Just what IS an RPG?

[Solly]

Whether you've really thought about it or not, we've all at least seen arguments over how we classify games. Some people might say things like "Zelda is an RPG" while others rush to correct them, saying that it's not. I've done it myself, in the past, but now I'm starting to wonder about my position.

The main problem with saying "this game is/isn't an RPG" is that the term really seems to mean a lot of different things to different people. At the same time, however, we place a lot of games under the RPG genre that have virtually nothing in common with each other. So how are we defining it?

"RPG," as most of you know is an acronym for "Roleplaying Game." Roleplaying, if Wikipedia is to be believed, is when players assume the roles of characters in a fictional setting. In the Elder Scrolls games, for example, the character is an avatar for the player, whose personality, looks, abilities and name have been customized personally. This sounds like the very definition of roleplaying game, but a lot of other RPGs don't follow this formula at all. Take Skies of Arcadia for example.

It's a pretty well-known game, regarded by many people as being one of the best RPGs they've ever played. But is it really an RPG under the definition of "Role Playing Game?" Your character, Vyse, is exactly that; a character. While you get to influence some of his minor decisions, and you take control of him, he is still his own creature with his own emotions, personality and motivations. He has a history and a name. Almost every detail of his character, (besides the subtle things) is unrelated to player decisions, and he is therefore not an avatar of the player- at least no more so than any other videogame character. The player isn’t part of Vyse any more than he or she is a part of Solid Snake or Mario.

That's not to say any of this is bad, but there isn't any real "roleplaying" involved. It's telling a story, but the story isn't about you. You're just moving the characters along. A lot of RPGs, JRPGs in particular are like this.

I never really considered Zelda an RPG, but if we are to define RPGs by literally interpreting the genre’s name, then it’s actually more of an RPG than Skies of Arcadia, or even some of the later Final Fantasy games.

At least here I can pick my character’s name, and maybe add to his personality, or project my own motivations onto him- if for no other reason than the fact that Link is usually a blank slate. The differences between how people interpret the genre of these games probably has a lot to do with how people play them. Does Zelda count as a roleplaying game if I’m really into it, name the character after myself, and attempt to project my feelings onto the player character? Does it cease to be one if I just name him Link and get on with it?

I’m just using this as an example. I don’t want to turn this into a 4^th Zelda thread, but when we say that Zelda ISN’T an RPG, why do we say that? Is it because we aren’t doing any roleplaying as Link, or does it lack some of the other elements RPG’s are associated with? A lot of people label game mechanics like leveling-up “RPG bits” but are they really critical when defining the genre, or are they superficial? And what counts as leveling-up anyway? Does it have to happen to your character, or does it happen to your items too? Is Orcs Must Die an RPG because you can spend performance-based awarded trinkets on boosting the parameters of your weapons and traps? Is Casltevania Symphony of the Night an RPG because it has EXP? And since when did that become part of roleplaying?

I’m really just curious. What's an RPG?

[KnightOfTheWind]

An overrated genre *trollface.jpg*. Only kidding. I don't know, I guess it varies. As long as there's some role playing involved and you feel a connection to the character and the world I guess. But I know what you mean, some RPG games have no traditional battle sequences, etc at all.

[Tornado]

I'd say the difference between Zelda and Zelda-like games and dungeon crawlers/roguelikes (which look and tend to play fairly similar to Zelda games) is that the latter put far more emphasis on resource and player management than the former titles.

Edited August 26, 2012 by Gilda

[KHCast]

I'd actually say Skyrim feels more like a RPG than Zelda. Something just sets me off to think that. Probably the options you have in that game compared to zelda...?

[Mega]

Whether or not JRPGs can truly be considered roleplaying, I honestly do prefer their approach to the character being an avatar of the player, mostly because I like getting to know the characters and becoming attached to them. Having complete control over their personalities or having them be silent kinda ruins that for me.

Though nonspeaking protagonists can be handled well. I do love Amaterasu from Okami, but she still has lots of character... though I'm really not sure that'd count as an RPG at all.

Then again, don't you play a role in almost every video game? It really does seem like this foggy area in categorization.

[Solkia]

Lots of belts.

[VO.SUPER]

Really, an RPG is a role playing game and is about living a role, and I'd say most modern JRPGs moved away from that title for a reason.

As we all know, the roleplaying game adapted itself from the Dungeons and Dragons structure for the most part, players and enemies would take turns rolling the die and hoping they got the better end of the deal. You assumed a role and made your choices in the story as you went along, and this is how the early RPGs from the 70s and 80s were back on computers.

You had the Ultima and Wizardry series which took the randomizing elements of classic D&D and pretty much acted the role of a hero, with limited choices.

You see, because memory was so precious back in those days, many RPGs could not really implement a system that allowed for more choice, unless you were playing a MUDD, where it was all just text.

So, to resolve this, the silent protagonist was made. The main character would remain silent to allow the player the chance to live out the role in their own head. Deep inside, they are the ones responding to these conversations. Yes, it's mostly just using imagination, but that's basically what D&D was.

And as we all know, JRPGs took the console world by storm while WRPGs continued to dominate the PC realm, and thus the terminology of RPG became twisted by the differing cultures.

As stated in the East and West thread, the Japanese prefer to have most of their decisions made for them already, and prefer their role being in synergy with the main character, which is why the silent protagonist died in many JRPGs. They wanted a character to relate to and grow up with, thus "playing" the role of the main character.

To a westerner, this is not playing the role, it is playing a book. This is why Western RPGs still retain the older method of role play, by allowing the player to expand their character in a way they see fit. They don't want to join with the character, they want to control the character and be in that situation.

