What makes Kingdom Come: Deliverance an RPG?

[Cipher]

Then, is symphony of the night an RPG? It has levels, stats that go up with levels, Exp gained that raises your level after you kill a monster, gear that has numbers that go up. What makes Wizardry and RPG and not Symphony of the Night?

I've never played Symphony of the Night. Does it have choices in how you build the character? Does it have an inventory for various weapons/gear/items?

To the best of my knowledge, Symphony of the Night is considered a true (action) 'JRPG' and spawned the term 'metroidvania'. Most games termed 'metroidvania' are actually just metroid-likes.
I assume @WhiteShark would know more.

Simon's Quest, meaning Castlevania 2 had the similar open map structure gated by certain items and abilities, but I agree, "metroidvania" is a misnomer. Metroid did it first all on its own.

[rusty_shackleford]

Then, is symphony of the night an RPG? It has levels, stats that go up with levels, Exp gained that raises your level after you kill a monster, gear that has numbers that go up. What makes Wizardry and RPG and not Symphony of the Night?

I've never played Symphony of the Night. Does it have choices in how you build the character? Does it have an inventory for various weapons/gear/items?

It has an inventory filled with gear that has numbers. Swords cut when slashing, knives do stabby stabby, unarmed does punches. Two handed swords have more reach and deal more damage but are slower, rapier stabs instead of cutting even though its a sword. You can also learn and cast spells that cost MP.

It doesn't have any choice outside of being an open map, which means you can tackle any challenge at your leisure but some parts of the map are gated by abilities that you have to find first so it is not entirely open, more like non-linear with certain gates that require abilities/relics to unlock.

The lack of actually roleplaying a character but having stats/gear is a hallmark of JRPG and in the west used to be called 'hack-and-slash', 'hackfest', etc., A very similar modern term is 'looter shooter'.

[Cipher]

But like I said, that would make anything that has gear with numbers that go up and character levels an RPG. And that means stuff like Borderlands or even stuff like the Gundam Breaker games, are you really OK with that? What made New Vegas good is not that it has Perks, Skills that go up with levels and levels, Fallout 3 has all of that as well. What separates and elevates New Vegas above FO3 and 4 is that you can actually roleplay a character in ways you cannot in FO3 and 4.

But it's both.
There are games where you can 'roleplay' a character, and they aren't RPGs. See e.g., The Life and Suffering of Sir Brante

How is this game not an RPG?

From the steam page: "A narrative-driven hardcore RPG set in a gritty world ruled by real but unrelenting gods. Set out on a challenging lifetime journey, where every choice has a price and entails consequences. Will you become an inquisitor, a judge, or conspire against the old order? Dare to decide!"

And again, I am not trying to be a contrarian, but if "RPG" means "character classes and levels" that is incorrect. That means "D&D" and D&D is not the only thing that defines it, or else every videogame would have to be Pong or have Pong-like elements.

[rusty_shackleford]

Related to the OP: What sets Gothic 2 apart from KCD that makes people think it's more of an RPG?
I have a few ideas already, but I'd like to hear some.

[Cipher]

I've never played Symphony of the Night. Does it have choices in how you build the character? Does it have an inventory for various weapons/gear/items?

It has an inventory filled with gear that has numbers. Swords cut when slashing, knives do stabby stabby, unarmed does punches. Two handed swords have more reach and deal more damage but are slower, rapier stabs instead of cutting even though its a sword. You can also learn and cast spells that cost MP.

It doesn't have any choice outside of being an open map, which means you can tackle any challenge at your leisure but some parts of the map are gated by abilities that you have to find first so it is not entirely open, more like non-linear with certain gates that require abilities/relics to unlock.

The lack of actually roleplaying a character but having stats/gear is a hallmark of JRPG and in the west used to be called 'hack-and-slash', 'hackfest', etc., A very similar modern term is 'looter shooter'.

I agree. Lack of "actually roleplaying" a character makes it not an RPG. But then, what character are you roleplaying in Wizardry? Or to put it in another way, what roleplaying can you do in Wizardry that you cannot do in Symphony of the Night?

