What is a RPG?

[ANGRYWOLF]

By GTA do you mean Grand Theft Auto?

so I replied to his comments.

Never played it.

I prefer sf or fantasy settings.Being a criminal doesn't appeal to me.

[NorthernChaosGod]

I fail to see how a WRPG has any more "role playing" in it than a JRPG, to be honest. Take Mass Effect and FFVII. In ME, you play the role of Commander Shepard. In FFVII, you are playing the role of Cloud. The introduction of a morality system is the only real difference in terms of how the roles are fulfilled. It doesn't change the way the story plays out, only a couple minor dialogue lines. If that's all it takes, why doesn't FFVII count with it's moral decisions (You get to choose to steal from a kid in Wall Market, or from the baby chickens in the Corel Mountains...)? You are given a role in the game, and you have to play through it.

And now I get to sit back and watch as everyone complains about me.

Is there a part in ME that you control someone other than Shepard? Cloud isn't in your control the whole game.

[Skyblade]

Other than that, this game is a great outlet, a blank slate to express your Strategy RPG wishes.

So, how do you guys feel this sub-genre fits in with our definitions? Tactical RPGs fall even further outside the scope than most JRPGs. Do they still warrant the same title?

[Yeargdribble]

The terminology lost all meaning in any pure sense a long time ago. Stop trying to define it in some cookie-cutter way that excludes some and includes others based on personal preference because if you got truly puritanical about it no current video game RPGs would be considered RPGs in the sense of the original meaning of the term.

Just allow people to keep coming up with sub-genres all day long and call them what you will. It's such a silly debate when people get worked up over whether or not some game should truly be called something or other.

The need for us to pigeon-hole things may be why it's so hard for the gaming industry to do anything new and different. If you can't slap a solid genre that everyone can relate to as the label then you might as well toss the game in the can. If you're steadfast and get it out there then someone will have to come up with a label for it.

Thereafter everyone will start mass producing crap in that same new genre and before long the fanboys will get butthurt and say that every game that ever uses "x mechanic" is a "x game" clone.


*NERDRAGE*

[Wolf Kanno]

In a JRPG it's these things that let people identify them as a "JRPG".
Exp system where defeating x amount of enemies increases various statistics.
Usually turn-based or pseudo-turn-based (such as ATB) combat.

In a WRPG it's usually these things:
Exp system where defeating x amount of enemies increases various statistics.
Skills that have a use outside of battle.
Multiple choice on how to solve many problems.
Usually realtime action-based combat, with some mods.

To be honest, I feel the same way about most of Mass Effect. I can count literally two choices in the game that actually affect the story in any great respect (involving Wrex, Ashley and the other dude who's name escapes me because I didn't like him). And even those don't really change the overall story if I'm not mistaken. They simply determine which characters you get to use. For all of the ability to role play that these WRPG's supposedly give, it's dissapointing how little your choices matter.

Anyway, as for the definition of what constitutes an RPG, I typically consider something to be an RPG based on a few factors.

Stat development - whether it's as simple as leveling up in the original FF or more complicated and customized such as Oblivion, most RPG's feature this aspect of character growth.

Strategic battle system - This is more common for JRPG's to be honest as they tend to have battle systems that try and focus on strategy to varying degrees of success. WRPG's usually still include strategy, but recent titles like Fallout 3 and Oblivion haven't really required it to be honest, and even Mass Effect was pretty light on how much thought you had to put into combat.

Focus on story - Yeah, a lot of genres can focus on the story, but it's not really an RPG if it doesn't. Whether it's a linear tale like in FF, or something focused on giving the character choices that rarely ever matter (Fallout 3), if there isn't some focus on the story and characters then it's probably not an RPG.

To be honest, I like Bolivar's definition the best, and it's true of any genre to be honest. I can't really define it but I know it when I see it.

I guess my next question for you two is simply this, does an RPG need to have all those requirement or does it only need one or a few to be considered an RPG? If so, which ones are more important than others?

