This thread is permanently archived
What's the meaning of RPG?
| Sorry if it looks I'm stupid on this (I probably am anyways xD), it's just curiosity. Wanted to post this before but casually the post "Y'all ever think about how weird our genres are?" was made and already saw someone talking about an issue with J-RPGs, not the same problem but kind of related.
| No actually it is not a stupid question that's an ongoing debate among many critics these days. The thing is, it used be any game with classes and a skill tree of some sort was considered an RPG. However, now every game posses these qualities (which is the reason why this debate even exists btw). I am no critic sadly so I am in no position to give you a definitive answer. Here are my two cents tho:
| We already know what RPGs looked like (you mentioned FF, DQ etc.) So any game that resemble them and feel like them can be considered and RPG. This is essentialy how we ended up using Rogule-likes and Souls-like
| Whenever I think about what makes an RPG an RPG, I think back to Dungeons & Dragons. I tend to associate stats, dice rolls/RNG, jobs, and character builds with an RPG's identity.
Role-playing your own custom character would be obvious, but not every RPG gives you as much personal agency. Skyrim and Dragon Age certainly fit that, but not Final Fantasy unless you count silent avatars.
| Well, it is a roleplaying game. Games that are made in a way where you're supposed to immerse yourself in the world and story and really feel like you are the main character, usually inspired to an extent by Dungeons and Dragons.
Obviously most games do put you in the role of a character and try to immerse you to an extent, but RPGs are usually meant to be more, realistic, in a sense. It'll take a little while to explain this though, but I will.
| Realism:
Basically, if you look at something like Final Fantasy or Dragon Quest (or just D&D) they usually have RNG in their combat to simulate how in real life most people probably wouldn't hit every single time they swing their sword or use some fancy skill or spell, or how the strength of it would usually vary depending on a lot of factors.
It's to simulate that intense "oh shit" moment of missing an important swing in a sword fight, or "fuck yeah" moment of hitting perfectly.
| The same thing goes for how you usually need items to heal and shit. It's to make it more realistic. To simulate the feeling of being with you party members in the depths of a dungeon, barely hanging on to your life and having to take a break and try to heal up the best you can with whatever you might have in your bag.
But obviously, this was all back in the day. Nowadays it's, a bit more complicated.
| But that's usually where stats come in.
Stats are meant to simulate how people are have different strengths and weaknesses, leveling up is meant to simulate how people grow and get better at different things over time. Like getting more resilient, getting stronger, hitting more accurately, getting better at using spells, getting more stamina etc.
So nowadays I would say that's the best way to distinguish it. All the things that I mentioned as well as the intent behind it.
| For example:
Call of Duty is not an RPG. It puts you in the role of a character, it has different stats on different weapons and you can level up. But the intent behind it matters.
The stats in something like CoD is not to simulate character growth. It's just an addictive way to keep people engaged.
Some form of adventuring is also important in RPGs. You're meant to be engrossed in the worlds and characters, unlike CoD where the hook is "see person, shoot person, get points".
| I hope this surface level breakdown helps a bit.
| I never considered Zelda an rpg. You could compare Super Mario World and Super Mario RPG to see what the differences are (which is basically what was said above)
| >>730855
Oh, yeah. I forgot to mention that. I don't consider Zelda an RPG either. They're more adventure games than RPGs in my opinion.
| >>730855 >>730864 Why not? In a traditional meaning Zelda games are about starting from nothing and evolving not only in gameplay but in story too. You get more life, magic, abilites, items, upgrades, forms, techniques and even grown up 7 years. There are no RNG factors except for sidequest, but because it's action based. Turn based RPGs automatically do inputs trough text. But action RPGs let you decide your own inputs.
FF Dissidia had exactly this two options.
| For me FF I was an adventure. Adventure and RPG can be together. At the end of Zelda and FF you are totally different from the start the game. Both games restrict accessing harder bosses under story and key elements.
Of course, under glitch factors, Zelda's gameplay may let you beat the final boss with the starting setting, but Final Fantasy, Pokemon or Dragon Quest also are under the same posibility.
| >>730855 Mario games are a bad example. Is not the character who is leveling up, is the player who gets better.
He can't go to the next level until he isn't good enough.
In Mario RPGs games you can't access the next story point until you are good enough or have the necesary gear. Basically beat the boss.
