Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Incline Okay let's be real here... Which games can never be RPGs?

Grampy_Bone

Arcane
Joined
Jan 25, 2016
Messages
3,698
Location
Wandering the world randomly in search of maps
It doesn't exist? If you swing at something, you hit it. Morrowind is realtime as well but it implements to-hit and spell cast calculations.
Gothic 1&2 at least you needed to invest in weapon skill to deal damage, otherwise your hits only did graze damage. So it wasn't pure action.

I mostly agree with your list except for Dark Souls, that game is almost perfect balance of 50/50 stats and player skill. There always is a mix in any RPG, even a pure turn-based game allows players to get by with clever tactics or item usage. It's possible to beat a lot of RPGs at level 1 just through system mastery but that doesn't make them less of RPGs in my eyes. I don't think requiring the player to dodge or block in real time negates all the other RPG aspects since those abilities themselves are stat-based (your blocking ability is stat and gear dependent, dodge roll is affected by weight, etc.)
 

Faarbaute

Arbiter
Joined
Mar 2, 2017
Messages
771
I would posit that being able to invalidate normal, intended gameplay (in this case character stat driven resolutions) by player skill through strategic mastery of systems, vs player skill through reflexes, is what distinguishes traditional RPGs with ARPGs.

However, being able to do such, also has to fall firmly outside of intended gameplay, for the game to qualify for its respective category. Otherwise, it's just a strategy game, an action game, and so on.

The same goes for other exploitative behaviours that other types of RPGs are open to, most notably kiting and meta gaming, if you want to go there. (I don't, TBH)
 
Last edited:

luj1

You're all shills
Vatnik
Joined
Jan 2, 2016
Messages
13,473
Location
Eastern block
You can't remove meta from the equation because all strategic and tactical decision making is down to the player and not the character.
Meta-gaming is a thing, and it was frowned upon when I still played tabletop. Even if you know something, your player character might not.

This is actually how I play many RPGs, it's enjoable af
 

luj1

You're all shills
Vatnik
Joined
Jan 2, 2016
Messages
13,473
Location
Eastern block
I would posit that the being able to invalidate normal, intended gameplay (in this case character stat driven resolutions) by player skill through strategic mastery of systems, vs player skill through reflexes, is what distinguishes traditional RPGs with ARPGs.

You can't use reflexes or twitch to play ToEE or KotC. Just like in tabletop. This is a true port of the experience. One is a TTRPG, the other is a CRPG. You're only using a computer.

In real CRPGs there is no player skill. And thinking doesn't count, that is bull shiet. We are talking about the physiological skill with a mouse, etc.
 
Last edited:

Faarbaute

Arbiter
Joined
Mar 2, 2017
Messages
771
Plenty of people ITT playing dumb. Tactics and thinking isn't the same as reflexes, or twitch
They are not the same, but they can all be used to invalidate your actual character or characters ability. That is what people are asserting. Everyone understands what you are saying.
 

Machocruz

Arcane
Joined
Jul 7, 2011
Messages
4,394
Location
Hyperborea

Go on please
Nothing more than you've been saying. Player "skill" (i.e. input) like decision making is a baseline necessity to play a game at all, it's hardly worth for anyone to bring up. The character's skill is the number on the sheet and should take precedence at the point of executing the skill. I don't think you ever said player input is not involved.
 

Iucounu

Educated
Joined
Jul 4, 2023
Messages
631
In my Skyrim sword fights, mouse reflexes had only minor effect compared with skill upgrades, gear, potions etc. At the time I felt I was doing something wrong by relying on things like potions, almost like cheating.

I had a similar experience in The Witcher 3; where even perfect mouse reflexes had no effect if the opponent's level was a little bit higher, while I could basically walk all over lower level enemies without even bothering to protect my own character from damage.

Now you're telling me this is how CRPGs are supposed to be played? The actual fighting gameplay is mostly window dressing, just to keep the player preoccupied while the game calculates the outcome of the stats in slow motion?
 
Joined
Nov 26, 2023
Messages
84
Again I find this too vague to accept because there are plenty of games you'd consider an RPG without these elements, and plenty of games with these elements that you wouldn't consider an RPG. The Sims has character customization, logistics/resource management, navigation and exploration, stat based progression, etc. But many would probably take issue with calling it an RPG.

Yeah, the sims is perhaps 50% RPG. Lacking adventure/exploration/navigation/combat/dungeon delving or whatever. The question is where do we draw the line at true RPG? somewhere between 70-95%. Like I said.