[rusty_shackleford]

But like I said, that would make anything that has gear with numbers that go up and character levels an RPG. And that means stuff like Borderlands or even stuff like the Gundam Breaker games, are you really OK with that? What made New Vegas good is not that it has Perks, Skills that go up with levels and levels, Fallout 3 has all of that as well. What separates and elevates New Vegas above FO3 and 4 is that you can actually roleplay a character in ways you cannot in FO3 and 4.

But it's both.
There are games where you can 'roleplay' a character, and they aren't RPGs. See e.g., The Life and Suffering of Sir Brante

How is this game not an RPG?

From the steam page: "A narrative-driven hardcore RPG set in a gritty world ruled by real but unrelenting gods. Set out on a challenging lifetime journey, where every choice has a price and entails consequences. Will you become an inquisitor, a judge, or conspire against the old order? Dare to decide!"

And again, I am not trying to be a contrarian, but if "RPG" means "character classes and levels" that is incorrect. That means "D&D" and D&D is not the only thing that defines it, or else every videogame would have to be Pong or have Pong-like elements.

I was going to write a couple paragraphs on this, but it can actually be summarized way shorter:
Lack of ability to solve problems. RPGs are fundamentally about problem solving, not to be confused with puzzles.

It's the main issue with e.g., Age of Decadence where you're just picking dialogue choices.

[Cipher]

But it's both.
There are games where you can 'roleplay' a character, and they aren't RPGs. See e.g., The Life and Suffering of Sir Brante

How is this game not an RPG?

From the steam page: "A narrative-driven hardcore RPG set in a gritty world ruled by real but unrelenting gods. Set out on a challenging lifetime journey, where every choice has a price and entails consequences. Will you become an inquisitor, a judge, or conspire against the old order? Dare to decide!"

And again, I am not trying to be a contrarian, but if "RPG" means "character classes and levels" that is incorrect. That means "D&D" and D&D is not the only thing that defines it, or else every videogame would have to be Pong or have Pong-like elements.

I was going to write a couple paragraphs on this, but it can actually be summarized way shorter:
Lack of ability to solve problems. RPGs are fundamentally about problem solving, not to be confused with puzzles.

It's the main issue with e.g., Age of Decadence where you're just picking dialogue choices.

Ok. So, Fallout 1 is an RPG because there are many ways to solve a problem. I agree with that. How many ways you have to solve a problem in Wizardry?

And again, please remember I am not ******** on Wizardry. It's a great and very fun game, I just don't think of it as an RPG.

[rusty_shackleford]

How is this game not an RPG?

From the steam page: "A narrative-driven hardcore RPG set in a gritty world ruled by real but unrelenting gods. Set out on a challenging lifetime journey, where every choice has a price and entails consequences. Will you become an inquisitor, a judge, or conspire against the old order? Dare to decide!"

And again, I am not trying to be a contrarian, but if "RPG" means "character classes and levels" that is incorrect. That means "D&D" and D&D is not the only thing that defines it, or else every videogame would have to be Pong or have Pong-like elements.

I was going to write a couple paragraphs on this, but it can actually be summarized way shorter:
Lack of ability to solve problems. RPGs are fundamentally about problem solving, not to be confused with puzzles.

It's the main issue with e.g., Age of Decadence where you're just picking dialogue choices.

Ok. So, Fallout 1 is an RPG because there are many ways to solve a problem. I agree with that. How many ways you have to solve a problem in Wizardry?

And again, please remember I am not ******** on Wizardry. It's a great and very fun game, I just don't think of it as an RPG.

Games like Wizardry are given more leeway because they had very little to work off of with regards to prior art, and were products of their time.
It's why I consider Wizardry 8 to be my favorite 'dungeon crawler' by a mile. There's nothing else really like it, and that's a shame — It's basically the Fallout of DRPGs.

[Xenich]

First of all, I like JRPGs and FInal Fantasy.

Now, I would say that JRPGs are not really RPGs and are more of a fantasy/sci-fi anime game with D&D mechanics duct taped into it. Specially the more traditional ones like Dragon Quest. In JRPGs you rarely have any say on what happens, no "role playing" if you will. You as the Player are a passive audience member for everything that goes on except combat and mini-games, if available. That is the only time that you become an active participant.