What's the difference?
Also, specially in 2D ones, power-ups are key elements and they are like "if you get hit in FF you lose all your levels and have to start over".
| But as this evolution is exclusive under the player you can't consider a Mario game a RPG.
RPG would mean a challenge to the character's situation and the player. Mario games are only a challenge to the player.
You jump the same the whole game, you run the same the whole game and so on.
| RPGs are more about "having a pet and taking care of it".
| >>731055
Bro, genres are blurred nowadays, and some games go multiple genres.
The Legend of Zelda doesn't have any of the elements that I enjoy from RPGs, therefore I don't think of it as an RPG. That would be like calling a sidescrolling game where you never jump for a platformer. Just, something feels off.
It is an RPG because Nintendo says so, and I still love the games a lot, but they're missing a lot of RPG elements. Like, would you ever play Zelda if you're craving an RPG?
| >>731129 But that it doesn't have some elements doesn't mean it isn't an RPG. Original FF and DQ didn't have elements that newer entrys introduced and many turn based RPG games mimic, so do they stop being RPGs?
Nintendo never says Zelda it's an RPG, Nintendo says it's a Puzzle, Adventure game. But Zelda devs never think of genres, they think about features, there are Zelda games that are more near RPG experience than others.
| I love Zelda because, even though there is no level system, you can see your progress being made in an inmersive world. Only FF game made me feel the same is Final Fantasy I and XV.
About platform games, you would be impressed to know that there are in fact many games where you can't jump but still are considered platformer. VVVVVV, Captain Toad, Monument Valley and many games from GB/NES/SNES like Bionic Commando or games you only move through ladders or falling.
| >>731138 to clarify, I felt progression in other FF games, but didn't feel as inmerse, as the characters are so unique and special I feel I'm watching a film I'm moving with my controller. I am in fact using stats and all that stuff, but I'm no longer Role-Playing. That's how I feel, but normally, people would role play as the character. But then what's the difference between those FF games and Red Dead Redemption or The Witcher or Diablo?
| my determination of what an rpg is how much stress I have while playing it. Keeping track of stats and balancing a party. All while keeping track of missables. FF8 was really stressful because overleveling had consequences. Zelda is totally stress free in those regards. Nothing is really missable. (never played BotW, are there missables?)
| >>731343 I disagree with the idea of RPGs being inherently stressful. Not to mention what's stressful will differ in various degrees between players and how they tolerate stress. A genre is best determined by observable traits, not the subjective feelings of a player.
| GTA San Andreas is my favorite E-RPG
| >>731358 It seems crazy but maybe measuring stress levels in a controlled study IS a way to determine which genre a game is.
| >>731710 in any case stress would help to determine it's difficutly or pace, but not genre. For example I have zero stress when playing Horror games, they are boring to me but to others is really scary and impressive. That would be a thematic genre, based on a general audience. But RPGs, Shooters, Racing games... are defined on its gameplay. There will be games with the same genre and one won't generate you any stress at all.
| What I get from this post is that a have multiple types of genres.
-Gameplay genre (shooter, action/turn-based/tactical)
-Theme genre (fantasy, horror)
-Base genre (party, adventure) which actually defines how the game is designed to be played.
-Difficulty genre which is actually not tagged often, but you won't take Code Vein as serious as Dark Souls. That it's easier and stress-free won't change the fact that both games are almost the same.
| I also get that if you don't play the game in the intended way doesn't mean it stops being that genre, you CAN'T change its gameplay genre unless you are modifying it directly (like the remake of FFVII). Smash is a Party Fighting game as much as you don't like it. The Party is optional, the fighting isn't. If you don't fight you are not partying, so basically not playing the game.
| I also see that some people can't distinguish between RPG and Turn-based/action/tactical RPG because they have RPG in common. And normally Action RPGs are really different in gameplay towards Turn-Based RPGs, even though they of course share some basics. This also means Action AND Action RPGs are different genres despite having elements in common.
| But you can't say Zelda is just an action game, so is the campaign of Halo games but they are totally different. You need a way to difference both games because you of course know there is a difference. >>730864 Adventure? Both games are an Adventure "An adventure is an exciting experience that is typically bold, sometimes risky, undertaking." - Wikipedia or "an exciting or very unusual experience" from WordReference.
