| |
Site Navigation
Main
News
Forums
Games
Games Database
Top 100
Release List
Support Files
Features
Reviews
Previews
Interviews
Editorials
Diaries
Misc
Download
Gallery
Music
Screenshots
Videos
Miscellaneous
Staff Members
Privacy Statement
|
|
|
|
Dhruin
Stranger In A Strange Land
Joined: 20 May 2002
Posts: 1825
Location: Sydney, Australia |
I have to disagree too, Roqua. Yes - a RPG should define interaction with the world through the character's abilities but to say that introducing an action element to a game disqualifies it from being classified as a RPG regardless of it's other elements is too limiting.
By this definition it is impossible to include any game with real time combat as a RPG, right? In every RT game, the player's control of the avatar affects combat in some way or another. Whilst I personally enjoy turn-based, RT games have a place for those that enjoy them (and there are good ones).
You're implicitly saying that a game that has complex character creation, where the character's skills have a visible effect on the gameworld, non-linear gameplay with multiple solutions depending on the character's skills and deep interactivity but has RT combat is less RPG than a linear, non-interactive, combat-fest as long as it's turn-based. That just doesn't make sense.
Unfortunately (or fortunately?) it's very hard to define a RPG and I feel that any definition should balance a range of features.
_________________
Editor @ RPGDot |
Tue Oct 28, 2003 9:15 am |
|
|
Kloetenotto
Eager Tradesman
Joined: 04 Jul 2003
Posts: 30
|
You say that the outcome of a battle should depend on the skills of the character, not the player?
Then why not have a "strategy" or "tactics" skill and let the computer play combat all alone?
Or hey, my character is a mage. He should know when to cast which spell to survive so why should I tell him? |
|
Tue Oct 28, 2003 1:16 pm |
|
|
Hexy
High Emperor
Joined: 28 Jun 2002
Posts: 621
|
quote:
By this definition it is impossible to include any game with real time combat as a RPG, right? In every RT game, the player's control of the avatar affects combat in some way or another. Whilst I personally enjoy turn-based, RT games have a place for those that enjoy them (and there are good ones).
I thought the thing that took away from RPG-ness was the whole "swing in a motion against your opponents legs (though it won't make any differance), then swing your weapon in a 45 degree parabel aiming for your opponents head."
Compare that to simply "attack now", like in most RT RPG, and there's a differance. You have to be able to separate 'fun' (fighting enemies in a realistic and hard Real Time environment, like Morrowind or Diablo) and 'overcomplex and silly' (Gothic, Daggerfall or Arx Fatalis). There's a differance in clicking on your enemy, and pressing down 2+ buttons in various combinations while using your mouse like crazy (something that in the end has the same result as simply clicking on your opponent).
Turn Based is out of the question since it has virtually no resemblance to reality or difficulty.
_________________
Like some bold seer in a trance;
Seeing all his own mischance |
|
Tue Oct 28, 2003 2:42 pm |
|
|
Ariel
Harmonious Angel
Joined: 21 Jul 2001
Posts: 432
Location: Germany |
I think there is a difference between "Role Playing" and "Role Playing".
Roqua and Hexy seem to prefer playing a role. Like a puppeteer they control a puppet's movements, actions and dialogue, but from a distance and confined to its predefined physical and imposed mental attributes.
Others prefer to play a role. They don't just control a puppet, they become the puppet. Its attributes are still a limiting factor, but they can also bring something of themselves into the character.
That said, I'm in the second camp, because it brings me much closer to the role I want to play. More specifically, it lets me act out a character, not just direct it. It lets me identify with the character more than I could from a rather detached point of view.
_________________
“Through the sounds of falling rain, through the clouds of bitter times
I see the pure grace of your smile, in dreams of the warmth in your eyes” - Tim North |
|
Tue Oct 28, 2003 3:10 pm |
|
|
Hexy
High Emperor
Joined: 28 Jun 2002
Posts: 621
|
Haha... way to glorify yourself.
You DON'T become the "puppet". Rather the "puppet" becomes YOU, and do you know why? Because you let YOUR limitations apply for the puppet as well.