Nothing wrong with that, but "lots character builds" and "itemization makes my numbers go up!" is not roleplaying. Even if its the "illusion of choice", having choices that stick for a given playthrough is roleplaying. Something like Fallout 1, where you can tackle tasks in many different ways, when having low Int forces the player into dumb dialogue options, where you can play the game with a different character and have a vastly different experience. Even if there is a "plot" or a "set goal", the journey can be very different and through that your journey there is a lot of roleplaying opportunities.

For all the faults of Tyranny, gating out options after the Player makes choices is an excellent way to roleplay. But we can't have any of that because Zoomers can't survive the FOMO and they only have a month or less to 100% a game, get their Platinum trophies and then move on to the next slop that their favorite Youtube personality/Streamer tells them is the game to play at the moment.

So if you have a game where the character has no development and just goes around the game looking for clues, making choices throughout and those choices change the story direction outcomes, that is an RPG?

Used to call those Adventure games.

So what defines an adventure game as not being an RPG?

It depends. Are you actually playing a role? See my example with Fallout. You are always the Vault Dweller of Vault 13 but outside of that, you are free to play that character as you see fit. Yes, the Master will always be the end game encounter, but one thing that game has that many so called RPGs don't is that you can actually fail. There is ticking clock, you can fail in your quest if you waste too much time. You can defeat the Master or you can use logic and medicine knowledge to show that its plan is futile.

Making choices that stick is an element of RPGs, just like character creation. But just because a game has character creation it doesn't mean is an RPG.

Would you say Street Fighter 6 is an RPG just because you can create your own character and add the moves you want? No. It's still a fighting game. Additionally, "genres" are, at the end of the day, meaningless. No piece of media fits neatly into any box. We use them for short hand. If you say "Horror Movie" you have a vague idea of what will be about. So, its not going to be Adam Sandler chasing after a woman who wouldn't give him the time of day IRL, its going to be about trying to scare you.

In that same way, and RPG is not about "levels and classes", its about playing as a character in a game. Fallout and Underail let you do that. You are barred from certain outcomes or approaches to a task depending on choices made during character creation and also during your actual time playing the game.

Age of Decadence is another example of a great RPG. You can play that game as a different character and approach it differently and you will get a vastly different experience. And not to be to anal about it, but I don't know which Adventure games you are talking about, since I don't really play them, but the ones that I remember where basically "click on everything until the one true answer pops up" so that would be the opposite of making choices through gameplay.

RPG means Roleplaying Game, as everyone here knows. If there is no roleplay, there can be no RPG. Roleplaying can only exist if you actually get to play a character. In Wizardry there are no characters, you have classes. You are not playing an Elven Wizard, you are playing a bot that casts magic. Again, not ******** on the game, but just picking a group of 4 units is not roleplaying anymore than deciding which units to field in Starcraft is roleplaying. The problem is that 90% of people think "Roleplaying" = "D&D". So, an RPG has to have levels and classes, because D&D has levels and classes, but even in the TTRPG space, that is not true. Runequest doesn't have classes, GURPs doesn't have classes or levels and those are OG TTRPGs, none of this "narrative Powered by the Apocalypse" woke ********.

Like I said though, then Adventure games become RPGs then based on your definition. So would many action games, etc...

I don't think "role" itself is a good delineation.

In fact, early adventure games functioned in the manner you use, but were called Adventure games as a different genre to RPGs.

Personally, as I have mentioned before I think character development is a key aspect in the definition. That is, the role must be a part of the decision making process (ie statistics of development weighting decision outcomes).

If there is an obstacle and the player can win the outcome through reflex, its an action game, not an RPG. Other genres may focus on different aspects of play (ie strategy games emulating more "board" style play and the like).

[rusty_shackleford]

And again, I am not trying to be a contrarian, but if "RPG" means "character classes and levels" that is incorrect. That means "D&D" and D&D is not the only thing that defines it, or else every videogame would have to be Pong or have Pong-like elements.

