beowulfaz ([info]beowulfaz) wrote in [info]geekculture,

Do you RPG?

I recently got into a discussion with a few of my students about the nature of computer role-playing games (RPGs). He was arguing that Diablo II was simply the best RPG ever, and I found myself disagreeing with the very idea that Diablo II counts as an actual RPG. I know that "action RPG" is the label for its section in Best Buy, but the more I think of it, the more it seems a misnomer. I realized that he and I had two vastly different definitions of RPG. Mine stems from my time spent playing pen and paper Dungeons and Dragons as an adolescent where you actually pretended to be someone else.

The way I see it, there are three components which qualify a computer game as an RPG:
1. Character generation and skills.
2. Flexibility in plot effected by character choice
3. Multiple outcomes

1. Character generation and skills.
When you create a character, do you have to make choices in terms of skill or ability sets or values? As you increase in level do you further specialize or develop these? Do your choices ultimately affect the strategies you utilize to play the game?

2. Flexibility in plot effected by character choice
Is the plot rigid and linear, or does your character's background, choices, or skills affect the events of the game? Can you form alliances with other non-player characters in the game which effect events? Can you acquire various henchmen who affect what you can or cannot do? Can you be good or evil (and does it make the game different)?

3. Multiple outcomes
Based on the choices you make during step 1 or step 2, does the game change in some significant way?

Looking at Diablo and Diablo II from this perspective, it really does seem lacking. Sure you can play a different class which radically changes how you play the game. The Necromancer in Diablo II, for example, essentially creates a lot of other soldiers to do his fighting for him. He's the general, as opposed to the grunt. It's been awhile since I played either game, but there never seemed to be a heck of a lot of flexibility in quests or npc interactions. The wealth of items you receive, the combining of them in unique ways, seems to be where the most flexibility stems.

So what is the best RPG out there?

Well Neverwinter Nights was hailed as one of the best (I haven't got the sequel yet). Obviously character creation has a phenomenal effect on your strategy throughout the game. In the original campaign, the plot is incredibly linear. You're offered the infrequent specialist quest depending upon your skills. No matter your personality you can acquire any of the possible henchmen. A choice between good and evil really does not effect the final confrontation. The subsequent expansion modules (Shadows of Undrentide and Hordes of the Underdark) made improvements in the second and third aspects. The linear plot still moved forward, but how you played the game (and with which companions) effected the final epilogue. I feel that the Knights of the Old Republic II: The Sith Lords (which uses the same engine as NWN) does a better job of creating a somewhat flexible plot. Being evil and having "influence" on your companions ultimately does have a larger effect on the game.

I've only had one experience with Massively Multiplayer On-line RPGs, and that was City of Heroes during its first year of release. While it has an absolutely tremendous character creation system which greatly effects your strategy, it never really has an impact on the plot. My magic-based hero still fought the same set of bad-guys as he levelled through the various areas. As a Hero, you couldn't be evil, and you didn't really have options with how you interacted with NPCs. Very few on-line players, in my experience, made any significant attempt to play the role or part of their characters (the exception being the number of men who played female characters). While they've since created lots of specialized quests or missions (area-specific, task force, and limited-time events), most characters can access all of them (eventually) as they work their way through the game. It's incredibly fun, but it doesn't seem like an RPG to me.

The best RPG in recent memory, in my opinion, was Arcanum. You had tremendous flexibility in your character with abilities, skills, magic or technology based powers, and good or evil. Your choices greatly affected your companions. Some technology-based folk would not join you if you were a magical person. Some characters would not join you depending upon your goodness. If you performed actions which made your companions unhappy, you had to find them things to improve your relationship. In the larger plot, your choices radically effected the final confrontations.

Those of you who do RPG (in either the real or virtual worlds) what do you think of the state of "RPG" games?


  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    Your IP address will be recorded 

  • 12 comments

[info]jell044

May 5 2007, 13:59:12 UTC 5 years ago

I <3 City of.. been playing it for 3 years now.. (god damn it's been that long?) But, I generally don't RP, mainly because all I do is create Female toons (if I'm gonna stare at an ass all day, might be a female's), and to me, RPing as a girl just seems.. weird. But other people do it and that's fine. Also, I'm definately a power gamer, always worrying about what's going to give me the most xp over time, and such. Leveling up my toon so that it actually FEELS like I am being a hero, other than having to stop attacking every group becuase I need some endurance. In Villains you get to be the bad guy, but its the same mechanics as CoH, so if you don't have the right mindset, it will feel as though you are being a hero, instead of being a villain.

