What is an RPG?

[WhiteShark]

Almost bordering on the threshold of the lower limit of the bare minimum... Yup, no doubt, Zelda is an RPG.

[Lich]

Some think the Binding of Isaac is a roguelike. Their opinions are irrelevant. The Berlin interpretation is an adequate starting point for defining roguelikes.

[rusty_shackleford]

A roguelike is inherently an RPG, binding of isaac is not an rpg.

[Emphyrio]

What is the "randomizer" in Skyrim?

[revenant]

What is the "randomizer" in Skyrim?

Rodent AI quests

[Valter]

Still don't know what an RPG is

[1998]

Is that an attempt to get Disco approved for the AG?

[Valter]

Is that an attempt to get Disco approved for the AG?

No, there's another thread for that. And I'm not even familiar with Disco. But it did remind me of the question that is this thread's title.

I'm just looking at the AG list and trying to see what stuff like Alpha Protocol's got to do with... Wizardry?

Analyzing how a game fits into the term "Role-Playing Game", taken at face-value, just adds to the confusion. Using examples I'm more familiar with. there's way more character Role-playing potential in something like Sir Brante than in Etrian Odyssey. I guess since one has combat, it's got more merit to being called a game? I would agree with that, as it's a more clear-cut game with rules, opponents and goals. But if we interpret it another way, there's also goals and fail-states in Sir Brante, even if the player interactions are purely through text.
So the former has a lot of role-playing and minimal-to-none gameplay (combat), making it a role-playing... experience? in my eyes. While the latter has no roleplaying at all and traditional combat, making it undoubtedly a game, but I don't see how you'd fit the role-playing label on it.

And what is the purpose of this nomenclature? Is it just a vestige of the first computer RPGs being based on tabletop games?
This is madness

[Stack of Turtles]

Real-time strategy games are RPGs where you role-play as an immortal summoner.

[Valter]

Real-time strategy games are RPGs where you role-play as an immortal summoner.

Action games are RTS games where you control and strategize around a single unit.

[rusty_shackleford]

Real-time strategy games are RPGs where you role-play as an immortal summoner.

Action games are RTS games where you control and strategize around a single unit.

@WhiteShark wrote a serious post like this once

[Tweed]

To understand RPGs we must start at the beginning:

Chapter 1 - Thespis

[rusty_shackleford]

Real-time strategy games are RPGs where you role-play as an immortal summoner.

Action games are RTS games where you control and strategize around a single unit.

@WhiteShark wrote a serious post like this once

Roleplaying games are sub-tactical scale wargames.

[Brugmans]

Action games are RTS games where you control and strategize around a single unit.

@WhiteShark wrote a serious post like this once

Roleplaying games are sub-tactical scale wargames.

Is that a controversial opinion?

[UltraFan123]

I think an "RPG" at its core needs to also be "party-based" so that there can be at least some level of variety in the role part of role-playing.

Like you need a melee fighter, a long-range that would be either projectile-thrower or wizard hurling fireballs, a healer to restore that HP, and a "wildcard" that could be any gimmicky role. At bare minimum.

[Lhynn]

Urmom is an rpg, and we grind levels together every night.

(Did I make this joke already? Dont know, but **** it)

[Acrux]

Two years to have the old arguments recycled. Sounds about right.

[Poityu]

RPG progression centers on stories, that is character driven, in the POV of a person or group, making choice and decisions.
The player has stats, which is used in said interaction, and checks for failure or success is part of the game's reactivity.

The larger the scope, the lesser it feels like an RPG, but Simulation/Strategy.
Without stats, even if it is character driven, it feels more like a CYOA or VN.

In eastern RPGs you tend not to make choices, but it is still character driven, letting you see how characters evole through the story.

In the current usage, the only requirement for an RPG label is an interactive story with similar scope and an optional stats system.
This is especially true for Japanese games. Cf. RPGMaker games. (This part was a mixup, sorry.)

[WhiteShark]

May as well quote the rest of the relevant bit from that post:

Roleplaying games are sub-tactical scale wargames. 'Role' refers to the combat role of a character. That's why the classes revolve around combat. Your role is your battlefield function.

Action games are RTS games where you control and strategize around a single unit.

This is incorrect because of granularity. What you're describing is actually a MOBA. An action game offers a finer level control over the precise actions of player character.

Real-time strategy games are RPGs where you role-play as an immortal summoner.

I suppose if the RTS had persistence of characters and advancement and a sub-tactical scale, one could classify it as a real time RPG.

[WhiteShark]

RPG progression centers on stories, that is character driven, in the POV of a person or group, making choice and decisions.
The player has stats, which is used in said interaction, and checks for failure or success is part of the game's reactivity.

Any definition of RPG that would exclude Wizardry and Rogue fails.

[just]

rpg is a spectrum

[Norfleet]

Asking people here to define "rpg" is like asking Elden Ring players to define "dog".