I think you're mixing up the intent of D&D with the stated rules of D&D. I strongly suspect none of you have read this before(and barely anyone probably has), it's (to the best of my knowledge) the first time Gygax acknowledges D&D as a "role-playing game". It's scanned form copies of Europa #9 in response to another writer, from 1975 I believe. You'll want to open them in new tabs as they're quite large, so I haven't embedded them as images as to not slow the page down.
https://f.rpghq.org/1GU1TA320Krt.avif?n ... opa_1.avif
https://f.rpghq.org/eXUg23Sfvq4A.avif?n ... opa_2.avif
https://f.rpghq.org/AkGVpTecezlt.avif?n ... opa_3.avif

(These were rendered at 300DPI, I'm not an expert on this )

Specifically, I zero in on the: "constant challenge […] never-ending exercise in problem solving"

---

It's also why I suspect games that have the so-called "immersive sim" properties tend to be among the most well remembered RPGs — Deus Ex is the highest rated RPG on GOG as of writing, Bethesda games are somewhere on the 'immersive sim' spectrum, Larian games, Arkane games, so on and so forth — as they arguably embody the genre like nothing else.

[DDC]

Defining an "RPG" is extremely difficult because for just about any rule one could make, I can come up with a game generally thought of as an RPG that violates the rule. This is also complicated by the fact that many AAA franchises that were previously action games, adventure games, RPGs, etc. are all converging into a single ambiguous genre, and marketing can even take precedence over the actual characteristics of the game. For example, Assassins Creed Odyssey arguably has more of the elements one would objectively associate with an RPG than does Final Fantasy XVI, yet FF is generally considered an RPG whereas ACO is not.

These are the criteria I use:

-An RPG generally has stat-based character advancement. A few RPGs have unique systems where character growth is handled entirely through skills or equipment, but these systems must be very deep for the game to be an RPG.

-Growth generally occurs through killing enemies and gaining levels therefrom, gaining experience from quests, or from performing the task to be improved (e.g. jumping a lot increases athletics). If the primary growth occurs from finding collectible items (like heart containers in Zelda), it is well on the way to being an adventure game. And if growth is primarily puzzle-solving and traversal abilities rather than direct increases in combat strength (again like Zelda), it is well on the way to being an adventure game. Some people get confused by this and refer to Zelda as an RPG because they are ignorant of the history of the industry. Going back to the very first Zelda on the NES, it was always marketed and discussed as part of the distinct "adventure" genre and was heavily distinguished from RPGs like Dragon Warrior.

-If action-based combat is "too good," that can knock a game out of the RPG genre. For example, Nier Automata has towns, quests, leveling, and equipment as one would associate with an RPG, but the combat plays so smooth that nobody considers it one. If it had the exact same game structure and elements, but was turn-based or had Soulsborne jank, plenty of people would be calling it an RPG. Turn-based combat can tilt a game heavily towards being an RPG if it has the requisite character advancement.

-There are also lesser critera like quests, towns, non-linearity, game length, party members, player choice, etc. that can tilt a game towards being an RPG, but they are much weaker than the above because so many games that are clearly RPGs blatantly break them. For example, an old school turn-based, party-based dungeon crawler with no quests, no dialogue, no towns, etc., just killing monsters and leveling up and traversing the dungeon, is indisputably an RPG.

[Cipher]

Personally, as I have mentioned before I think character development is a key aspect in the definition. That is, the role must be a part of the decision making process (ie statistics of development weighting decision outcomes).

If there is an obstacle and the player can win the outcome through reflex, its an action game, not an RPG. Other genres may focus on different aspects of play (ie strategy games emulating more "board" style play and the like).

I agree with this. Hence why Fallout 1 and Underrail are RPGs. Its not that there is gear that has numbers or levels, its that you can tackle problems within the game world in different ways and there is an opportunity cost in your character creation decisions. I.e. if you are a sneaky crafty character, then you may be able to open a lock or hack a terminal that another character wouldn't be able to, but if combat does erupt, you are going to get a harder time than a combat focused character. By that same token, that character would lack the abilities to hack that terminal or open that lock, and thus would have to solve that same problem in a different way.

To me, this is what makes an RPG. Classes and gear with numbers do not factor into that. Now, the only thing I would disagree is that Deus Ex had combat that was the result of twitch reflex, but you could also solve problems through other means that did not depended on the Player's twitch reflex skill, but the character skill. This makes Deus Ex an RPG for me, even though it does have real time action combat.

[WhiteShark]

Then, is symphony of the night an RPG? It has levels, stats that go up with levels, Exp gained that raises your level after you kill a monster, gear that has numbers that go up. What makes Wizardry and RPG and not Symphony of the Night?