If you still play, try going on Virtue (the "unoffical" RP server). There are tons of RP specific groups on there

[info]jell044

May 5 2007, 14:02:03 UTC 5 years ago

Ohyeah, even though I don't RP, I do get concepts in my head for certain powersets/origins and I go with it from there.

[info]timidmr_t

May 7 2007, 01:33:06 UTC 5 years ago

I just got back into City of Heroes again recently. I'm on the Infinity server. I love that game.

[info]jell044

May 8 2007, 18:40:52 UTC 5 years ago

ya me too, though I am mainly on Justice/Virtue.

[info]multicore

May 5 2007, 18:44:27 UTC 5 years ago

I'm playing Anarchy Online (MMORPG) for about a year and a half.
This game got me only because of the sci-fi theme and the humor it have.
Most of the "sword and sorcery" rpg are simply boring for me.

Anyway all our life can be considered as one big role playing game..

As it says:"R.P.G.'s where the voice in your head come out and play" :)

[info]timidmr_t

May 7 2007, 01:54:32 UTC 5 years ago

If these other games that don't live up to your standards aren't RPGs, what are they?

Put your elitist mentality aside. Diablo II, among many other "linear" RPGs out there, are in fact, RPGs. These are the standards the game companies use for RPGs these days:

1. Some sort of progression system that involves stat juggling, skill customization, and usually equipment.

2. A compelling, or at least somewhat epic plot.

Being able to be a bad guy or choose to kill everyone in Morrowind are features that make an RPG unique in its own way. They are not necessary. I think the problem with your attitude towards these games is you're using the "RPG" label like there aren't (or shouldn't be) any sub-labels for it. Here in 2007, however, there are. Diablo II is an Action RPG. City of Heroes is an MMORPG. NWN, Baldur's Gate, etc. could be considered virtual pen-and-paper RPGs, because the systems behind them emulate those rulesets.

This would be like me refusing to accept Gears of War as a shooter because it's not completely first-person, like what all of the older Shooter games were like. Or if I were to say that any cars made with automatic transmissions shouldn't be considered cars because I think manual is the way you should drive a car. Those two opinions are just that: Opinions, and very skewed ones at that. However, I could go on and on for paragraphs like you did, explaining to great lengths why my opinion is not only valid, but is the correct way of thinking. Foolish.

All of those games are RPGs, just different kinds of RPGs. You liked certain RPGs better than other RPGs, just as your student(s) hail Diablo II as their favorite. What you're trying to do here is justify your opinion as superior to the opinions' of others, and presenting your views on these games like they're facts. You wouldn't happen to be a college professor would you?

[info]beowulfaz

May 7 2007, 10:28:40 UTC 5 years ago

Actually, what I'm doing is presenting my thoughts on the subject and asking for others to share their views.

From the first paragraph I acknowledge that my student and I had two different definitions of what makes an RPG. Throughout the posting I repeat phrases like "my view," "in my opinion," and "the way I see it." I didn't realize that offering one's perspective and presenting it in an organized fashion with evidence could offend someone so, or that everything that is on blogs is apparently factual and not at all based on very skewed opinions.

The heart of my argument is that a role-playing game involves playing a character and not just playing a set of skills or abilities. The best, in my opinion, are those that give you that freedom. I can replay some NWN modules or KOTOR II or Arcanum and have a radically different experience within the game more than just whether I am fighting with sword, bow, or quarterstaff. I recently started playing a bunch of fan-created NWN mods and some of them do a fantastic job of creating whole worlds for a characters to play someone else entirely than just a tank, a shooter, a controller, or a defender (to use the COH definitions of characters).

I teach high school English. My mother is an elementary school teacher, and my brothers are both college professors. I teach my students to look at the world around them, the language and media that fills it, and to analyze it for its values and ideas. I teach them to consider, question, and ponder the stories of their lives, and yes, I also teach them to write analytical essays where they have to form a thesis and present evidence in a logical manner.

