What's an RPG? (Long article illiterates need not apply)

[Gabriel]

No we can't. Most of those "founding fathers" didn't really have storylines that served more purpose than framing the action. Some still don't. And as you said, other genres have storylines. Ninja Gaiden had a storyline. King's Quest had a storyline. Neither are RPGs.

OK. How about this.

If we ripped out the entire storyline of Fire Emblem, and replaced all the character graphics with abstract shapes, would it still be a RPG, or would it become a wargame?

Did Tunnels of Doom have a story? I don't recall if there's any specific reason why you're generating the random dungeons.

Do RPGs not need an in-game story? Unless Tunnels of Doom lacks one, I can't think of any which lack one entirely, perhaps Aklabeth (sp) or maybe Telengard.

I think you're right, though. The storyline requirement is meaningless. In the olden days there wasn't enough memory for a story, and in modern times there's enough memory for anything to have an in-game story.

[Cryomancer]

Where would Sigma Star Saga place into this? It has a storyline, characters, items, exploration, but all it's "random battles" and leveling up are done via horizontal shooting segments. Obviously the game was designed to have elements of two genres, does that make defining both of those genres more difficult, or should we just accept that there are games that intentionally cross between genres?

this is all very interesting.

[blissfulnoise]

Where would Sigma Star Saga place into this? It has a storyline, characters, items, exploration, but all it's "random battles" and leveling up are done via horizontal shooting segments. Obviously the game was designed to have elements of two genres, does that make defining both of those genres more difficult, or should we just accept that there are games that intentionally cross between genres?

this is all very interesting.

Much like Guardian Legend, SSS defies any sort of hard and fast genre definition. Guardian Legend goes into a sort of Action/Adventure/Shooter category; not RPG though. Sigma Star Saga is more Shooter/RPG since it has many more traditional RPG elements.

Just like film, cross genres become genres onto themselves: Romantic Comedy, Crime Drama, etc. until the subgenres become genres in their own right.

[Chris]

At first I'd like to say that imo there's no black & white or boolean value to apply to the borderline cases. Sometimes there just is no clear line to be drawn.
Furthermore when other games share certain RPG characteristics, then this doesn't necessarily render these characteristics irrelevant.
RPGs are (as many other videogames) simulations of fictional worlds and most of their characteristics evolved out of technical constraints. As these are overcome and simulations get more realistic, genre inevitably merge (see GTA San Andreas).


Anyway, let's take a look at RPGs and try to formulate similarities and differentiations.
I think we can make out three subdivisions in chronological order:

1) P&P-RPG (the Pen & Paper RPGs out of which the others evolved)
2) C-RPG (computer RPGs)
3) J-RPG (Japanese RPGs or console RPGs)

As P&P RPGs are more improvisational affairs, where the rules are defined/executed by a gamemaster (not a computer), they give players the greatest amount of freedom and control in shaping the direction and outcome of the game through their choices (a kind of interactive storytelling). They're also more collaborative and social than competitive, cause they can incorporate harder to formalise concepts like social interaction more easily.
C-RPGs tried to simulate this experience, but as the rules are now in the hands of the computer, great abstractions had to be made due to technical constraints. Though with time they also offered reasonably open-ended and nonlinear plot structures and dynamic worlds, while J-RPGs are generally more strictly directed and linear experiences.
Of course when we speak about an RPG, we want to describe C-RPGs and J-RPGs. So.. what do they have in common? Let's take a look at both the player's experience of playing an RPG and the game (seen as a formal system) itself:


What does the player do and feel in an RPG?
Players assume the role of a fictional avatar or party in a (usually well-developed) simulated fictional gameworld (setting).
The gaming experience is primarily centered around immersion (being someone else) or empathy (feeling with someone else).

How's that done in an RPG?
The game is either concerned with creating the player's or following the designer's story with an emphasis on character/party development and customization.
As an abstraction for actual skill development, the avatar's/party's quantized characteristics (stats) are raised over the course of the game through rewards for exploring the gameworld & overcomming challenges.


For example Wizardry (and C-RPGs in general) are more concerned with letting the players experience and tell their own story through more extensive character customization. In this case, the nonexistence of a story even strengthens this point, as leaving out details creates room to be filled by the player's own imagination. This raises a feeling of immersion, whereas it's more difficult to imagine oneself to be a detailed, predefined avatar like seen in many J-RPGs, where you instead feel with him/her (empathy).
I hope this kinda helps to resolve the often named problem of early RPGs not having predefined stories at all.

I could write and try to explain a few more things, but I guess it's enough for now
PS: @James8BitStar: I like your ideas of genre classifications. I guess I'll write a few words about them when I find the time.

[j_factor]

I don't have any objection with asking the question if Wizardry should be a RPG. I just don't find the argument to remove it from the genre a compelling one. It's like if we suddenly reclassified platformers to exclude Super Mario Bros; we'd need a pretty good reason.

I'm having to bend over backwards because of my story requirement. Is there any reason you feel Wizardry should be excluded other than not meeting your non-player character requirement?