That isn't giving any difference between both games.
| What's the difference between the beggining of a Zelda game like Ocarina of Time and Halo 1? None. Link is an unnarmed child who finds a sword. Master Chief is an unnarmed guy in a suit who finds a gun weapon.
| But what's the difference between the ending of Ocarina of Time and Halo 1?. That in Zelda, you have more life, items, improved your sword, find out some secret items like an even better sword, magic, improved magic with spells like inmortallity or teleport, elemental arrows... If you don't take any of that it will be harder to beat the final boss or you won't even be able to reach to it.
At the end of Halo 1 you have another gun. Probably not much better.
| In Zelda there has been some progression, just like in a turn-based RPG, I would say it deserves the spot to be an Action RPG, again, It's true is missing things like classes, even though you can play a Zelda game with only a bow and beat most of it, you could say is non-closed classes as you can swap between Sword, bow and magic even though you probably are mostly going to use the sword, but as if swordman wasn't the most used class in any RPG...
| There aren't important stats or experience, but in action RPGs those are usually optional.
In fact are they mandatory for an RPG? why the original Harvest Moon on SNES is an RPG when it has none of that (afaik, really haven't try it too much, but Stardew Valley is also considered RPG despite the only stats are life and stamina.)?
| As >>d32f80 said, RPGs are simulating experiences how it was done traditional was by stats. That's something you will do when you have multiple characters to compare and experience to let you know that your character is learning to fight.
But in a Zelda game you don't need that. It's trying to be more realistic in the case of in real life I killed a bunny, so now I will deal more damage to the next bunny" while in real life we have no level up system (if there is please teach me).
| We in fact will deal more damage because from our previous action we have learn to swing our sword better. But that would be exponential increase of damage, there will be point were next to a bear we won't be able to significaly damage it, because our sword and us have reached our limit.
| So we would need to upgrade to another sword or try other weapons like a bow.
While a turn-based RPG or a tabletop RPG can simulate this action through level up or in fact new items. Zelda won't simulate it by numbers but phisically, your sword will have more reach and better edge. You are in fact Role Playing by action.
Monster Hunter is also like that and people are more open to accept it as an RPG than Zelda.
| To my point. RPG is not a genre that defines the gameplay. It's a base genre, defines what the game is intented to be. Fictional Roleplay in an extended way. Not as simple as a Super Mario game where you pretend you are Mario and that's it.
But a game that will make you Role Play fictional experiences, being a farmer, a hero, a mage, manage a party...
| Adventure genre is also a base genre. Is not definying the gameplay of the game. It's telling you that you will experience an adventure. Not through stats, guns, armies or fists.
Gameplay genre are Turn based, action and tactical, not RPG.
Base genre is RPG.
So basically there really is no word to define a game has stats or level up. What's a game without combat and with those things? The Sims?
everyone just roleplays that "RPG" is the word.
-The End, sorry.
| >>11d6d2
I'm, not reading that. Sorry. That's like, 7k letters or something.
I read the last 3 or so posts and, I mean, you have valid points. Though, everything you seem to be saying is kinda moot because I didn't say that TLoZ isn't an RPG. It technically is. It's just not really a very roleplay-ish game for me. If I want roleplaying I'll play XC or SMT/Persona or something. If I want action and adventure I play BotW. Doesn't mean that BotW isn't RPG or that XC isn't adventure.
| It's like the difference between LARPing and TTRPGs. For me I'd LARP to just fuck around and do active shit with people, and I'd play a TTRPG if I want to immerse myself deeply in story and characters.
But there are also places that mix it. That are LARP but a lot of combat and actions or done in similar ways to TTRPGs, and I'd love to do that if I want a bit of both.
It's the same with video games.
All of those are technically role-playing, but I do them for different reasons.
| Well, currently I don't do any of them because COVID and no groups where I live, but you get the point.
This thread is permanently archived
| Recently have been thinking about Role-play games... What exactly are RPGs and what makes a game an RPG? Everyone knows Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest are RPGs, but Skyrim is also an RPG and also Zelda, but why Metroid isn't an RPG while Castlevania has RPG elements?
What's even an RPG element? Stats? Classes? Upgrades? Then why racing games aren't RPGs? Because you play intending you are a character in a fictional setting? Then why GTA isn't an RPG but the Witcher is?