[info]timidmr_t

May 9 2007, 05:36:22 UTC 5 years ago

...and yet you won't look at this from a different angle?

While you may feel the best RPGs give you full freedom (and you're, of course, welcome to that opinion) you're not arguing what kind of RPGs you feel are the best. You're arguing what actually is an RPG.

In Diablo II, City of Heroes, etc. I'm playing a character. I customize my skills and abilities to fit a certain theme. In other, even more linear RPGs where players aren't given much of a choice of what they can make their characters do (ie. Final Fantasy IV, Lunar: Overrated Piece of Shit, etc.) they're still playing their characters. A story is unfolding for them, and they're playing through it. Sure, a little more freedom would be great, but it doesn't make the game NOT an RPG just because it doesn't have a certain qualification you prefer in your RPGs.

What you're basically arguing is that you like NWN, KOTOR and Arcanum, and that those games are superior to other games. Except, instead of saying "I think these games are better than other RPGs because..." you're saying "Any game that doesn't give me the freedom to do things differently like my favorite games do, isn't an RPG." Basically, even though you may precede your thoughts with statements such as "In my opinion," you're still presenting your opinion as if it's a standard by which an entire genre of games should be based off of.

This is really close-minded, which is ironic considering the kind of games you prefer and the subject you teach, not to mention your supposed method of teaching it.

[info]beowulfaz

May 9 2007, 22:56:00 UTC 5 years ago

I guess I am arguing that these games don't qualify as an RPG rather than if they are good or bad RPGs.

I disagree that the inclusion of a story or plot qualifies the game as an RPG. Playing a character for me, involves more than just choosing a strategy and adopting the skills and acquiring the equipment to further that strategy.

I grew up playing DND, Warhammer, and every other role-playing game that TSR created, and I want computer role-playing games to reflect that heritage. I dislike games that are essentially Monty Haul, dungeon crawl, hack'n'slash bonanzas. I like a game with a story that allows me to play a character and not just play the game.

Yes, I have postulated my own definition of what makes an RPG. Yes, I have put forth games which, in my mind, qualify as a good example of those characteristics. To quote from the second sentence of my first post, "I found myself disagreeing with the very idea that Diablo II counts as an actual RPG." There was no trickery in my posting that I didn't think the game (or others like it) qualify as an RPG.

To return to your car analogy, I'm essentially arguing that you can't call your Sports Utility Vehicle an SUV unless you actually use it in some capacity for Sports. Unless you're hauling the team around or off-roading on your way to go kayaking, it's just a small truck or big car.

I'm not quite sure how or why this has offended you so. It's clear we disagree, and you seem offended by the very suggestion that there is a different definition of an RPG than your own.

Deleted comment

[info]beowulfaz

June 5 2007, 01:58:11 UTC 4 years ago

I don't know what I find more alarming, that a website exists attempting to archive all blog-postings about gender and role-playing or that my post would be labeled as "tangential." Sigh...

Looking back on the original post, I do see that I was focused mainly on gameplay and design. Most stories are written with a male slant in mind. If there is a romantic storyline, often times the male protagonist has choices. In Baldur's Gate II you could pursue any of the three female elves (LG winged elf, N druid, or CE drow cleric); however, if you were female you only got the smug paladin as a possibility.

I have no idea what the actual population of women gamers is, but I have learned to never make assumptions about with whom I am playing on-line. I have read on far too many discussion boards the statement, "If I'm going to be staring at someone's ass for forty plus hours it better be a chicks!" One of my good friends who plays for more MMORPGs than I would ever want to consider, always plays female characters. What he's found is that male players tend to be extremely helpful and giving to a scantily-clad female character. I have no hard data, but it is intersting.

Planescape: Torment had to be one of the best computer RPGs, as you had flexibility in character, skills, alignment, henchmen, and your choices radically altered the different endings. Such a good game.

Sadly, it has been more than a few years since I last had any pen-and-paper live RPG experience. I'd really like to find an Ars Magica group, because it's such a fantastic blend of fantasy and history with one of the most compelling magic systems out there.
Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Facebook Twitter More login options
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…