So what is a "real" RPG?

[veloper]

RPG is a stupid term that needs to die. Nothing more, nothing less.

In fact, we've already killed it, we really just need to stop beating its dessicated corpse.

It can mean anything from Final Fantasy to Diablo to Baldur's Gate to Mass Effect to Oblivion to Fable to Tactics Ogre. You know what all of those games have in common? None of them particularly belong in the same genre as any of the others.

People really, really need to shut up about what is and isn't an RPG. It's gone beyond stupid and clear on through hilariously fun and is now into painfully embarrassing. Just knock it off already.

You've been ninja'd a multiple times in this thread already you know.
No need to further elaborate.
Oh heck. Welcome aboard!

Well, several people have pointed out that there are conflicting definitions or whatnot, but I didn't see anybody flat out say we should stop using the term because it's so badly broken that it's actually become anti-useful.

Because that's what I'm trying to say. I'm just going to completely stop using the term RPG to describe any game ever, and I strongly encourage everyone else to do the same.

Gamers will naturally stop talking about it, after we take it a bit further first and call *everything* "RPG". Then just saying "game" will be shorter.

Well yes, but we're going to start doing that by having discussions on the matter, aren't we? I mean, I know I can't magically make everyone agree with me overnight, and really if I'm the only one that feels this way there's not a damn thing I can do at all, but is it really so wrong to say it?

Maybe I need to do more? Perhaps we should start coming up with better names for the various things that will need new genres? Names that don't confine a type of game to a specific region, which is essentially nonsensical?

Heck, maybe even just figuring out what lumps together well with what is a good place to start.

It can be done.
Some bloke here coined the term Third Person Looter for diablo clones. Don't remember who it was, but I'm still using it nevertheless, because it fits.

 

[MrJKapowey]

For me there are 'Basic' RPGs and 'True' RPGs, In my personal classification for my games shelf the two are both RPGs.

Example of a basic RPG - Assassins Creed Brotherhood
Example of a true RPG - The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion

To be a basic RPG (in my book) a game needs to have:

- purchasable stuff (an in-game economy)
- An open world
- Freedom of where to go in said open world (The ability to cock around)
- Abilities unlocked throughout the game (in a mission you get a new toy to kill stuff with)
- Abilities earned by doing stuff (e.g. 'x kills with ranged' gives you the ability to zoom in)

I wouldn't classify any game (generally) without those things to be an RPG. It may be, and I may look at it and say 'Hmm, despite not conforming to what I think a standard RPG should have, I think this counts as one'.

A true RPG must have the below in addition to:

- A large number of random side quests.
- MANY CHARACTERS - most of whom can be interacted with (apart from murder).
- Varying environment.
- Made by Bioware or Bethesda (I joke)
- Some kind of major main quest.
- The ability to do LOTS of stuff, including that which is not helpful or even fun.
(e.g. gamble all my money away and get drunk before killing myself)
- Multiple combat styles/paths through battles.
- a GOOD story.

This is IMO, don't rage at me if you have a game that doesn't conform to these, and is an RPG.

 

[magicmonkeybars]

If you love RPGs you are in one of two camps, either you love the math, the mechanics of the game or you love to emerge yourself into a fantasy setting making decisions based on your character's motivations.
What makes a real RPG depends on which camp you're in.

Those two "camps" aren't mutually exclusive.

True but most people like one aspect better than the other, some people will find an rpg less interesting or rpg like if one aspect is lacking, usually it's the people who like strategy more that complain about rpgs being extinct or dumbed down.
In turn there are plenty of people who overlook a overly complex or difficult game because it tells a great story and has endearing characters.
I doubt many people who play rpgs don't belong in both but at the same time prefer the weight to be shifted to one side of the spectrum in favour of the other.

 

[ZephrC]

It can be done.
Some bloke here coined the term Third Person Looter for diablo clones. Don't remember who it was, but I'm still using it nevertheless, because it fits.