MGS4, which I haven’t played so if I get this a bit off you know why, has a lot of emphasis on action and marketed as such. If someone who likes action games walks into a shop or local torrent site they would pick MGS4 over ME. Someone looking for an RPG however would pick the latter despite both having a strong story

Actually, the story is one of the major things people play the MGS series for. The MGS series is what made action games feel like big budget movies. Hell, MGS4's biggest complaint from some fans is what JRPGs usually get nailed with and that is having too much story and not enough gameplay. Its a very cutscene heavy game. If I worked in a game store and was asked to recommend a good story based game I would probably recommend an MGS title before an RPG, especially in regards to game released in the last few years (I would even recommend Ico or SotC but that's another can of worms entirely) so it still stands that other genres are really getting into the whole story niche that RPGs held for years.

Halo of all things is actually loved by its fans for its story as well as its game mechanics and BioShock and Half Life 2 are both titles that have really taken story telling into the forefront of the FPS genre. MGS, Uncharted, Assassin's Creed, Prince of Persia, and DMC are all games on both sides of the ocean that are highly praised for their excellent stories and narratives.

The terminology lost all meaning in any pure sense a long time ago. Stop trying to define it in some cookie-cutter way that excludes some and includes others based on personal preference because if you got truly puritanical about it no current video game RPGs would be considered RPGs in the sense of the original meaning of the term.

I only wish to see what others think, really by todays standards I would say most genres don't exist anymore cause everything is beginning to meld with each other but still, its amusing no less to see how others would define such a thing.

Just allow people to keep coming up with sub-genres all day long and call them what you will. It's such a silly debate when people get worked up over whether or not some game should truly be called something or other.

I don't feel anyone is really worked up here Yearg. This whole conversation is just a playful debate. The fact is that RPG really has just splintered and the word now means the sum of its parts but that doesn't necessarily mean we can't pull out the root that connects them all.

The need for us to pigeon-hole things may be why it's so hard for the gaming industry to do anything new and different. If you can't slap a solid genre that everyone can relate to as the label then you might as well toss the game in the can. If you're steadfast and get it out there then someone will have to come up with a label for it.

Thereafter everyone will start mass producing crap in that same new genre and before long the fanboys will get butthurt and say that every game that ever uses "x mechanic" is a "x game" clone.
*NERDRAGE*

Nerdrage indeed, to be honest I feel that most big budget companies shy away from true experimentation because they try to throw huge budgets behind them and if they flop its a bad financial investment. With the advent of more independent smaller companies and their huge success on DLC networks, I feel we are really beginning to see some amazing game design coming out of the indie market and there success is now allowing us to see bigger companies try their hand at it too by releasing lower budget titles with more experimentation. The World Ends With You is probably one of the most amazing SE titles in terms of game design and direction to come out of Square in decades.

Even old genres like the point and click adventure games have returned thanks to the DS and even some old genres or game types are starting to make there way back to the forefront of gaming thanks to DLC and handhelds. Of course this really has nothing to do with the topic but this is my take on the real problem of innovation in the industry.

[Slothy]

To be honest, I feel the same way about most of Mass Effect. I can count literally two choices in the game that actually affect the story in any great respect (involving Wrex, Ashley and the other dude who's name escapes me because I didn't like him). And even those don't really change the overall story if I'm not mistaken. They simply determine which characters you get to use. For all of the ability to role play that these WRPG's supposedly give, it's dissapointing how little your choices matter.

Anyway, as for the definition of what constitutes an RPG, I typically consider something to be an RPG based on a few factors.

Stat development - whether it's as simple as leveling up in the original FF or more complicated and customized such as Oblivion, most RPG's feature this aspect of character growth.

Strategic battle system - This is more common for JRPG's to be honest as they tend to have battle systems that try and focus on strategy to varying degrees of success. WRPG's usually still include strategy, but recent titles like Fallout 3 and Oblivion haven't really required it to be honest, and even Mass Effect was pretty light on how much thought you had to put into combat.

