Final Fantasy VIII wasn't a racing game just because your character was running around the whole time to save time. It wasn't a parkour game either just because in some sections of the game you jump/climb through the scenario. It wasn't a shooter just because you have gunsabre and a couple of characters capable of firing shots in each combat.
Now if there was a site called MMOFPS.COM where they'd cover Final Fantasy VIII as a shooter, or MMORACING.COM where they'd cover Final Fantasy VIII as a racing game, people would be as confused as when I heard in this site that Dying Light is a RPG. A RPG is a RPG, and the one main and strong deciding factor is usually a deep, long winded story with rich dialog and lore to soak yourself into hour after hour. Dozens or hundreds of NPC weave the world and submerge you into it through countless interactions that go beyond agreeing to take their errands or shooting them in the face. If you dress a dog like a princess it's still a dog. I understand for MMORPG.COM it's very attractive the idea of generating more discussion and more hits on their site by covering a game that by the way, it's a good and fun game, like Dying Light. But it still is not a RPG, the same way that Resident Evil and Call of Duty aren't RPGs, or Final Fantasy VIII isn't a racing or shooting game.
My opinion is my own. I respect all other opinions and views equally, but keep in mind that my opinion will always be the best for me. That's why it's my opinion.
I reject this article outright as I will NEVER consider Super Mario Bros or Sonic The Hedgehog side-scrollers a RPG...because that is the BS being spewed here. Role-Playing is more than just playing a role because you are playing a role in PONG...the role of the bar.
This is more pandering to gaming companies to excuse their using the wrong labels to sell their games.
If a game is cross genre, call it that.
If a game is a new genre, come up with a new name.
Stop abusing words for the sake of advertising and let your game stand on its own merits.
Oh gawd! Please don't. You're asking people to stop using the term RPG so loosely, which I can get on board with, but let's not encourage them to start making up new genre names. When I read that, I threw up in my mouth a little.
I think that the ROLE PLAYING element is actually missing in the majority of games. I think that RPGs are, generally, more interactive and, as someone else mentioned earlier, that translates into something very expensive. These days, someone slaps in a level system and it's all of a sudden an RPG, or has "RPG Elements". I would actually say that EA Sports games actually have more RPG than the majority of RPGs out there. Shoot, you can actually create a player, with a stat sheet, but you only play that player. In addition, your actions can, and do, determine the outcome of the event, and also impact your character growth. I would even go as far as to say that these games challenge the majority of MMORPGs on the RPG part of things.
For myself, I would say that the biggest defining feature in an RPG is the ability to impact the story and there just isn't much of that going on right now.
Well, harsh comments. It's not a bad definition at all, but I'm not entirely happy with it. I understand it's your own, so taking that into account, I'm actually quite positive about it.
"I, and this column, identify RPGs to cover like this: An RPG is a game that focuses on the development of a main character, created or provided, to a substantial degree, and provides the player efficacy in their development. This can be through meaningful decisions, through dialogue or skill trees, or the meaningful choices on the journey through gameplay. It can include action, shooting, climbing, racing, or any outer-genre staple, but at least one main focus must remain on building that character (or multiples) and empowering the player to shape their role on that path."
There are a few things I'd like to critique:
The clarity of the definition is not exactly very good as the degree of efficacy is explained at the very end, although it's most likely the main positive about it. I'm not too certain I'm happy with "one main focus" and your emphasis on genre crossover, though.
"Meaningful decisions, through dialogue or skill trees, or the meaningful choices on the journey through gameplay" is rather vague to be used in a definition. Perhaps just list actions, dialogue and artificial character building as the typical blocks, if you want to list them? I would also want to see some de-emphasis on the artificial choices, but that's nitpicking and to some extent controversial (crpg's...).
How do I say this.. in my opinion (shock), the role doesn't encompass solely the character, but also its environment. As such, the definition should ideally take into account the game's ability to immerse the player in the world.
Ways to build the character: I would perhaps concentrate more on information and creating the story of the character; whether it's the character's past, present or future, the player is creating a story and the definition should place more emphasis on that. I'd say the character's story and the player's efficacy on it are main traits of an rpg. The definition could also take into account immersiveness of the story in relation to the scope of the game.
As a suggestion, could the site please come up with a definition, so individual writers don't need to make them up, please? It's kinda central, I think. Make it a site event or something. Ask contributions and I think many will provide them. For the new site, it could be a way to garner some attention.