[traxtan]

It's called RPGHQ

[Poityu]

Any definition of RPG that would exclude Wizardry and Rogue fails.

Hm, yes I did see that from the earlier page before I post. I'd say my definition is what I look for when searching for one.

Wizardry and Rogue I'd put into dungeon crawler, playing as murder hobos. If you want to categorize that as their character story, it somewhat fits? (I wouldn't feel much of a role play personally)
The rest (in the POV of a person or group... part of the game's reactivity) fits.

[Valter]

I think an "RPG" at its core needs to also be "party-based" so that there can be at least some level of variety in the role part of role-playing.

Like you need a melee fighter, a long-range that would be either projectile-thrower or wizard hurling fireballs, a healer to restore that HP, and a "wildcard" that could be any gimmicky role. At bare minimum.

Elder Scrolls games are crying

[Valter]

Any definition of RPG that would exclude Wizardry and Rogue fails.

Hm, yes I did see that from the earlier page before I post. I'd say my definition is what I look for when searching for one.

Wizardry and Rogue I'd put into dungeon crawler, playing as murder hobos. If you want to categorize that as their character story, it somewhat fits? (I wouldn't feel much of a role play personally)
The rest (in the POV of a person or group... part of the game's reactivity) fits.

Dungeon Crawler is such a better description for those kind of games. You immediately know what the primary type of activity and/or gameplay in the game will be.

If you tell someone your favourite genre is RPGs, they leave knowing **** all about what you actually like.
Could it be screen-wipers like Path of Exile? Immersive first-person adventures like Skyrim? Stealth espionage like Alpha Protocol? Third-person party-based adventures like Dragon Age? Tactical mission-based big squad games like Fire Emblem? First-person dungeon-crawlers like Legend of Grimrock? Hell, is it even solo or party-based?

I think the point I'm trying to get to here is that there's a reason there's all these different terms for RPG subsets.
Dungeon Crawler. CRPG. Soulslike. ARPG. Turn-based RPG. Tactical RPG. RTWP RPG. Simulation RPG? (Just came up with that one for stuff like Skyrim and Kingdom Come)
All of these give you a reasonable idea of what the game is about.
Nowadays, RPG no longer serves that purpose. And not having played any RPGs older than KOTOR, I can only assume that the reason the RPG label first became the main term for these party-based adventuring computer games was due to tabletop D&D (and others) having been a main influence during their genesis. And that at the time there weren't as many different variations of RPGs, making it a decently clear what kinda game you were talking about.

[Valter]

RPG progression centers on stories, that is character driven, in the POV of a person or group, making choice and decisions.
The player has stats, which is used in said interaction, and checks for failure or success is part of the game's reactivity.

The larger the scope, the lesser it feels like an RPG, but Simulation/Strategy.
Without stats, even if it is character driven, it feels more like a CYOA or VN.

In eastern RPGs you tend not to make choices, but it is still character driven, letting you see how characters evole through the story.

In the current usage, the only requirement for an RPG label is an interactive story with similar scope and an optional stats system.
This is especially true for Japanese games. Cf. RPGMaker games.

Having first experienced the genre through Oblivion, DA Origins, Mass Effect 1 and The Witcher 1, the first paragraph is pretty much the main impression that was instilled upon me of what to expect out of an RPG.
Regarding the last paragraph, I would agree with that, but for the sake of keeping Gamebooks and Games separate, stats and combat also ought to be a requirement for an RPG (video game = combat), not optional.

[WhiteShark]

Roleplaying games are sub-tactical scale wargames.

Is that a controversial opinion?

It is among people who don't know what RPGs and wargames are.

[Tweed]

RPGs are stat-driven progression games where the characters get stronger over time by defeating enemies and sometimes by finishing quests. The two most basic examples of this format that I know are Wizardry and Dragon Quest with DQ borrowing heavily from Ultima and a little from Wiz (the original DQ can barely be called a JRPG) which both use hit points as a currency for exploration. The stronger you are, the longer you last, the longer you last, the farther you can go and the more stuff you can fight and so it goes and so it goes...

This at it's heart is an RPG, this was with us from the beginning.

[Valter]

RPGs are stat-driven progression games where the characters get stronger over time by defeating enemies and sometimes by finishing quests. The two most basic examples of this format that I know are Wizardry and Dragon Quest with DQ borrowing heavily from Ultima and a little from Wiz (the original DQ can barely be called a JRPG) which both use hit points as a currency for exploration. The stronger you are, the longer you last, the longer you last, the farther you can go and the more stuff you can fight and so it goes and so it goes...

This at it's heart is an RPG, this was with us from the beginning.

Would you include games where stats are exclusively obtained from gear? Such as Monster Hunter. There is clear progression, and you get stronger by defeating enemies, but in the form of using their materials for new equipment.