Heh, that's awesome! I'm gonna use that as well. Those have been pretty well separated out already though. I'm thinking Bethesda style games are already starting to be called open-world games, so I'm going to use that for those, I think.

The big sticking point right now is Bioware games, and I'm not just saying that because of the current dust-up over DA2. You can try and lump them in with games that have similar combat mechanics, but they really don't fit very well because of the heavy story and dialog emphasis. I'm thinking... Third Person Yakker? I dunno, needs some work.

Tactics or Strategy games seem to have mostly dropped the RPG bit already, so I guess I don't need to worry about those. Hack 'n Slash games seems to work for the more Fable style of game as well. Off the top of my head that just leaves the menu based kinda games where positioning is not a vital part of the battle system. I'm having a hard time coming up with a good name for those that would be recognizable but not use the name of the country they are famously associated with.

 

[trooper6]

RPG - Role Playing Game. Emphasis on Role Playing.

The "Role" originally meant the tactical role; not larping or acting.

A role is also a task or a duty in an undertaking.

RPGSs were originally just derived from table top war games, only on a smaller scale. Your role is to tank or to heal or to disarm traps, etc.

no, paraphrasing out of context wikipedia a bit there aren't we

depends on which of the 80's RPG's you consider the start if you are a talisman fan then i guess you are right but the phrase role playing game or RPG is sighted as being coined Gary Gygax and D&D even in its first incarnation was always about playing a character not just kicking in doors.

D&D extended from Chainmail, which is where it was coined. It was a wargame using single models a player.

In any case, I've always taken the gamist POV, because it's the only thing that doesn't end in tears.
Gygaxian dungeons never seemed to lend themselves to developing your thespian character anyway. Roll up a new character again!

While D&D was the first and did derive from wargames, it wasn't itself a wargame any longer. Additionally, very quickly other games popped up, that are also RPGs that have had different emphases. For example, good old Call of Cthulhu. I think it important to look at the triumverate, Call of Cthulhu, D&D, and Traveller to see the variety of the genre at its infancy. It isn't all about kicking in doors only.

And as a person who was playing D&D way back in that day...I also am here to report that lots and lots of thespy players enjoyed D&D from the get go. As a matter of fact I once ran the thespiest dungeon you ever did see back in 83.

You can die just by opening the wrong, but unremarkable door.

That would be one incredibly unfriendly GM.

That's the sort of stuff that goes on in a Gygaxian dungeon. A good GM doesn't resort to those I agree.
Still you can't shake the impression that the original intent of Gygax was for the DM to mess with the players.

First off, Gygax was not the only creator of D&D--everyone always forgets about Arneson. Also, the author cannot control how people intepret their work. And I've never been of the hostile DM-player relationship sort. Probably because I'm so thespy.

RPGs can be many different things. Heck, there are gazillions of RPGs that don't even use classes and levels, rather points (my personal faves)...and they've been around for over twenty years now as well.

I think it is important to recognize a) diversity in the field of RPGs, and b) that players can take a ruleset and use it create stories differently that what Gygax imagined.

 

[loc978]

...Dragon Age 2 is a real RPG. You play a role, you gain experience levels, there's an ongoing story... Some purists would disagree with me, but to those purists I would say that by their definition, no computer/video game should ever be considered a role-playing game, because it defines your role for you instead of collaborating with you like a real Game Master.

The thing about RPGs, though, is that not all of 'em appeal to everyone. For example: just because I consider Bahamut Lagoon to be a shitty game doesn't mean it's not a real RPG.

 

[trooper6]

...Dragon Age 2 is a real RPG. You play a role, you gain experience levels, there's an ongoing story... Some purists would disagree with me, but to those purists I would say that by their definition, no computer/video game should ever be considered a role-playing game, because it defines your role for you instead of collaborating with you like a real Game Master.

The thing about RPGs, though, is that not all of 'em appeal to everyone. For example: just because I consider Bahamut Lagoon to be a shitty game doesn't mean it's not a real RPG.