Well, harsh comments. It's not a bad definition at all, but I'm not entirely happy with it. I understand it's your own, so taking that into account, I'm actually quite positive about it.
"I, and this column, identify RPGs to cover like this: An RPG is a game that focuses on the development of a main character, created or provided, to a substantial degree, and provides the player efficacy in their development. This can be through meaningful decisions, through dialogue or skill trees, or the meaningful choices on the journey through gameplay. It can include action, shooting, climbing, racing, or any outer-genre staple, but at least one main focus must remain on building that character (or multiples) and empowering the player to shape their role on that path."
There are a few things I'd like to critique:
The clarity of the definition is not exactly very good as the degree of efficacy is explained at the very end, although it's most likely the main positive about it. I'm not too certain I'm happy with "one main focus" and your emphasis on genre crossover, though.
"Meaningful decisions, through dialogue or skill trees, or the meaningful choices on the journey through gameplay" is rather vague to be used in a definition. Perhaps just list actions, dialogue and artificial character building as the typical blocks, if you want to list them? I would also want to see some de-emphasis on the artificial choices, but that's nitpicking and to some extent controversial (crpg's...).
How do I say this.. in my opinion (shock), the role doesn't encompass solely the character, but also its environment. As such, the definition should ideally take into account the game's ability to immerse the player in the world.
Ways to build the character: I would perhaps concentrate more on information and creating the story of the character; whether it's the character's past, present or future, the player is creating a story and the definition should place more emphasis on that. I'd say the character's story and the player's efficacy on it are main traits of an rpg. The definition could also take into account immersiveness of the story in relation to the scope of the game.
As a suggestion, could the site please come up with a definition, so individual writers don't need to make them up, please? It's kinda central, I think. Make it a site event or something. Ask contributions and I think many will provide them. For the new site, it could be a way to garner some attention.
2. In a real RPG every decision is meaningful because you make it. It may or may not have massive implications in the rest of the world, but sometimes the small choices that don't have a big effect but are still important in how we view our characters.
3. Is not a defining factor of RPGs, an immersive world is something sought in a variety of genres. Old school RPGs were not immersive in that way, being mostly text based, but they are the granddaddies and some of the greatest RPGs ever made.
4. Building the character with things like levels, abilities, stats(Strength, Dexterity etc...) are pretty much where videogame RPGs got there name in the first place, these things were all part of pen and paper RPGs, it was these core systems that were common among all early RPGs and one of the few similarities they actually shared with pen and paper RPGs. Early videogame RPGs(and hence the origin of the name as it pertains to videogames) didn't have many features compared to current games, but these things were pretty much a common thread that made them different from other video games at the time. While being able to build the characters story is something great in a freeform RPG, many great RPGs have predefined characters to start with where you can't change their background.
I think the owners of this site are finding "MMORPG" to be a problem, considering the industry is clearly moving elsewhere. Audience is escaping a site that's trying to cover a lot of titles that aren't "MMORPG"s by anyone's definition.
But arguing over that acronym always makes a good topic for pedants to bluster at each other over, and split ever-finer hairs in their equivocation wars, doesn't it?
I think the owners of this site are finding "MMORPG" to be a problem, considering the industry is clearly moving elsewhere. Audience is escaping a site that's trying to cover a lot of titles that aren't "MMORPG"s by anyone's definition.
But arguing over that acronym always makes a good topic for pedants to bluster at each other over, and split ever-finer hairs in their equivocation wars, doesn't it?
Pretty much this ^
Though it always makes me laugh when people argue over terms like RPG, which already have a clear definition; just because there are games that like to blur the lines a bit.
RPG still means what it always has, and if anyone's confused a quick google search can give you the proper definition. While there are many games that encorperate RPG elements within them, it is typically the primary driving force of a game which classifies it. I.E. Halflife has RPG elements to it, but it's still primarily a shooter. So thus it's classified as one.
When a game blurs the lines enough to be undefinable by conventional means, it usually results in a new genre and gets a new definition. The most recent example of this being MOBA.
Comments
I agree with the majority of posters, really.
Final Fantasy VIII wasn't a racing game just because your character was running around the whole time to save time. It wasn't a parkour game either just because in some sections of the game you jump/climb through the scenario. It wasn't a shooter just because you have gunsabre and a couple of characters capable of firing shots in each combat.
