Quote:
- The "Health" potion - Can't we see some more original ways to heal a character from a life threatening wound..?

In Neverwinter Nights yopu have healing 'kits' that you can apply to other people as well as yourself and there are healing 'spells' in many games. Also some games require rest/sleep to heal damage completely.

Quote:
- Poision - I swear its on EVERY damn game and every time it does the same thing.. you get it.. you loose health slowly.. until you die or you cure it.. Again a desperate cry for innovation please!

You must never have played Ultima Online, because the poisons at the higher levels (ie- Deadly) can kill you in about 6 seconds and you can be in a real panic while
you attempt to cure it (with 'cure' failure making it even more exciting).
In other games poisons are debilitating (effecting constitution and strength etc.. -- not just HP).

Complaining about cliches in RPG's has become a cliche. At least, most complaints presented in now-cliched form.

I think Western RPG's have more emphasis on character creation and customization, which leads to more minimaxing. Japanese RPG's have less of this, which necessitates large, strange settings to make up for it. Western RPG's are more based in PnP heritage, while Japanese RPG's are more willing to give you preset characters in a world that doesn't look like anything you've seen before. Both of the approaches have their strengths and weaknesses... I can't play Japanese games that don't give me enough tactical flexibility, and the settings of Western RPG's often bore me.

My own bastardized definition of an RPG (as I don't come from a PnP tradition, and I don't really play RPG's to act as another entity)

1. Combat is non-realtime, or a significant portion of combat is determined by non-realtime choices

2. Combat abilities of specific characters increase dramatically over the course of the game, as does the enemies' combat abilities (eg, the level 1 char vs the level 99 char)

My two cents on the subject of "Role-playing Games":

I never played pen & paper RPGs. I started RPGs with Final Fantasy 7, then eventually Diablo 2, World of Warcraft, and a few others here and there. But I've never considered myself 'role-playing'. I just have a character on the screen -- like any side-scroller, fighting game, or adventure game has -- that has certain spells or skills. And the longer I play, the better those abilities become. Moreover, all those genres I mentioned can have a story too (although not as much in fighting games).

So, if I take Street Fighter and let you pick who has what special moves, and after every victory you get 'experience' and spend a point in strength, stamina, or speed, would that change it from a fighting game to a role playing game?

Whenever I see a game labeled 'RPG', I take it with a grain of salt. RPG elements, as they've become known, spill over into many genres. For example in Warcraft 3 your heros can gain exp and have skill choices. In Battlefield 2 your playtime eventually leads to unlockables, which is essentially the same thing as leveling up and learning a new spell. In Psychonauts, a platformer, you can gain new spells and get stronger. One game you can truly role-play (in my opinion) is the Grand Theft Auto series, which is considered an 'Action' game. (And I am going to guess that many GTA fans shy away from titles in the RPG category.)

When I think about Western and Japanese RPGs I think of Yin and Yang. Both of these are part of the same coin, but different faces (another anology for you people). You have Western on one side which consist of a more dircect storyline. I hate to say it, but we like to get to more of the gameplay instead of the storyline (this is ONLY retaining to most American RPG Devolpers in today's market). Japanese RPGs on the other hand are built to captivate, confuse, utterly disapoint, enrage, and make you cry (I never have cried from playing a RPG, but who knows it could happen :P). While the gameplay is nice (battles tend to revolve around the over usage of really flahsy magic) but not the major importance the storyline is what truley matters.

Now that that is out of the way I can tell you what I think a RPG should be and typically will be.

A good RPG is really both of these methods molded into one. That is what I BELIEVE (please don't qoute me). This will happen sooner or later (if not now) in America atleast due to the new generation of Game Designers (of which I am included). Upcoming generations have grown up playing both styles of RPGs and can generaly pick out the bad and good of both(hence the argument that started this topic) . When this is done RPGs will have its long over-due evolution (HORAY)! (sry if this is too long)

(TWO THUMBS UP FOR PARENTHISESE)

Well, up until about a week ago, my only experience with "RPGs" has been stuff like the Final Fantasy or Pokemon series. These game mainly consist of working with stats and running through the proper hoops to move the story along.


I never played any DnD, though I might want to at some point.

However, just last week I found a role-playing chat room and I must say its rather interesting. Since it is just a chat-room (and has no real game code to speak of)it mainly uses the players imagination and communication skills to achieve the "role-playing" effect.

I suppose if I were to break an RPG down to its basic components, it would be.

1. Defining who the characters are, what they can do, what they want, where they plan to be.

2. define the setting and the rules.