Indeed. Just because someone doesn't like maple donuts doesn't make them not donuts.

Anyway, I think it is funny that people complain that DA2 isn't a real RPG because your role is pre-defined. Because 1) JRPGs predefine your roles and people still call those RPGs and 2) compared to a point buy classless table top game like GURPS, D&D doesn't give you much freedom in creating your role either--and no one complains about that (well, I do...but, you know what I mean).

 

[funguy2121]

One thing about the DA2 rage I don't get at all is people who say that it's not a real rpg. Umm, what? I presume they are talking about the combat, but what on earth does that have to do with if it's a rpg or not? I've always thought of roleplaying games in term of setting, character interaction, and story, not on how complicated the battle system is. That's why I usually put the difficulty on casual. I don't give two farts about the combat. I'm here for the story. If I wanted to play games that focused on combat above all else I'd buy a FSP.

I genuinely hope that all of those same people consider Zelda NOT to be an RPG and that they actually hate it.

Swear I'm not flaming. OP, do you honestly think that, say, any Final Fantasy ever has a better story than The Social Network or No Country for Old Men?

 

[Vern5]

RPG literally means role-playing game. That sounds disastrously misleading because I could say I play the role of Master Chief in Halo and thus assume that such an FPS is an RPG as well. RPG is just a really weird blanket term for every game with dialogue options and stat-building. And then once you have your hands on an RPG it gets even weirder. What kind of RPG have you just picked up? The kind where you talk to a lot of people and follow the linear plot to its conclusion ala anything Bioware has ever made? Or maybe you have grabbed the game that lets you play through it the way you want to in an almost overwhelming open fashion?

I think there needs to be a new word for story-driven stat building games. Not SDSBGs because that sounds like some horrible kind of VD. Something quick and snappy that summarizes the kind of game a certain RPG is. In other words, the term RPG is a mess.

 

[Zaik]

More or less it's people who want a virtual D&D tabletop game and are mad they didn't get one.

Oddly, DA:O wasn't a D&D tabletop game either. It was based off a game based off a game based off an idea of trying to make up a D&D scenario about a guy who was secretly born from some mythical D&D god running around a bland green and brown world chasing some wizard who wants to steal the main characters secret god powers and succeeds to do so, but is later killed because they end up being fully able to use the powers which had been totally stolen from them already to follow him to hell and kill him.

Yeah that's actually what happens.

 

[Talon_Skywarp]

Since I grew up with JPRG and only just starting engaging with western RPG, I'll always say this.

Star ocean 2 is the shining example of RPG to me. It was huge, complex, filled with choices and had the best character line up to date in an RPG.

So, I stand by my dodgy dressed moaning friends.

 

[Vibhor]

By your definition, STALKER is an RPG. As the game progresses you gain access to more powerful weapons and armour, which improve your damage output and resistance. The damage is based on variables and those variables can be improved over time. True RPG.

By my definition Stalker is NOT a RPG.
You get more powerful weapons but your character's basic damage remains the same.
Thats like saying that you leveled up in doom when you found out BFG9000
Damage is not based on variables, the weapons do a fixed damage. The basic pistol doesn't become a sniper rifle when you play alot of the game.

 

[WorldCritic]

To me, an RPG is having a world bigger than that of most games in which you can go to a number of places whenever you want with a more in depth story and gradually growing stronger as you complete objectives and defeat enemies. It may not always involve creating a character, but it feels like there is more of a sense of involvement than say in an FPS.

 

[Drakmeire]

A game in which you take on the role of someone else and make choices for them, many action games can't be considered RPGs because in order to progress you must follow a specific path and goals, the Persona series is a true RPG because it gives you the choice of doing what you want to progress the story. you can even decide how and when to go through the dungeons or to ignore them entirely (although that makes the game end).
The Sims also could be considered an RPG since you are making choices for your sims. Second Life is a perfect example since all you do it role play as a character in game.