Now if there was a site called MMOFPS.COM where they'd cover Final Fantasy VIII as a shooter, or MMORACING.COM where they'd cover Final Fantasy VIII as a racing game, people would be as confused as when I heard in this site that Dying Light is a RPG. A RPG is a RPG, and the one main and strong deciding factor is usually a deep, long winded story with rich dialog and lore to soak yourself into hour after hour. Dozens or hundreds of NPC weave the world and submerge you into it through countless interactions that go beyond agreeing to take their errands or shooting them in the face. If you dress a dog like a princess it's still a dog. I understand for MMORPG.COM it's very attractive the idea of generating more discussion and more hits on their site by covering a game that by the way, it's a good and fun game, like Dying Light. But it still is not a RPG, the same way that Resident Evil and Call of Duty aren't RPGs, or Final Fantasy VIII isn't a racing or shooting game.
My opinion is my own. I respect all other opinions and views equally, but keep in mind that my opinion will always be the best for me. That's why it's my opinion.
Oh gawd! Please don't. You're asking people to stop using the term RPG so loosely, which I can get on board with, but let's not encourage them to start making up new genre names. When I read that, I threw up in my mouth a little.
I think that the ROLE PLAYING element is actually missing in the majority of games. I think that RPGs are, generally, more interactive and, as someone else mentioned earlier, that translates into something very expensive. These days, someone slaps in a level system and it's all of a sudden an RPG, or has "RPG Elements". I would actually say that EA Sports games actually have more RPG than the majority of RPGs out there. Shoot, you can actually create a player, with a stat sheet, but you only play that player. In addition, your actions can, and do, determine the outcome of the event, and also impact your character growth. I would even go as far as to say that these games challenge the majority of MMORPGs on the RPG part of things.
For myself, I would say that the biggest defining feature in an RPG is the ability to impact the story and there just isn't much of that going on right now.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
Well, harsh comments. It's not a bad definition at all, but I'm not entirely happy with it. I understand it's your own, so taking that into account, I'm actually quite positive about it.
"I, and this column, identify RPGs to cover like this: An RPG is a game that focuses on the development of a main character, created or provided, to a substantial degree, and provides the player efficacy in their development. This can be through meaningful decisions, through dialogue or skill trees, or the meaningful choices on the journey through gameplay. It can include action, shooting, climbing, racing, or any outer-genre staple, but at least one main focus must remain on building that character (or multiples) and empowering the player to shape their role on that path."
There are a few things I'd like to critique:
2. In a real RPG every decision is meaningful because you make it. It may or may not have massive implications in the rest of the world, but sometimes the small choices that don't have a big effect but are still important in how we view our characters.
3. Is not a defining factor of RPGs, an immersive world is something sought in a variety of genres. Old school RPGs were not immersive in that way, being mostly text based, but they are the granddaddies and some of the greatest RPGs ever made.
4. Building the character with things like levels, abilities, stats(Strength, Dexterity etc...) are pretty much where videogame RPGs got there name in the first place, these things were all part of pen and paper RPGs, it was these core systems that were common among all early RPGs and one of the few similarities they actually shared with pen and paper RPGs. Early videogame RPGs(and hence the origin of the name as it pertains to videogames) didn't have many features compared to current games, but these things were pretty much a common thread that made them different from other video games at the time. While being able to build the characters story is something great in a freeform RPG, many great RPGs have predefined characters to start with where you can't change their background.
I think the owners of this site are finding "MMORPG" to be a problem, considering the industry is clearly moving elsewhere. Audience is escaping a site that's trying to cover a lot of titles that aren't "MMORPG"s by anyone's definition.
But arguing over that acronym always makes a good topic for pedants to bluster at each other over, and split ever-finer hairs in their equivocation wars, doesn't it?
Pretty much this ^
Though it always makes me laugh when people argue over terms like RPG, which already have a clear definition; just because there are games that like to blur the lines a bit.
RPG still means what it always has, and if anyone's confused a quick google search can give you the proper definition. While there are many games that encorperate RPG elements within them, it is typically the primary driving force of a game which classifies it. I.E. Halflife has RPG elements to it, but it's still primarily a shooter. So thus it's classified as one.
When a game blurs the lines enough to be undefinable by conventional means, it usually results in a new genre and gets a new definition. The most recent example of this being MOBA.