Hmm. I'm not sure how best to explain it, but I've never really thought of dungeon crawlers as RPGs. I usually think of RPGs as games that have dungeon crawling in them -- if dungeon crawling is the entire game, it's not an RPG. I'm not sure if I could say as a hard and fast rule that all RPGs must be divided into dungeons and towns, but that is certainly the epitome.

Tangetically, you mention Ancient Art of War as not being a RTS. I honestly had never thought of that game's categorization. I used to play Ancient Art of War at Sea quite a bit on a friend's Tandy. It occurs to me that AAoWaS shares many qualities with Starfleet Command and Star Trek: Tactical Assault. Would SFC also fail to qualify as a RTS? I suppose you could categorize the games as a different breed of simulator. I guess the old Apple game Broadsides would be in the same boat (pun intended).

We have enough points to keep us busy for a while, but that little bit caught my eye.

Unfortunately, this is where I break down, as I've not played Starfleet Command or Star Trek: Tactical Assault. I suppose I need to educate myself on more hoary old PC games.

I definitely don't disagree. I'd prefer to be able to list much harder rules.

We (or maybe just me) seem to be focusing a lot on the idea of statistics versus action oriented play. But what about storyline? I'm sure we can all agree that storyline is a key element of an RPG, but nowadays all games have storylines. How is the storyline of Fire Emblem different from that of Gradius V. Both are linear. Both have little bearing on their game. I think everyone will agree that a RPG MUST have a story, but how does that little element on the checklist work?

Storyline is a good one. We could perhaps say that to be an RPG, it must have a plot that has a beginning, middle, and end. We'll put that as a tentative requirement for now. I'm sure someone will list a bunch of ridiculously old DOS games that they insist are RPGs, that only had a story inasmuch as they had a paragraph of backstory in the manual and a "Congratulations!" screen at the end. In all seriousness, maybe such games really should not be considered RPGs.

I know there are arcadeish dungeon crawlers, so not all dungeon crawlers are RPGs. I don't know anything about Nethack. As for Adventure, regardless of whether you're talking about Adventure in the Collossal Cave or the 2600 game, neither are RPGs. The 2600 game is pure action with no leveling up or other statistical elements. There are no shops, non-player characters, or any of the other associated things to relate to RPGs. Adventure in the Collossal Cave also lacks all of the same things despite it being turn based.

Speaking of games like the Adventures, Zorks, and Advanced Dungeons & Dragons: Cloudy Mountain, I'd use your "proto-RPG" label to apply to them. They clearly aren't RPGs, but they're certainly leaning that way.

All fair enough.

This has been a very interesting discussion, but now I feel like I'm running out of points to make. I hereby forfeit the title of "Anthony1 Jr."

One possibility I'll throw out there. Maybe we shouldn't think of "RPG" as a genre anymore. Maybe we should think of action-RPG, strategy-RPG, "Japanese" RPG, etc. all as separate genres, with some common elements. Or maybe we should only be talking about "RPG elements" and completely disavow there being such a thing as an RPG. The only problem with that is coming up with a name for the type of game that Final Fantasy, Phantasy Star, et al are. Just food for thought!

[James8BitStar]

Though I've officially decided I don't care about the definition of the "RPG" anymore since it is a hopelessly outdated term, I do have some final words on that.

First of all, storyline is a BAD criteria, not just for RPGs but for pretty much any video game. These are games, and the only criteria that should even count are ones that directly involve the mechanics of the games. Storyline does not.

Secondly, I'm of the mind that any criteria which only works if you disregard half the accepted canon of the RPG, is bad criteria. Most of you seem to be saying "I came up with a new criteria, how many games fit it?" When what you should be doing is saying "all these games are considered RPGs, what do they have in common?" and use that as your basis (not to brag, but that's how I arrived at my "Statistics and Exploration" theory).

That being said...

Or maybe we should only be talking about "RPG elements" and completely disavow there being such a thing as an RPG.

I like that idea.

The only problem with that is coming up with a name for the type of game that Final Fantasy, Phantasy Star, et al are.

*Pokes, points at previous post*

[ALAKA]

Would you guys consider Tecmo Cup for the NES an rpg?

[Chris]

I certainly would. Thing is, you can apply RPG mechanics & characteristics to nearly any setting/fictional world.
E.g. you could very well built an RPG around drag-racing or mountain climbing.

It's especially easy to apply to sports, cause of the clear, predefined rulesets.
Another good example is the RPG mode in World Court Tennis for TG16.

[Cryomancer]

That's nothing new, there are paper and pencil sports RPGs too. Most notably, football.

[Gabriel]

That's nothing new, there are paper and pencil sports RPGs too. Most notably, football.

Could you provide a name of one of these? I'm coming out of about 25 years of being a die-hard P&P RPGer, and have heard of quite a few games ranging from Spawn of Fashan to Zaon, but I've never seen any sports RPG. Are these retail games, paid PDFs, or web homebrew freebies?

[Cryomancer]

http://www.blood-bowl.net/ I've never played it, and it is technically more of a miniatures game, but there's stats and dice. It's arguably more like a tabletop war/mech/space game, but it's something close at least.

see also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fantasy..._(board_games)

[HappehLemons]

I've always been confused about this.
Is there any universally agreed definition of an RPG? I understand that it is a "Role Playing Game" but if that was truly the definition every game would be a RPG.