I guess maybe, just maybe you can include one non-gameplay addendum then to really nail it down based on the established rules of the past: it has to be masculine fantasy. Themes of conquest, heroism, adventure. Girly or low-T stuff like Sims can be no RPG....right? Right? Other than that - which I am still not quite confident in but it is the established rule of the past and shared among almost every one of them - RPG is otherwise all defined by gameplay convention. That I absolutely am confident in.

We can let the girls in can't we? lol. Don't do it they ruin everything, them and their endless simps. Whoops too late.
I can't remember the name, but one of the most acclaimed fan made neverwinter nights campaigns was made by a woman and written with a female perspective in mind.

So, clearly, even if a game is feminine or has female oriented themes, it can still be an RPG.

Absolutely an RPG...if it still contains all or most of the established core gameplay design tenets of an RPG. This is very simple to comprehend and there isn't any other logical way to approach this, so I don't know what the arguments and confusion are about. All you said there is the writing style changed. But the game is still about conquest, dungeon delving, combat tactics and such? Not very typical of female psychology. I would imagine the mod ISNT about those things in reality, but still features them merely as a byproduct of it being a mod for an RPG. In reality the woman probably didn't care about any of that and it was merely a vessel to express her writing ambitions or fantasies. Typical storyfaggot stuff (9/10 male storyfaggots are low-t soy boys, statistics show!). Who knows, maybe she is an outlier and is super into RPG gameplay concepts. Doubtful though, there is a reason there are hardly any women into cRPG. Quite a few into TTRPG though, and this is because there is a heavy social component to it.

Also...Bioware "RPG". Of the ones I played (3 games), they're fake or lite RPGs. < 70% qualifiers met. And also attract women because of heavy social component, fictional sex and romance. Not played NWN and never will though, I avoid Bioware shit like the plague. This is because I care about proper RPG gameplay concepts on the whole and not mere storyfag fluff or social simulation alone. Those things are cool...when attached to a proper role-playing game. Not a CYOA or virtual romance story sim with low effort combat attached.
Think you might be projecting whatever problems you have with women into the conversation.
 

Saint_Proverbius

Administrator
Staff Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2002
Messages
11,873
Location
Behind you.
You can't use reflexes or twitch to play ToEE or KotC. Just like in tabletop. This is a true port of the experience. One is a TTRPG, the other is a CRPG. You're only using a computer.
This thread got me thinking, as well as your post on why Diablo II is a classic. As much as it gets panned for being a clickfest because of it's real time nature, it actually does do a fairly good job at abstracting the player from the character - particularly for a real time game. There's really not a lot of reflexes involved in the combat. It's more about knowing when to move, where and how far, when to use a skill, and so on. I think part of what makes this work is the size of the sprites versus the screen real estate that you have. You have enough screen to know what's going on in a fairly tight proximity, the monsters can only see as far as half that screen width, so you're not accidentally pulling monsters from all over the map. The monsters do have random movements, but it's generally not very far from where they initially spawn. They pace about, but in a small area, which gives them the illusion of "life" but not so much that they break the pace. That means if you're getting overwhelmed, it's probably your fault. The only exception to this is early in Act V, but that's because it's supposed to be a hectic warzone. Even then, they didn't get carried away with it.
 

luj1

You're all shills
Vatnik
Joined
Jan 2, 2016
Messages
13,473
Location
Eastern block
I think part of what makes this work is the size of the sprites versus the screen real estate that you have. You have enough screen to know what's going on in a fairly tight proximity, the monsters can only see as far as half that screen width, so you're not accidentally pulling monsters from all over the map. The monsters do have random movements, but it's generally not very far from where they initially spawn. They pace about, but in a small area, which gives them the illusion of "life" but not so much that they break the pace. That means if you're getting overwhelmed, it's probably your fault.

Yeah the battlefield is readable. The size of a tile in Diablo (and every Diablo-like took it from Diablo) was borrowed from the original XCOM actually.
 

Falksi

Arcane
Joined
Feb 14, 2017
Messages
10,610
Location
Nottingham
There's fucking loads, but Mass Effect 2 is the one which always comes to mind.

It's literally Cut-scene-shooter action-wank mini game-repeat. There's virtually fuck all actual roleplaying apart from the binary moral choice, which is wafer thin.
 