3. Judge the results of actions during combat or whatever else happens.

4. Determine how the game "ends" and how the adventure can be continued later.


Personally, I think something like a text adventure interface would be nice to have in an RPG. ie type "/me cast fireball on the monster" or "say "Shopkeep, How much is that sword?"" would be good for immersion.

Hey i am a bit curios? What was that site you went to to do that (sry if i am breaking up the topic a little)

Quote:I started RPGs with Final Fantasy 7, then eventually Diablo 2, World of Warcraft, and a few others here and there. But I've never considered myself 'role-playing'. I just have a character on the screen -- like any side-scroller, fighting game, or adventure game has -- that has certain spells or skills. And the longer I play, the better those abilities become. Moreover, all those genres I mentioned can have a story too (although not as much in fighting games).

this is why I don't think that the current set of games that call themselves RPGs are not truely RPGs. If you look at other genras and try to clasify these so called RPGs then they fall into the Action/Adventure games. Hideing stats does not eleiminate them and players will either hack or spend time figguring out those stats and how to best min/max them (which if that is what you are wanting the player to do then you have succeeded).

I don't have a big problem with the current lot of "Action/Adventure" games and do enjoy them. But when I want a Role Playing Game experence then there is sadly nothing out that I have played that gives this experence.

But what is the Role Playing Experence?

I don't nessesarily think it can be put down to one single mechanic, or even group of mechanics. It is not just story/plot or character stat building. All of these contribut to is in some way but an RPG does not need all of them and they are not the only contributors needed.

Story/Plot: A good story is helpful to an RPG, but is it nessesary? Most times that someone uses the term "Story" in relation to a game it is the preset path (and giving the player a choice of several preset pthas is still having preset paths) through the game that the designers have created. But can a story be entierly created through the player in collaberation with the game mechanics?

I think the answer to this is a definite: Yes! Take for example the game "The Sims". This is in some way similar to an RPG but instead of a single character you are controling multiple characters (some of the earlier RPGs had this like in Eye of the Beholder), known in the RPG circle as a "Party". In The Sims the player, through the mechanics, makes a story about the people that they control.

So this shows that a story can be created by the player and does not need to be dictated by the designer.

Character Stats: Character Stats are a staple of many RPGs, but are they nessesary. Some games hide the stats from the player to give the illusion that there are no stats. Due to the nature of computers and the constraints of technology (getting a real language parser is not feasable for a game - yet), there will be some nessesary stats. So yes Stats are nessesary, but they can be minimised.

In an old game called "Sword of the Samurai", you were only given a few stats. These were: Land, Number of Troops, Honour, Melee Skill, Command Skill and Health. Many of these would not even be considdered a "Stat" in a normal RPG, but in the context of this game they can be treated as such as it was by your players actions that you could increase (or even decrease) these, and it was based on these that your character (the Samurai) would be judged by others and used to resolve encounter in the game.

Even Health was not a single Hit Point kind of stat either, Health could be different depending on the situation. In the sword fighting subgame health was alwayse 4. Each hit would do between 1 to 2 damage (depending on the attack you used). In the adventureing subgame you only had 2 health. The first hit would make your character move and attack slower and the second would kiill them. So Health could be droped as a stat and grouped with just the mechanics.

Dialogue: Is the ability to have complex comunication between the player and NPCs nessesary. In many game they list features of the amount of dialogue as if it is a good thing. I find that this is a big turn off for me. If I wanted to read lots of text I would read a book (and I am an avid reader and hame quite an extensive library of book that I own and read, so I am not adverse to reading)

The comunication between the characters in the sims is completely symbolic and natural language has been eliminated, and in Sword of the Samurai the only dialogue between character is when other NPCs either threaten you or you choose to either insult them or invite them for a tea ceremony (make peace) and even then it is just a stock line of text that is essentillay a menu item.


I would considder both "The Sims" and "Sword of the Samurai" to be more RPG like than many of the Action/Adventure games out (like World of Warcraft for instance), simply because they give the player more freedom to take on the role given to them (or in the case of The Sims to define that role to some degree as well).

The main reson that I think that the stock of RPGs we have are more of an action/Adventure game is that most non RPers will not understand the experence of a good roleplaying game but will be able to understand the mechanics of them instead. They will be need to link it with what they have already experenced, which is that of board games and other types of computer games. In both of these the mechanics and stats (eg in monopoly you have money and the properties that you have bought which are like stats and equipment).

Because of this lack of understanding of Non RPer, and the fact that not all developers of an CRPG would be RPers then this lack of understanding translates into a design that the developers are able to understand (and so be able to create it).

Nice post Edtharan (and thnx for all the replies people! its good to hear other's views on a topic which I hold so close to my heart..) however i'd like to disagree with you in classifiying the sims as a "true" role playing game..