I've never played Symphony of the Night. Does it have choices in how you build the character? Does it have an inventory for various weapons/gear/items?

To the best of my knowledge, Symphony of the Night is considered a true (action) 'JRPG' and spawned the term 'metroidvania'. Most games termed 'metroidvania' are actually just metroid-likes.
I assume @WhiteShark would know more.

What makes Symphony of the Night a 'metroidvania' and not just a metroidlike is loot, gear, and levels. Monsters drop money and sometimes equipment, there's stuff to buy, and you can equip Alucard with different weapons, armor, and jewellery. All of these give different stat bonuses and sometimes special effects, and weapons are directly represented, having different appearances, reach, animations, and attacks. Monsters give XP and Alucard gains stats with levels.

I was going to say that, if anything disqualifies it from 'true' AJRPG status, it's a lack of intrinsic stat uniqueness (i.e., one level 99 Alucard will be exactly the same as another level 99 Alucard), but upon looking it up to confirm, I found that I was wrong: there is apparently randomness to the stats gained on level up. Alucard can also find and summon familliars that level up independently from him, so if party members are a requirement for RPG status, Symphony of the Night passes there, too, though he can only have one familiar active at a time.

Now, it's still an action game, so unlike a traditional RPG like Wizardry, one can beat it without much regard for the RPG mechanics if he is very skilled at the action mechanics, but I don't think there's any grounds to dispute its being an AJRPG.

[Xenich]

The thing about starting to fork what a roleplaying game is with "strategic RPG", "Action RPG", "Dungeon Crawler RPG", "JRPG" and such is that then the label becomes meaningless. The idea of the label is to be shorthand but if everything is just a flavor of RPG, then the label has lost its meaning and now we should use a new label.

So, Symphony of the Night is not a "metroidvania RPG", is just a Metroid game with a Castlevania coat of pain on it. And it is an excellent game. The only metric that people could point to SotN to claim is an RPG is because you have an inventory, the gear has numbers that go up and Alucard has stats that go up with levels.

But like I said, that would make anything that has gear with numbers that go up and character levels an RPG. And that means stuff like Borderlands or even stuff like the Gundam Breaker games, are you really OK with that? What made New Vegas good is not that it has Perks, Skills that go up with levels and levels, Fallout 3 has all of that as well. What separates and elevates New Vegas above FO3 and 4 is that you can actually roleplay a character in ways you cannot in FO3 and 4.


EDIT: And once again, I am discussing this in good faith. I am not trying to claim to be an authority on what is or is not an RPG. I have my opinion about it, based on the origins and applications of the term in psychology and then on TTRPGs, a hobby I've enjoyed for decades, and then making my case about what I think is and isn't an RPG.

I don't see it that way, in fact I see the forking as actually giving more depth of information rather than watering it down. When I see "Action RPG" I know the game is going to be more focused on player reaction and input than it is statistical resolution and terms like Dungeon Crawler tell me the "style" of its play. Strategic tells me the game will be focused more on board style function and play, likely turn based, or at least with a heavier influence on statistical play over player reaction. If I see Adventure game, I know it is going to be more focused on puzzle solving, exploration and story progression.

Where I have issues is with everything being called an RPG rather than termed as its hybrid to give it more meaning. Dark Souls is really just action/arcade with RPG for fluff. The reality is, the action of the player is the key aspect of play, nothing else as you don't need the RPG elements to win the game. Contrast that with Wizardry where you must develop your character properly to continue the game and succeed.

I think that is an important point concerning your argument. It isn't that there are numbers, stats, skills, perks.. etc... it is what regulates success in the game? Is it player reaction? Is it the statistics of the development?

In the end, story and "role" is just a vehicle to drive it. A "role" without character development is just Super Mario chasing the villain and it doesn't define the game as it could achieve that basic aspect with most genres.

[rusty_shackleford]

It's also why I suspect games that have the so-called "immersive sim" properties tend to be among the most well remembered RPGs — Deus Ex is the highest rated RPG on GOG as of writing, Bethesda games are somewhere on the 'immersive sim' spectrum, Larian games, Arkane games, so on and so forth — as they arguably embody the genre like nothing else.