Focus on story - Yeah, a lot of genres can focus on the story, but it's not really an RPG if it doesn't. Whether it's a linear tale like in FF, or something focused on giving the character choices that rarely ever matter (Fallout 3), if there isn't some focus on the story and characters then it's probably not an RPG.

To be honest, I like Bolivar's definition the best, and it's true of any genre to be honest. I can't really define it but I know it when I see it.

I guess my next question for you two is simply this, does an RPG need to have all those requirement or does it only need one or a few to be considered an RPG? If so, which ones are more important than others?

I'd definitely lump story focus and stat development in as the most important factors. Story focus doesn't have to just mean having a long involved, or even that original story though, it could also mean being able to develop your character through the game. I mean to be perfectly honest, Mass Effect's story was pretty cliche sci-fi fodder, but the character interaction made it better than it really was even if your choices didn't matter that much.

Stat development is largely what separates other genres from RPG's though because even while other genres take on elements that were traditionally the domain of RPG's such as the focus on story or, even some more strategic battle systems, actually being able to develop your character how you like in any significant depth is still pretty much relegated to RPG's.

Like I said in my other post, a strategic combat system is certainly part of most RPG's, but the level of strategy can vary so much (largely due to poor game balance) that it's really not as important as others. Some games pull off a strategic combat system well like Final Fantasy IX or Persona 3 (AI teammates aside), but others like FFVIII, FFVI, and Fallout 3 have only a minimum amount of strategy involved but no one would accuse them of being anything other than RPG's (you could argue about Fallout 3, but considering the heavy use of VATS and the fact that it's a piss poor FPS suggests otherwise.

Long story short, character building and a focus on story are the two most important elements.

[Mercen-X]

Strategy-Adventure

[Zeromus_X]

I would define an RPG as a game where you play the role of a character (whether a predetermined JRPG character or a fully customizable WRPG/tabletop character) and there is some form of character customization or variety of character types available.

[NeoCracker]

I would define an RPG as a game where you play the role of a character (whether a predetermined JRPG character or a fully customizable WRPG/tabletop character) and there is some form of character customization or variety of character types available.

Army of Two matches that description perfectly.

I think I'll go with an console RPG, at it's core, is a major focus on Stat Developement.

Story is really about as relevant to a game genre as lyrics are to a music genre.

Nowadays, however, a lot of games are using stat development, and thus the RPG element is prelevant in most games. To be considered an RPG I believe the main focus of the gameplay revolves around your stat developement, whether custom or predetermined.

[Skyblade]

I fail to see how a WRPG has any more "role playing" in it than a JRPG, to be honest. Take Mass Effect and FFVII. In ME, you play the role of Commander Shepard. In FFVII, you are playing the role of Cloud. The introduction of a morality system is the only real difference in terms of how the roles are fulfilled. It doesn't change the way the story plays out, only a couple minor dialogue lines. If that's all it takes, why doesn't FFVII count with it's moral decisions (You get to choose to steal from a kid in Wall Market, or from the baby chickens in the Corel Mountains...)? You are given a role in the game, and you have to play through it.

And now I get to sit back and watch as everyone complains about me.

Is there a part in ME that you control someone other than Shepard? Cloud isn't in your control the whole game.

Well... Big Spoiler WarningThere is in ME2. Does that mean the sequel isn't an RPG?

[qwertysaur]

JRPG's are almost Visual novels now

[Polnareff]

What is an RPG?

A miserable little pile of sidequests!

But enough talk! Have at you!

[BG-57]

I tend to define RPG games in terms of what they're not rather than what they are. If a game has an emphasis on scaring the player with monsters, it's survival horror, not RPG. If the emphasis is on gunplay skill then it's a FPS, not an RPG. If it has emphasis on manuvering around levels through difficult physical movement then it's a platformer, not an RPG.

To be sure, these non-RPG's have incorperated a lot of RPG elements in them over time (compare ME with Doom 2 say), but their specialized focus tends to shunt them into categories while RPG's avoid them.