This probably seems like a dumb question, but I see a lot of games classified into the RPG genres with no clue why.

[Arkhan]

RPG is mostly games where you build your character up with a system of stats.
and battles take place similar to a D&D setting

Character development, story, and towns are emphasized....

theres dungeon-->town--->exploration afoot....

Its often menu driven. Only in rare cases (action RPGs) is it not totally "menu driven"

Basically its games similar to an electronic implementation of D&D or other pen/paper RPGs.

Yes you're playing a role in say, Halo, but it doesn't contain the same immersive story/world elements that make it a deeper game than a normal FPS...

Some games COULD be said to be RPGs, but often have a more predominant genre... like Zelda, it is more action/adventure than action RPG.

somethin' like that.

[MASTERWEEDO]

I've always been confused about this.
Is there any universally agreed definition of an RPG? I understand that it is a "Role Playing Game" but if that was truly the definition every game would be a RPG.

This probably seems like a dumb question, but I see a lot of games classified into the RPG genres with no clue why.

I have always had the same question.

[Jorpho]

oh no

http://www.digitpress.com/forum/showthread.php?t=38415
http://www.digitpress.com/forum/showthread.php?t=113452

Can we get a merge or a lock in here, stat?

[Zoltor]

RPG is mostly games where you build your character up with a system of stats.
and battles take place similar to a D&D setting

Character development, story, and towns are emphasized....

theres dungeon-->town--->exploration afoot....

Its often menu driven. Only in rare cases (action RPGs) is it not totally "menu driven"

Basically its games similar to an electronic implementation of D&D or other pen/paper RPGs.

Yes you're playing a role in say, Halo, but it doesn't contain the same immersive story/world elements that make it a deeper game than a normal FPS...

Some games COULD be said to be RPGs, but often have a more predominant genre... like Zelda, it is more action/adventure than action RPG.

somethin' like that.

Damn, he beat me to it(I had to go and get something to eat). Well that pretty much says it all.

[kupomogli]

There are a lot of "RPGs" that I don't consider RPG titles. Zelda, Ys, Castlevania(new,) Dirge of Cerberus, Faxanadu, Brave Fencer Musashi, Dragon Valor, Fallout, Morrowind, etc. Games like that I don't consider RPG titles. Sure you can change equipment and/or get levels up, but they're more "action adventure" than anything.

An RPG to me is really defined by the battle system. Like Arkhan said. Menu driven. Star Ocean, Tales of, and Crisis Core Final Fantasy 7 are the only games I'd consider action RPG titles.

People can list as many genres as they want with RPG tacked on, but this doesn't change the fact that the RPG aspect is the most minor aspect in the game.

[Therealqtip]

You guys got it all wrong, its a Rocket Propelled Grenade!

[Aussie2B]

Is there any universally agreed definition of an RPG?

Short answer is no, not even remotely close. It's a debate that crops up fairly frequently, and they often degrade into heated arguments. I'd say, as with most genres, you know it when you see it, since if you try to pin down some concrete rules you'll always find many exceptions despite that said exceptions clearly belong too. I'd also say that it's the formation of concrete rules that muddles things even further because then you start throwing in stuff that really doesn't belong. Take Crystalis and Zelda for example. While some people include Zelda as an RPG, most don't. Crystalis clearly follows the same school of design, yet it's usually considered an RPG. Why? Just because it has HP, MP, and level ups? Modern Castlevania games do too, but they're generally not considered RPGs. In fact, they clearly take after Super Metroid style design, and that certainly isn't widely regarded as an RPG. For an even more telling example, replace Crystalis with Alundra. Alundra is flat-out considered a Zelda rip-off, yet it too is generally called an RPG. It's all a huge mess, so I take a huge grain of salt with anyone's categorization.

[Zoltor]

Short answer is no, not even remotely close. It's a debate that crops up fairly frequently, and they often degrade into heated arguments. I'd say, as with most genres, you know it when you see it, since if you try to pin down some concrete rules you'll always find many exceptions despite that said exceptions clearly belong too. I'd also say that it's the formation of concrete rules that muddles things even further because then you start throwing in stuff that really doesn't belong. Take Crystalis and Zelda for example. While some people include Zelda as an RPG, most don't. Crystalis clearly follows the same school of design, yet it's usually considered an RPG. Why? Just because it has HP, MP, and level ups? Modern Castlevania games do too, but they're generally not considered RPGs. In fact, they clearly take after Super Metroid style design, and that certainly isn't widely regarded as an RPG. For an even more telling example, replace Crystalis with Alundra. Alundra is flat-out considered a Zelda rip-off, yet it too is generally called an RPG. It's all a huge mess, so I take a huge grain of salt with anyone's categorization.

Omg tell me about it, even in threads that are based around games that are clearly "pure" RPGs, people still bring up Crystalis. Is it a RPG, yea, but It's not a pure RPG, It's an "Action/RPG, there are sub genres for a reason, use them, also by the love that is all good, and right, stop calling Zelda games, RPGs.