Also, I submit this as my personal answer to the OP as to why KCD is an RPG. Being able to solve problems — with multiple ways to approach the problem, little handholding, encouraging the player to find their own solution, etc., — is an inherent, fundamental part of RPGs. It is of course not the only part of being an RPG, as RPG is a 'hybrid' genre itself. Lots of adventure games have problems, for example.

And for anyone wondering what the difference between a puzzle and a problem is, I found this writeup to be rather good, it's in two parts:
https://theangrygm.com/puzzles-suck/
https://theangrygm.com/bring-me-problems/

[WhiteShark]

-If action-based combat is "too good," that can knock a game out of the RPG genre. For example, Nier Automata has towns, quests, leveling, and equipment as one would associate with an RPG, but the combat plays so smooth that nobody considers it one. If it had the exact same game structure and elements, but was turn-based or had Soulsborne jank, plenty of people would be calling it an RPG. Turn-based combat can tilt a game heavily towards being an RPG if it has the requisite character advancement.

I alluded to it in my other post just now, but, in my eyes, the real division between RPG and ARPG is whether being good at action lets you more or less bypass the other mechanics. If an RPG is realtime but still designed such that you are dependent on your stats to succeed, I'd still consider it an RPG, but if the action mechanics let you do stuff like level 1 runs, it's in ARPG territory. Under this criterion, many realtime DRPGs are really ADRPGs because you can squaredance your way to victory.

[Cipher]

And again, I am not trying to be a contrarian, but if "RPG" means "character classes and levels" that is incorrect. That means "D&D" and D&D is not the only thing that defines it, or else every videogame would have to be Pong or have Pong-like elements.

I think you're mixing up the intent of D&D with the stated rules of D&D. I strongly suspect none of you have read this before(and barely anyone probably has), it's (to the best of my knowledge) the first time Gygax acknowledges D&D as a "role-playing game". It's scanned form copies of Europa #9 in response to another writer, from 1975 I believe. You'll want to open them in new tabs as they're quite large, so I haven't embedded them as images as to not slow the page down.
https://f.rpghq.org/1GU1TA320Krt.avif?n ... opa_1.avif
https://f.rpghq.org/eXUg23Sfvq4A.avif?n ... opa_2.avif
https://f.rpghq.org/AkGVpTecezlt.avif?n ... opa_3.avif

(These were rendered at 300DPI, I'm not an expert on this )

Specifically, I zero in on the: "constant challenge […] never-ending exercise in problem solving"

---

It's also why I suspect games that have the so-called "immersive sim" properties tend to be among the most well remembered RPGs — Deus Ex is the highest rated RPG on GOG as of writing, Bethesda games are somewhere on the 'immersive sim' spectrum, Larian games, Arkane games, so on and so forth — as they arguably embody the genre like nothing else.

That is a great find, thanks for sharing that! I'll read it when I get back home.

What I mean is that people equate D&D to "it has classes and levels and you kill monsters and get fat loot". I agree with this definition: "constant challenge […] never-ending exercise in problem solving"

But specially after WotC bought the brand and released 3rd edition, the game has turned from that definition, into "my character build with numbers that go up bonks harder than yours". Hence why Pathfinder became a thing since it was that turned up to eleven. When I played AD&D as a 13 year old kid, no one talked about our character builds or whatever. We relayed stories about our characters and their stories. We used their names, and the names of the places they visited and talked about how exciting was to conquer the perils they faced.

To me that's what the RPG experience is all about, and that includes D&D when is about that and not about creating a half dragon, half vampire, dhampir kobold with levels in 15 different classes just to cherry pick features to have "moar powah".

[Jordy]

Why don't you guys just check Wikipedia like me? It says it right there.

[rusty_shackleford]

Why don't you guys just check Wikipedia like me?

because I don't like libtards

[Jordy]

Why don't you guys just check Wikipedia like me?

because I don't like libtards

That's a very compelling argument.

[Cipher]

The thing about starting to fork what a roleplaying game is with "strategic RPG", "Action RPG", "Dungeon Crawler RPG", "JRPG" and such is that then the label becomes meaningless. The idea of the label is to be shorthand but if everything is just a flavor of RPG, then the label has lost its meaning and now we should use a new label.

So, Symphony of the Night is not a "metroidvania RPG", is just a Metroid game with a Castlevania coat of pain on it. And it is an excellent game. The only metric that people could point to SotN to claim is an RPG is because you have an inventory, the gear has numbers that go up and Alucard has stats that go up with levels.