Take Arx Fatalis as an example. You have a character who's really good at using magic... but at the same time he isn't good at all. Because you do the work for him. Thus, it matters very little wether he's good at magic or not, since his ROLE as a skilled magician is destroyed just so YOU can be more in control of your character, and FAIL while trying to make a magical circle exactly right (something the skilled magician you've possed would know how to do).
Now, a mage in Baldur's Gate REALLY IS a mage. Why? Because he ACTUALLY uses his magic. You still control the more "general" aspects of him, like his PERSONALITY.
_________________
Like some bold seer in a trance;
Seeing all his own mischance |
|
Tue Oct 28, 2003 3:39 pm |
|
|
Ariel
Harmonious Angel
Joined: 21 Jul 2001
Posts: 432
Location: Germany |
quote:
Originally posted by Hexy
You DON'T become the "puppet". Rather the "puppet" becomes YOU, and do you know why? Because you let YOUR limitations apply for the puppet as well.
Yeah, I think that's what I implied. You forget character development though. You, the player, develop along with you, the character, and it is for this symbiosis that you can imagine yourself more as an alter ego, so to speak.
If you neglect your own development, then of course there would be left only a shell with potential instead of a mostly fleshed out fact.
_________________
“Through the sounds of falling rain, through the clouds of bitter times
I see the pure grace of your smile, in dreams of the warmth in your eyes” - Tim North |
|
Tue Oct 28, 2003 4:09 pm |
|
|
Jung
Most Exalted Highlord
Joined: 19 Jun 2002
Posts: 411
Location: Texas |
You prefer to direct your character and I prefer to directly control my character. Really, there isn't as big a difference between the two as you imply.
If I am not very good at controlling, then my character will fail, despite high magic/combat abilities. I, myself, do not have any abilities to cast or fight, but my character may. My character does not have the ability to control itself, but I do. So putting those two together and I have the ability to live in a virtual character that has abilities far greater than I, but is only as good as I am at controlling it. I can't think of anything more satisfying than excelling at controlling, being able to directly assume fantastic abilities, and making the right strategic chioces. To me, that is really roleplaying.
You seem to want to create and direct a character, but let the abilities of the character completely determine the outcome of your direction. Fine, but your character is only as good as your strategic abilities. I don't see that much difference plus, you don't have as much control depending on a roll of the dice.
_________________
"You two are a regular ol' Three Musketeers." |
|
Tue Oct 28, 2003 4:18 pm |
|
|
Dwango
Head Merchant
Joined: 06 May 2002
Posts: 68
|
Jung is getting to the crux of the matter. It comes down to how much contol the player has over the character's actions vs how much control statistic have over the character's actions. But that line is rather difficult to define.
The reality is once arbitrary stats are attached to actions, you enter the murky world of RPG. Pure action games give you a standard baseline of statistics that won't change throughout the game. RPGs allow you to adjust statistics that affect game play, to simulate character strengths and weaknesses.
The degree and type of user control that determines an RPG depends on who you are. Some people want minimal control and maximum stats to work with. Others want enough stats to enhance or hamper their existing skills, so they can improve independantly for fun, while gaining levels to automatically improve. For instance, in Gothic you could gain in skill and level, making swordplay easier to attempt. Of course, the baseline would be your own skill level in using the interface. But thats a given in any CPRG. The interface will always be a limiting factor.
Certainly in BG you did not have to know how to make runes in the air. But you did have to choose which spells to memorize and know when to use them. I'm sure there are plenty of players who threw a fireball on thier own party members or summons before they understood how to place them. But does that make BG any less of a RPG?
I think an RPG is a game that aids you in playing a role with statistics. Certainly, less statistics will make a game more action oriented. But I don't believe that eliminates it from being an RPG.
_________________
Ha, Ha, Ha.... Oh, you were SERIOUS?
-Dwango |
|
Tue Oct 28, 2003 7:17 pm |
|
|
elkston
High Emperor
Joined: 21 Sep 2002
Posts: 691
Location: North Carolina, USA |
The only thing that matters is:
Do you enjoy playing the game? If so, then why care about how it is labled. I like the action/RPG hybrid that Gothic offers as well as traditional turn-based/statistic based games like Wizardry 8 or Baldur's Gate 2.
