Calistarius;n7934130 said:
The reason I feel this about these things, that the character system matters the most... and that the other things do not matter as much as the character system and it's complexity... when it comes to "how rpg it feels" for me, is because these other things... be it story, or conversations, combat, inventory, etc, etc, etc... they are things that can, and do, exist in games which are not rpg's at all. They are actually pretty common amongst games which are not rpg's at all. Granted, you can find games which are not rpg's at all which do have a character system to one degree or another, but these games are very few, and in general said character systems tend to be very limited in their complexity... it's just not as common in none rpg's... they are at best the exeptions that sort of proves the rule I guess. Because for the most part, the only place you will find these kinds of character system complexity is RPG's. This is why I find that the levels of character systems complexity, with attributes and skills, and their effects on the game as a whole, to be the most importent factor in determaning "what level of rpg" a game is. If I where to choice the second most importent thing to this "how much rpg like does it feel"-equation, then I would definatly say a conversation system... but it is a fair bit behind the character system for me, since conversation systems are more common outside of rpg's then character systems tends to be.
''Conversations''(branching dialogs) are not common in other genres at all. There are 2 genres that have them-RPGs and Adventure games.
Stats, on the other hand, is something that majority of games have nowadays.
Units in Total War series have a lot of stats for example. Attack, defence, HP, damage, armor-piercing, charge, missle block etc(more stats then in some rpgs actually). And you can level up them too! They fight and improve their stats over time, similar to how you get slowly stronger in Morrowind by hitting things. No twitch skills required either, you click and characters start hitting each other while rolling dice on the background. Kinda how characters do it in RTwP RPGs.
Or how about Crusader Kings. Characters have stats like warfare, cunning, diplomacy etc. And all kinds of cool perks, both positive and negative, like genius, ugly, imbecile, dull, shy, adventurer etc. This game has more perks than any RPG to date. You can actually create a character and spread points as you like, as you would do in RPG, and create some very colourful individual. Stats affect how effective this character is in different situations, as well as how other characters react to him.
And then there is XCOM of course. Characters lvl-up, get new abilities, improve stats, you can choose gear etc. Like in RPGs.
However, no one ever called this games RPGs. No one even dared once to call them '' games with RPG elements''.
One big thing that almost all RPGs have but strategy/tactical games dont. Branching dialog. A tool that allows you to actually role-play, act as you think this particular character should act. Why do a lot of people have easier time calling games like Mass Effect and Witcher RPG, but not Dark Souls or Diablo. Because at least 50% of Mass effect or Witcher consists of dialogs, role-playing.
Of course this is not the only tool for role-playing. In Bloodlines you can sneak, hack, lockpick, seduce and hit people with a sword. The point is, when you try to determine genre, the main question should be ''what was the design goal ?''. Was it to create role-playing experience or something else? Is combat here to serve RPG, or RPG to serve combat. What is the main thing people love Mass Effect for? Combat, or that you have the option to punch reporter in the face or throw guy out the window? What is the main reason people love Dark Souls? Combat, or RPG elements(if there are any)?
When you ask this kind of questions things become clearer in my opinion. This why I am annoyed when people put games like Witcher, Mass Effect, Gothic, Bloodlines in the same genre with Souls games, Diablo or Dragons Dogma. Yes, they all have action and rpg in them. But they are completely different at their core. You cant just slap Action-RPG label on everything.
When it comes to affecting dialogs with stats. I didn't ever played PnP rpgs, so correct me if I am wrong. Isnt the core gameplay consists of players making choices as characters(role-playing) and trying to prevail, while all deep character systems are there to support(rather then being main point of the game because stats and numbers are cool) that and restrict players?
I ask because I have two games on my mind, Fallout 2 and Dragon Age: Origins. In Fallout 2, if you have low intelligence, you are forced to speak as stupid character. In Dragon Age, however, stats dont affect your dialogue at all BUT you get lots of dialogue options to say what you feel your character should say. If I have certain type of character in mind, I can still role-play as him without mechanical restrictions, because number of dialogue options through the game allow me to. If a game alows you to role-play without skill checks and restrictions, does lack of this things really make it lesser RPG. Just thinking.
What kinda bothers me, is that RPG stands for Role-Playing Game, and often, definitions that I read on the internet from some people dont make much sense to me. If actual role-playing is not part of RPG, then why call it that? Call it something else. ''Character Building Simulator''. ''Tactical game with pause and lots of stats''."Loot and lvl up''. Whatever. Forget ''RPG'' and call what it really is. I dont care how traditionaly genre was called. We dont call Dramas Action movies, we dont call Comedies Horror movies. It doesnt work you change it. And then all this debates ''what is RPG'' will be over.
Sorry for my sloppy English.
Even more so living in Sweden. XD