But like I said, that would make anything that has gear with numbers that go up and character levels an RPG. And that means stuff like Borderlands or even stuff like the Gundam Breaker games, are you really OK with that? What made New Vegas good is not that it has Perks, Skills that go up with levels and levels, Fallout 3 has all of that as well. What separates and elevates New Vegas above FO3 and 4 is that you can actually roleplay a character in ways you cannot in FO3 and 4.


EDIT: And once again, I am discussing this in good faith. I am not trying to claim to be an authority on what is or is not an RPG. I have my opinion about it, based on the origins and applications of the term in psychology and then on TTRPGs, a hobby I've enjoyed for decades, and then making my case about what I think is and isn't an RPG.

I don't see it that way, in fact I see the forking as actually giving more depth of information rather than watering it down. When I see "Action RPG" I know the game is going to be more focused on player reaction and input than it is statistical resolution and terms like Dungeon Crawler tell me the "style" of its play. Strategic tells me the game will be focused more on board style function and play, likely turn based, or at least with a heavier influence on statistical play over player reaction. If I see Adventure game, I know it is going to be more focused on puzzle solving, exploration and story progression.

Where I have issues is with everything being called an RPG rather than termed as its hybrid to give it more meaning. Dark Souls is really just action/arcade with RPG for fluff. The reality is, the action of the player is the key aspect of play, nothing else as you don't need the RPG elements to win the game. Contrast that with Wizardry where you must develop your character properly to continue the game and succeed.

I think that is an important point concerning your argument. It isn't that there are numbers, stats, skills, perks.. etc... it is what regulates success in the game? Is it player reaction? Is it the statistics of the development?

In the end, story and "role" is just a vehicle to drive it. A "role" without character development is just Super Mario chasing the villain and it doesn't define the game as it could achieve that basic aspect with most genres.

I agree with you that stuff like Dark Souls is not an RPG. And that's precisely where I am coming from on this discussion. I hate that everything now has "RPG elements" when that only means levels, classes and gear with numbers. I think that's my actual issue, because then it watered down the term "RPG" to mean "levels, classes and gear with numbers" and while those are elements of some RPGs, those elements do not make a game an RPG.

Like I said, check Gundam Breaker. GB4 just released. It is awesome if you are a gunpla fan. But, it's a 3D beat'em up. No one would call it an RPG. However, has gear as each part has stats and those parts have levels. The levels make the numbers (stats) of the parts go up.

And that's the crux of my argument. If levels, classes and gear with numbers means a game is an RPG, then Gundam Breaker 4 is an RPG. And I do not think that for a second. And the game doesn't think that as well.

[Acrux]

To the best of my knowledge, Symphony of the Night is considered a true (action) 'JRPG' and spawned the term 'metroidvania'. Most games termed 'metroidvania' are actually just metroid-likes.

We're supposed to be calling them "Below the Root-likes" around here, anyway.

[Nooneatall]

I really let myself get dragged into an autistic thread...

[Xenich]

The thing about starting to fork what a roleplaying game is with "strategic RPG", "Action RPG", "Dungeon Crawler RPG", "JRPG" and such is that then the label becomes meaningless. The idea of the label is to be shorthand but if everything is just a flavor of RPG, then the label has lost its meaning and now we should use a new label.

So, Symphony of the Night is not a "metroidvania RPG", is just a Metroid game with a Castlevania coat of pain on it. And it is an excellent game. The only metric that people could point to SotN to claim is an RPG is because you have an inventory, the gear has numbers that go up and Alucard has stats that go up with levels.

But like I said, that would make anything that has gear with numbers that go up and character levels an RPG. And that means stuff like Borderlands or even stuff like the Gundam Breaker games, are you really OK with that? What made New Vegas good is not that it has Perks, Skills that go up with levels and levels, Fallout 3 has all of that as well. What separates and elevates New Vegas above FO3 and 4 is that you can actually roleplay a character in ways you cannot in FO3 and 4.


EDIT: And once again, I am discussing this in good faith. I am not trying to claim to be an authority on what is or is not an RPG. I have my opinion about it, based on the origins and applications of the term in psychology and then on TTRPGs, a hobby I've enjoyed for decades, and then making my case about what I think is and isn't an RPG.