NecroLord

Dumbfuck!
Dumbfuck
Joined
Sep 6, 2022
Messages
9,089
Location
Southeastern Yurop
You can't use reflexes or twitch to play ToEE or KotC. Just like in tabletop. This is a true port of the experience. One is a TTRPG, the other is a CRPG. You're only using a computer.
This thread got me thinking, as well as your post on why Diablo II is a classic. As much as it gets panned for being a clickfest because of it's real time nature, it actually does do a fairly good job at abstracting the player from the character - particularly for a real time game. There's really not a lot of reflexes involved in the combat. It's more about knowing when to move, where and how far, when to use a skill, and so on. I think part of what makes this work is the size of the sprites versus the screen real estate that you have. You have enough screen to know what's going on in a fairly tight proximity, the monsters can only see as far as half that screen width, so you're not accidentally pulling monsters from all over the map. The monsters do have random movements, but it's generally not very far from where they initially spawn. They pace about, but in a small area, which gives them the illusion of "life" but not so much that they break the pace. That means if you're getting overwhelmed, it's probably your fault. The only exception to this is early in Act V, but that's because it's supposed to be a hectic warzone. Even then, they didn't get carried away with it.
It's a good game, though not as awesome and atmospheric as its predecessor...
 

Zeriel

Arcane
Joined
Jun 17, 2012
Messages
13,487
Definitional wanking has always been stupid. It's like getting very upset that the average person means something different from a 18th century colonist when they say "liberal". You know what they mean, so what does it matter? Likewise, when people talk about RPGs, you generally know what they mean. Some people are very stupid, but I think it's more a matter of wanting to correct people than truly being confused.
 

BlackAdderBG

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Apr 24, 2012
Messages
3,081
Location
Little Vienna
Codex 2013 Codex 2014 PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015 Codex 2016 - The Age of Grimoire Grab the Codex by the pussy Codex USB, 2014 Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker
Definitional wanking has always been stupid. It's like getting very upset that the average person means something different from a 18th century colonist when they say "liberal". You know what they mean, so what does it matter? Likewise, when people talk about RPGs, you generally know what they mean. Some people are very stupid, but I think it's more a matter of wanting to correct people than truly being confused.

When people say RPG there is zero chance you know what they mean and you end up with whatever the fuck General RPG Discussion on the Codex is.
 

Zed Duke of Banville

Dungeon Master
Patron
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
11,956
Definitional wanking has always been stupid. It's like getting very upset that the average person means something different from a 18th century colonist when they say "liberal". You know what they mean, so what does it matter? Likewise, when people talk about RPGs, you generally know what they mean. Some people are very stupid, but I think it's more a matter of wanting to correct people than truly being confused.
Abuses Of Speech
To these Uses, there are also foure correspondent Abuses. First, when men register their thoughts wrong, by the inconstancy of the signification of their words; by which they register for their conceptions, that which they never conceived; and so deceive themselves. Secondly, when they use words metaphorically; that is, in other sense than that they are ordained for; and thereby deceive others. Thirdly, when by words they declare that to be their will, which is not. Fourthly, when they use them to grieve one another: for seeing nature hath armed living creatures, some with teeth, some with horns, and some with hands, to grieve an enemy, it is but an abuse of Speech, to grieve him with the tongue, unlesse it be one whom wee are obliged to govern; and then it is not to grieve, but to correct and amend.

The manner how Speech serveth to the remembrance of the consequence of causes and effects, consisteth in the imposing of Names, and the Connexion of them.
...
By this it appears how necessary it is for any man that aspires to true Knowledge, to examine the Definitions of former Authors; and either to correct them, where they are negligently set down; or to make them himselfe. For the errours of Definitions multiply themselves, according as the reckoning proceeds; and lead men into absurdities, which at last they see, but cannot avoyd, without reckoning anew from the beginning; in which lyes the foundation of their errours. From whence it happens, that they which trust to books, do as they that cast up many little summs into a greater, without considering whether those little summes were rightly cast up or not; and at last finding the errour visible, and not mistrusting their first grounds, know not which way to cleere themselves; but spend time in fluttering over their bookes; as birds that entring by the chimney, and finding themselves inclosed in a chamber, flitter at the false light of a glasse window, for want of wit to consider which way they came in. So that in the right Definition of Names, lyes the first use of Speech; which is the Acquisition of Science: And in wrong, or no Definitions' lyes the first abuse; from which proceed all false and senslesse Tenets; which make those men that take their instruction from the authority of books, and not from their own meditation, to be as much below the condition of ignorant men, as men endued with true Science are above it. For between true Science, and erroneous Doctrines, Ignorance is in the middle. Naturall sense and imagination, are not subject to absurdity. Nature it selfe cannot erre: and as men abound in copiousnesse of language; so they become more wise, or more mad than ordinary. Nor is it possible without Letters for any man to become either excellently wise, or (unless his memory be hurt by disease, or ill constitution of organs) excellently foolish. For words are wise mens counters, they do but reckon by them: but they are the mony of fooles, that value them by the authority of an Aristotle, a Cicero, or a Thomas, or any other Doctor whatsoever, if but a man.
...
The first cause of Absurd conclusions I ascribe to the want of Method; in that they begin not their Ratiocination from Definitions; that is, from settled significations of their words: as if they could cast account, without knowing the value of the numerall words, One, Two, and Three.