I will say that there is something very appealing about having the combat happen in real time and where you control the action. It gives the game a very kinetic and exciting flow. All the time I was playing Enclave (not really an RPG if you want to assign lables), I was thinking -- now what if they had made this into a full fledged RPG? Gothic 3 seems to be going in this direction and I am enthused about this.
_________________
All shall hear the words of Karras...the words of Karras |
|
Tue Oct 28, 2003 7:56 pm |
|
|
Roqua
High Emperor
Joined: 02 Sep 2003
Posts: 897
Location: rump |
The point I was trying to make wasn't aimed at preference, it was aimed at labels. I would prefer to play Gothic and Dues Ex over NWN, Diablo, or DS. Preference has nothing to do with facts. A fact is a fact, and a preference is an opinion. |
|
Tue Oct 28, 2003 11:07 pm |
|
|
MageofFire
Griller of Molerats
Joined: 03 Oct 2003
Posts: 1594
Location: Monastery of Innos |
Awhile back, as many of you may remember, I posted a topic called Hack'n'Slash versus Immersion and Story. I was questioning whether games like Diablo and Dungeon Siege were really RPGs, as they seemed to be so tied up in action that they became one huge dungeon crawl from start to finish with few actual RPG elements. Now we are questioning whether games like Dues Ex and Gothic are RPGs. Just to get state my opinion, I believe Gothic (I've never played Dues Ex) is an RPG. Why? It has character progression, a good (long) story, a free-roam environment without any "levels" to go through, and lots of NPCs to talk to and recieve quests from. That's putting it in a general perspective. There are lots of finer details that make Gothic a true RPG of which I will not bother to list. Rather than thinking that Gothic's combat system strips it completely of its "RPGedness," I choose to think of it as an action game element. Action and strategy games have RPG elements and are still called action and strategy games, so why can't RPGs have action elements and still be called RPGs? 
_________________
OMG! WTF?! MONKEYS!!!!
=Member of numerous usergroups=
=Active in none of them=
Mediocreties, I absolve you! |
|
Wed Oct 29, 2003 1:04 am |
|
|
Gorath
Mostly Harmless
Joined: 03 Sep 2001
Posts: 6327
Location: NRW, Germany |
@Roqua
You seem to be rather creative in what you call fact. And who says existing definitions cannot be updated?
_________________
Webmaster GothicDot
Last edited by Gorath on Wed Oct 29, 2003 1:34 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Wed Oct 29, 2003 1:07 am |
|
|
MageofFire
Griller of Molerats
Joined: 03 Oct 2003
Posts: 1594
Location: Monastery of Innos |
Yes, he surely is.
_________________
OMG! WTF?! MONKEYS!!!!
=Member of numerous usergroups=
=Active in none of them=
Mediocreties, I absolve you!
Last edited by MageofFire on Sun Nov 23, 2003 6:02 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Wed Oct 29, 2003 1:11 am |
|
|
Ariel
Harmonious Angel
Joined: 21 Jul 2001
Posts: 432
Location: Germany |
quote:
Originally posted by Roqua
Preference has nothing to do with facts. A fact is a fact, and a preference is an opinion.
But your facts are opinionative, ergo, they are not facts.
You label certain games "RPG" and disregard others (which are by your definition no RPGs in the first place). I happen to label them differently and include Gothic but almost totally exclude Diablo.
Besides, there's more to an "RPG" than just one point.
_________________
“Through the sounds of falling rain, through the clouds of bitter times
I see the pure grace of your smile, in dreams of the warmth in your eyes” - Tim North |
|
Wed Oct 29, 2003 1:25 am |
|
|
MageofFire
Griller of Molerats
Joined: 03 Oct 2003
Posts: 1594
Location: Monastery of Innos |
@Arhiel-Me too. Gothic is an RPG with action elements, Diablo is an action game with RPG elements.
_________________
OMG! WTF?! MONKEYS!!!!
=Member of numerous usergroups=
=Active in none of them=
Mediocreties, I absolve you! |
|
Wed Oct 29, 2003 1:27 am |
|
|
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Thu Apr 11, 2019 1:29 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