The reason I say this is because the essence of a role playing game in my oppinion is "a game whereby you take on a particular role within a particular world with very clear goals defined by the story.." Therefore its up you you as a player to fulfill your role as much or as little as you can until ultimately you succeed (or fail) in acomplishing the goals defined by the game..

I don't agree with the sims being an RPG because of a number of reasons..:

mainly the fact that you don't actually take on any particular well-defined "role" as you kind-of manage the lives of a group/family of pseudo-intellectual people.. As you play there's no direct Avatar you control, nor any kind of specific character will distinct properties/characteristics you can be.. You create each sim (of which they differ only in sex and look without any real distinction between each..) and don't do anything else besides babysit them and make sure they don't pee all over the house, burn it down or die of starvation because they are rather stupid..

Personally I disagree with the views expressed in this thread that western RPGs focus more on gameplay than eastern RPGs..
I think this is ludacris since you only have to look at the depth of some of the most successful eastern RPGs (FF, Xenogears, Pokemon, Dragon quest, Tales of series etc..) to see that a great degree of attention has been paid to EVERY area of these titles and not just a focus on telling a story.. Heck most Japanese RPGs work so well BECAUSE of there gameplay systems since sometimes the story they tell are so strange and wierd (a la Manga) that they make so little sense, very little enjoyment can be drawn from trying to follow it alone..
One of the reason why I personally admire eastern RPGs so much is purely because they tend to start by wanting to tell a very deep and engaging story and through that, develop a very rich and engaging gameplay system which is used to drive the player through the story, flesh it out and add the expansion of the originally created world into the mix giving the player the opportunity to digress at most points through the game to go off and explore, develop there characters and find rare and useful/interesting items and equipment.. In this vein eastern and western RPGs both have this in common whereby they both try as much as possible to reduce the linearity of the gaming experience by opening up a world before the player to explore as freely as the current position in the plot can allow..

Now granted eastern RPGs tend to use many cliched gameplay mechanics which originated in the old 2D RPGs of the SNES and Sega Mega Drive days but the most successful nowadays build on these ideas, still utilising the same paradigms (i.e. having separate combat and exploration worlds, turn-based battles etc..) but putting together very richly detailed and interesting gameplay systems to really switch things up keep the whole experience fresh.. Also its true that such games are more often than not heavily stat-based and overall very abstract in terms of the gameplay systems in use but who says having stats in RPGs is necessarily a bad thing? I'm sure if your used to the more westernised RPGs then it probably wont be your cup of tea but in my oppinion i'm yet to see a western RPG which can compete against some of the best eastern RPGs and tactical RPGs in terms of giving the play a much more involving strategic and tactical experience.. I'm sorry to see that most western RPGs try to rely to much on the "real-time" battle system but fail to realise that "real-time" doesn't necessarily negate the possibility of providing an equally strategic experience as it's counterpart.. Even some of the biggest games like the Elder Scrolls series and nearly every MMORPG to date have battle systems which are based more around constantly hacking at your opponent (and casting the odd spell) until either someone dies or your weapon breaks..

I just find it kinda sad when western developed action games can provide very rich and detailed battle/combat systems/mechanics and yet the real-time-combat-based RPGs suffer from lackluster battles with the "RPG elements" providing the depth in many other areas of the game..

But I guess maybe some people like it that way and its just me..

I think many of the Western Rpg's to be a lot like MMORPG's where you can customize your character and you go do quests and stuffs. I like the customization and all but the main reason I like RPG's is the plot. I sometimes find myself cheating through the game just to finish the story. It's what captures me even as I stopped playing those games. If I played a Western style RPG, I'd probably finish it and dump it.

Those Japanese are so creative, but I'd chalk it up to how media driven they are. Also they have many colorful legends that they can go ahead and butcher for their own needs. They also practically lived the post apocolyptic age.

Ya D&D nerds. Heck, I did that too, cept I had a very good yet crazy friend who made him his own crazy world where you can go ahead and do whatever the hell you pleased. Right now, I nailed a random pedestrian's arm to the shopkeep's door cause he kicked me out for smelling like a peasent. I made a dead squirrel puppet to confuse monsters and my other friend is being stalked by killer tater tots. No dice required. I cannot take the D&D world seriously anymore, not like I actually did in the first place.

My idea of a video game rpg is basically what games have gone away from. Linnear story, uses experiance points to get to heigher strength levels, a small hand full of very developed characters, hundreds of npcs, top-down or some varriation of birds eye view, and of course dungeons!. Personally, I don't consider morrowind, Deus Ex, and alike to be RPGs- to me they are FPSs.

Just my 2cents though.
-Linolium