And whereas all bodies enter into account upon divers considerations, (which I have mentioned in the precedent chapter) these considerations being diversly named, divers absurdities proceed from the confusion, and unfit connexion of their names into assertions.
...
To conclude, The Light of humane minds is Perspicuous Words, but by exact definitions first snuffed, and purged from ambiguity; Reason is the Pace; Encrease of Science, the Way; and the Benefit of man-kind, the End. And on the contrary, Metaphors, and senslesse and ambiguous words, are like Ignes Fatui; and reasoning upon them, is wandering amongst innumerable absurdities; and their end, contention, and sedition, or contempt.

- Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan

frontispiece-of-the-leviathan-by-thomas-hobbes-abraham-bosse.jpg
 

Silverfish

Arbiter
Joined
Dec 4, 2019
Messages
3,270
There's fucking loads, but Mass Effect 2 is the one which always comes to mind.

It's literally Cut-scene-shooter action-wank mini game-repeat. There's virtually fuck all actual roleplaying apart from the binary moral choice, which is wafer thin.

If you messed up the Miranda romance, you could just play the game again instead of getting mad.
 

Saint_Proverbius

Administrator
Staff Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2002
Messages
11,873
Location
Behind you.
It's a good game, though not as awesome and atmospheric as its predecessor...
It is and and isn't. The tileset for the first Act in Diablo II was fairly scaled back in terms of atmosphere from the first five levels of the dungeon in Tristram. However, look at the tileset for Act IV in Diablo II versus the last levels in Diablo. There's clearly more atmosphere in the sequel versus the original. That's largely due to the fact they added multiple terrain generators in addition to the dungeon generators. That's one thing Diablo II has leaps and bounds over the first one, and that's the amount of area types that it can procedurally generate.
 

Alan

Educated
Joined
Apr 11, 2022
Messages
64
Location
Spain
If

it doesn't feel like an strategy game

or

the player character doesn't move regularly

then it's not an rpg
 

CryptRat

Arcane
Developer
Joined
Sep 10, 2014
Messages
3,573
If

it doesn't feel like an strategy game

or

the player character doesn't move regularly

then it's not an rpg
I was almost this you but then you lost me when you forgot the plural in "the player characters don't move regularly"
 

Laz Sundays

Educated
Joined
Jan 12, 2020
Messages
166
Rpg = games for virgin nerds, complex borefest. That's what it always meant. Times changed, lines got blurred, everyone lost their mind. The end. Can't be a good ole nerd anymore without having to share tag. Once the word got around, everyone felt entitled to a piece of the Pie, simply because it smelled special.

It became cool to be rpg. So now everything is.
 

Iucounu

Educated
Joined
Jul 4, 2023
Messages
631
There's fucking loads, but Mass Effect 2 is the one which always comes to mind.

It's literally Cut-scene-shooter action-wank mini game-repeat. There's virtually fuck all actual roleplaying apart from the binary moral choice, which is wafer thin.
True. There's no conventional inventory, unless you count your actual spaceship as the inventory (which is only accessible between combat missions). There is almost no loot anyway besides ammo, and only a small number of weapons. Levels are small, combat is linear and 100% scripted, the only possible replay variation comes from your own actions.

On the other hand it does have classes and skill trees, resulting in varied combat (I recall the Vanguard class lets you focus on melee, if you don't like the usual ME popamole fighting). At least in the final mission there's lots of C&C; depending on which upgrades you've done, which party members that are loyal etc (a bit late, perhaps).
 

Alan

Educated
Joined
Apr 11, 2022
Messages
64
Location
Spain
If

it doesn't feel like an strategy game

or

the player character doesn't move regularly

then it's not an rpg
I was almost this you but then you lost me when you forgot the plural in "the player characters don't move regularly"
I didn't forget it. Thought that case was included implicitly
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom