DJOGamer PT
Arcane
This is a retarded notion when you think about itIn truth, all CRPGs need to be is a reasonable digital analog of a tabletop session.
This is a retarded notion when you think about itIn truth, all CRPGs need to be is a reasonable digital analog of a tabletop session.
Those games are still patterned after general tabletop design, structure, and rules, so I think they qualify as "reasonable digital analog". It's easy to see the foundational format at work in them, not so much in Borderlands.I think that cRPGs need to part ways with tabletop RPGs. The experience is just too different. I'm glad there are new systems like Pillars of Eternity, Fallout and Divinity Original Sin.
This is a retarded notion when you think about itIn truth, all CRPGs need to be is a reasonable digital analog of a tabletop session.
Okay. Here's my actual answer.
A game is an RPG if the controllable statistics of the character determines the ability of the character to respond to the world. Everything else is a fluff.
That falls under equipment, not statsOkay. Here's my actual answer.
A game is an RPG if the controllable statistics of the character determines the ability of the character to respond to the world. Everything else is a fluff.
Well, I can get better suspension in NFS Underground, which leads to better steering and control of the vehicle. That doesn't make it a CRPG.
This is a p. anal definition but yes. Without character development there is no RPG.Okay. Here's my actual answer.
A game is an RPG if the controllable statistics of the character determines the ability of the character to respond to the world.
Oh it gets even worse than that for a lot of video games, where there are no rolls and it's just a matter of your hand-eye-coordination. So no roll-playing. And no role-playing. "B-b-but you play the role of Bubsy the Bobcat!" No, you control a digital game piece named Bubsy, you do not act out his personality, mannerisms, voice, etc. And you also don't play his role in the hierarchical sense because the game offers no other roles to perform or a hierarchy to perform a role in.What about the game where you do the same exact things, but you can not choose the char's stats at all. They are fixed. The DM does not even give you a character sheet. He simply asks you to make rolls and then tells you the outcome and you have no other input to the game.
Is this last experience still an RPG?
I am inclined to say no.
Like Alpha Protocol or Mass Effect, you can still hit with low stats (and enemies are not bullet sponges) but accuracy and how well you can wield the weapon are directly related to character build and that's mandatory.So in a RPG shooter, it should never be enough for the player just to aim well with his mouse, he must also increase his character skill stats, like "accuracy" or "damage"? The latter sounds as if enemies would be bullet sponges. Nothing wrong with that where it makes sense - like when trying to destroy an armored vehicle with a pistol - but if you can't even kill an unprotected NPC point blank with a powerful gun just because your "damage" skill is too low, I think the RPG mechanic is taken too far.
Do these stats always have to be associated with the character's personal abilities (unlocked in an abstract skill tree menu, where the player assigns skill points), or can they also manifest themselves as better equipment (bought by an in-game trader, where the player pays with earned credits)? Getting better guns or armor should be regarded as stat upgrades. I'm asking because I recall reading complaints about Stalker Clear Sky, that you can't hit anything with the early non-upgraded guns, which seems like a typical RPG mechanic to me.
Those are Action RPGs buddy.
Dark Souls is (relatively) good. And falls under Action RPG which is often not a "true" RPG, no. But sometimes I would say they are, such as Arx Fatalis or Morrowind.
My definition would be to have at least maybe 70% of well-established RPG game design to qualify as a "true" RPG. 40-69% then your game is RPG-lite. Any less than that, not an RPG.
RPG progression systems, preferably intersecting and numerous.
Puzzle and adventure game elements
The ability to roleplay to some extent
Sense of adventure - a variably non-linear world, including navigation challenge and exploration gameplay. Dungeons, towns, overworld.
NPC interactions. People to talk to at bare minimum, the majority optional, and not just a couple dudes, but enough people that creates sense of an actual living world.
Dialogue choices and NPC reactivity for bonus points.
Side quests and optional content in general (secrets)
Die rolls to apply at least some aspects of core gameplay
Inventory, economy, shopping.
Perhaps most importantly, combat to tie much of this together.
Gameplay design should ALWAYS be the determining factor for genre qualification. e.g RTS - the basis is the gameplay. Stealth - the basis is the gameplay. Platformer - the basis is the gameplay.
Why?This is a retarded notion when you think about itIn truth, all CRPGs need to be is a reasonable digital analog of a tabletop session.
Conclusion: If a fat fuck plays it, it's an RPG.I have never played pen and paper or any tabletop game.
When I played magic the gathering as a kid(I quit when I was like 12 or 13) all the people who played dungeons and dragons were weird looking or fat.
Also I saw a fat guy playing warhammer tabletop(no idea if it was 40k or fantasy) literally pick his nose and eat it. Then they started sperging out about lore and I realized I couldn't be around these types of people anymore.
Going into a hobby shop in the early 00's was more traumatizing for me then when I drowned as a kid. RPG's are best enjoyed at a computer screen in the comfort of your own home without bad odors.
I feel really sorry for the people in that tabletop campaign who didn't get to be the Bhaalspawn.Why?This is a retarded notion when you think about itIn truth, all CRPGs need to be is a reasonable digital analog of a tabletop session.
BG I was an attempt to recreate tabletop session.
What? I was talking about BG I.I feel really sorry for the people in that tabletop campaign who didn't get to be the Bhaalspawn.Why?This is a retarded notion when you think about itIn truth, all CRPGs need to be is a reasonable digital analog of a tabletop session.
BG I was an attempt to recreate tabletop session.
I recall Mass Effect enemies are very much bullet sponges, regardless of your character stats.Like Alpha Protocol or Mass Effect, you can still hit with low stats (and enemies are not bullet sponges)So in a RPG shooter, it should never be enough for the player just to aim well with his mouse, he must also increase his character skill stats, like "accuracy" or "damage"? The latter sounds as if enemies would be bullet sponges. Nothing wrong with that where it makes sense - like when trying to destroy an armored vehicle with a pistol - but if you can't even kill an unprotected NPC point blank with a powerful gun just because your "damage" skill is too low, I think the RPG mechanic is taken too far.
Do these stats always have to be associated with the character's personal abilities (unlocked in an abstract skill tree menu, where the player assigns skill points), or can they also manifest themselves as better equipment (bought by an in-game trader, where the player pays with earned credits)? Getting better guns or armor should be regarded as stat upgrades. I'm asking because I recall reading complaints about Stalker Clear Sky, that you can't hit anything with the early non-upgraded guns, which seems like a typical RPG mechanic to me.
In an Action RPG, the character's skill could be that of the player's own, and the RPG stats could instead be applied to the character's equipment; like weapon accuracy, ammo types (armor piercing, incendiary), etc. That way the game doesn't have to put artificial limitations on the character's own abilities, which always feels like wearing a straitjacket to me when playing an action game. For example, if the character's own accuracy is low stat, an RPG may represent that as an annoying swaying reticule. If an Action RPG instead only limits weapon accuracy, the character can aim just as good as the player, but a low stat weapon's bullets will not hit quite where its reticule shows, and the player must use extra skill to compensate for the weapon's shortcomings.Upgrading equipment is just Upgrading equipment, I don't see how that's related to the above because you'll still be shit at using the weapon itself. It needs to be combined with character stats.
My definition would be to have at least maybe 70% of well-established RPG game design to qualify as a "true" RPG
Gregz suggested this, but it doesn't work imo. Because it's not a qualitative approach, but merely a quantitative one. Ergo, you can put stats, quests, inventory in a racing game, but that still won't make it an RPG.
I think action games, FPS, adventures, strategies, tactics, racings, simulators, platformers, visual novels, puzzles, sport games, fightings - can't be called RPG
Well? Do you have anything or you're just full of shit?Go onThis is a retarded notion when you think about itIn truth, all CRPGs need to be is a reasonable digital analog of a tabletop session.