I don't see it that way, in fact I see the forking as actually giving more depth of information rather than watering it down. When I see "Action RPG" I know the game is going to be more focused on player reaction and input than it is statistical resolution and terms like Dungeon Crawler tell me the "style" of its play. Strategic tells me the game will be focused more on board style function and play, likely turn based, or at least with a heavier influence on statistical play over player reaction. If I see Adventure game, I know it is going to be more focused on puzzle solving, exploration and story progression.

Where I have issues is with everything being called an RPG rather than termed as its hybrid to give it more meaning. Dark Souls is really just action/arcade with RPG for fluff. The reality is, the action of the player is the key aspect of play, nothing else as you don't need the RPG elements to win the game. Contrast that with Wizardry where you must develop your character properly to continue the game and succeed.

I think that is an important point concerning your argument. It isn't that there are numbers, stats, skills, perks.. etc... it is what regulates success in the game? Is it player reaction? Is it the statistics of the development?

In the end, story and "role" is just a vehicle to drive it. A "role" without character development is just Super Mario chasing the villain and it doesn't define the game as it could achieve that basic aspect with most genres.

I agree with you that stuff like Dark Souls is not an RPG. And that's precisely where I am coming from on this discussion. I hate that everything now has "RPG elements" when that only means levels, classes and gear with numbers. I think that's my actual issue, because then it watered down the term "RPG" to mean "levels, classes and gear with numbers" and while those are elements of some RPGs, those elements do not make a game an RPG.

Like I said, check Gundam Breaker. GB4 just released. It is awesome if you are a gunpla fan. But, it's a 3D beat'em up. No one would call it an RPG. However, has gear as each part has stats and those parts have levels. The levels make the numbers (stats) of the parts go up.

And that's the crux of my argument. If levels, classes and gear with numbers means a game is an RPG, then Gundam Breaker 4 is an RPG. And I do not think that for a second. And the game doesn't think that as well.

I understand your point. I looked up Dark Souls and Elden Ring. Dark souls Remastered is listed as "Action" only. Elden Ring is listed as "Action, RPG".

Dark Souls to be more informative would be fine with "Action, RPG" as well because it does contain RPG elements, but like Elden Ring, we know it isn't required. That said, from an information aspect, I think it is fair to add "RPG" as a sub definition to them to denote they allow character development in their play.

The important point though isn't RPG elements in defining an RPG I think, it is as we have discussed, those elements be required for progression. Levels, gear, attributes, skills, etc... are meaningless unless they bar a player in progression in some fashion. That is, they must cause failures that the player can not circumvent through other means (ie action).

I think the biggest problem is the players out there who don't give intelligent consideration to the classifications and generalize them. You get enough people like that using the wrong terms and it becomes the new term unfortunately. Something that has urked me for years concerning the "newer" generation of D&D players and their loose generalization of the games features and play.

[Jordy]

I really let myself get dragged into an autistic thread...

PM me if you need someone to talk to buddy.

Don't

[Jordy]

Violence is always the answer.

"You might win a fight with violence, but you'll never win an arguement."

Well that showed me.

[wndrbr]

Related to the OP: What sets Gothic 2 apart from KCD that makes people think it's more of an RPG?
I have a few ideas already, but I'd like to hear some.

in KCD: you don't get to choose a faction to join, you don't have to make a choice which attribute to main, and you don't decide which weapon skill to max out.

If KCD was a gothic-like game, there would be a choice of a faction and a specialization, i.e. either join sir Hanush' faction to get access to sir Bernard's skill training (by the end of the game you become an armor-clad knight), or join sir Radzig's faction to get access to roguish skills (by the endgame you become Radzig's squire and get to do the covert ops wetwork), or stay as an independent and hone your skills with Father Godwin (you become a warrior-monk-poet).

As it is, KCD's main plot is a bit too railroaded, even after you finish the prologue.

[Orvas Dren]

RPGHQ, where none of us actually know what an RPG is

[Nooneatall]

Violence is always the answer.

"You might win a fight with violence, but you'll never win an arguement."

Well that showed me.

You don't need to win an argument if you can subjugate your opponent

[Tweed]

I guess Disco really is an RPG then.