At this point, the term JRPG is just a genre term in describing a Japanese experience for a role playing game. The Japanese player wants to be in synergy with a character they understand and enjoy. That is why they keep that title and we still call them RPGs.

So in short, a RPG is what the culture defines it as.

[WarioBone]

Lots of belts.

Overdesigned characters, skimpy armor that somehow protects from massive amounts of damage, and oversized swords/guns.

dem belts

Edited August 26, 2012 by Kind-Hearted Jerk

[VO.SUPER]

Overdesigned characters, skimpy armor that somehow protects from massive amounts of damage, and oversized swords/guns.

dem belts

Don't forget baggy clothes that would put a labyrinth to shame.

[SuperStingray]

I don't really like the term "role-playing games" because the player has a role in EVERY game; even in Tetris the player assumes the role of the current brick. But even if we went by what the term "RPG" was meant to encompass, the genre's still broad enough that we split them into multiple camps. But even still, if you label something JRPG or WRPG you still don't have a clear idea of what you're in for; is it like Paper Mario or Final Fantasy? Mass Effect or Fallout 3? And even then, JRPG and WRPG still kind of seem like awkward terms when you see games like Anachronox and Dark Souls which come from the "wrong" continent. I could go on, but once again Extra Credits covered this topic, and actually has a full on trilogy for it.

Edited August 26, 2012 by SuperStingray

[Diogenes]

Just what IS an RPG?

Hmp, who even knows at this point.

From a functional standpoint, having a major emphasis on stats and stat growth seems to be the major characteristic.

[Solkia]

Aside form belts, basically this:

-Heavily story-based

-You have a party

-All the women have large tits or minskirtsand the guys are either douchebags or idiots

-likely to spend a majority of the game grinding, but not always

feel free to expand/correct me on this.

Edited August 27, 2012 by Solkia-kun

[WarioBone]

-All the women have large tits or minskirtsand the guys are either douchebags or idiots

Secondarily, women can also have -A cup breasts and the men can be angsty angst balls of angst.

[Tornado]

Aside form belts, basically this:

-Heavily story-based

-You have a party

-All the women have large tits or minskirtsand the guys are either douchebags or idiots

-likely to spend a majority of the game grinding, but not always

feel free to expand/correct me on this.

You forgot "My parents are deeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaad the world is about to eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeennnnnnnnd and they won't even give me a discount on potions."

Edited August 27, 2012 by Gilda

[Solkia]

WAIT.

This is an old comic, but I love it, and it basically is part of what Gilda just said

[Sarah Jane Smith]

I've hated the name "RPG" for quite some time. It's so broad and vague it's impossible to settle on a concrete definition.

[\Lennox]

Overdesigned characters, skimpy armor that somehow protects from massive amounts of damage, and oversized swords/guns.

dem belts

Don't forget the zippers, so I can zip you up!

Typically said to a White-Haired Pretty boy who, when he is not a villain, is a total smart-ass.

Like me!

Edited August 27, 2012 by Yoshiya Kiryu/Joshua

[Scott]

I consider Elder Scrolls/Fallout RPG's, I don't consider Zelda and RPG.

So many things set them apart, mainly customization, in Elder Scrolls you can customize your character thoroughly, even their eye colour which you won't notice in-game, in Zelda, you come as you are, no choice to change Links Appearance.

Though Zelda games have big worlds to explore, I'd argue the worlds in Elder Scrolls is vastly bigger, with huge holds as well. In Elder Scrolls, you can loot items and such and expand/improve your character very much, which in turn could turn the tide in battle. In some Zelda games, weapon upgrades are few and far between, some are just needed for the story.

No, I consider Zelda a Hack & Slash.

Though, a couple of days ago I had a Diablo-esque Zelda idea, similar to Four Swords, but this time, Available to play as is Two Links and Two Princess Zelda's. The original Green tunic Link would wield the Sword, a Blue tunic Link would wield the Bow & Arrows. Zelda in her princess form would carry Mage-like powers and Zelda in either her Tetra form or a new toon sheik form as a Valkyrie-eske warrior. With dungeons to crawl and stuff to loot.

[Emmett L. Brown]

So in short, a RPG is what the culture defines it as.

I totally agree. Fortunately, we do have enough sub-categories that it's always easy to know which one is being discussed. If I'm talking about Warhammer 3000 with the boards and figurines, I'll call it a tabletop RPG. If it's a geniune roleplaying with a dungeon master telling the tale and bold young geeks around a table steering the their characters with words, pencils, paper and statistics, then I'll call it a roleplaying session. If it's a video game where you yourself create your character from scratch and define both their stats, appearance, and personality, and have a huge world of quests and monsters to explore in freeroaming fashion, then I'll call it a Western RPG. On the other hand, if it's basically a japanese movie with occasional short periods of gameplay, I'll call it Final Fantasy X, a Japanese RPG...or possibly Metal Gear Solid 4, so yeah.

[Scott]

If I'm talking about Warhammer 3000 with the boards and figurines, I'll call it a tabletop RPG.

Don't you mean Warhammer 40,000?

[The Kid]

You forgot "My parents are deeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaad

Batman: The RPG, coming soon.

Is it bad that's the first thing I thought of?

[Salamander]

Just to add to the pile of terse posts listing sarcastic and yet accurate typical RPG features:

Menus. More specifically, submenus. Lots of them.

[SuperStingray]

Just to add to the pile of terse posts listing sarcastic and yet accurate typical RPG features:

Menus. More specifically, submenus. Lots of them.

RTSes have those too.

[Salamander]

That's why you have to qualify it with the other generic features, e.g. the emphasis on stats and stat progression as mentioned by Diogenes. Funny how the main traits of an RPG have nothing to do with the R or the P.