@Wasdie said:
I find RPG to be a pretty broad term.
This is a topic I've often tackled, how do we really define RPG? Which at the core of it is asking, "what really distinguishes RPGs from other genres?"
It used to be we went by stats and xp leveling. But this is a mechanic we see implemented in so many games; The Force Unleashed, that Wolverine movie game, Dead Rising, Batman Arkham, Assassin's Creed, the new Tomb Raider, and even COD. Yet hardly anyone would consider these to be role playing games. Of course stats and XP has its origins in tabletop games with dice rolls, it's the reference point used in making this argument, which it does serve a function in making the genre work the way it does. But that alone doesn't make an RPG.
There was a time that story was the domain of the genre but now that can be seen among a plethora of action and adventure games, even some rare shooters (Spec Ops the Line, Zelda, Alan Wake, Last of Us, Half Life 2...). The medium has just progressed to make it more possible to implement with most any gameplay design.
People often make the argument about the "RPG elements" but mechanics are only part of the equation for any genre. What really sets each one apart is the "experience" they give us. And that experience is derived not only from our interactivity (the mechanics) but a combination of the goals we're trying to achieve that is the purpose for the action (whether that's destroying as many enemies as possible, establishing an empire, saving the world or that one important individual, winning the racing tour circuit, defending against an invasion, surviving the night, surviving a plague, slaying evil, achieving honor or stature...) along with the tone & atmosphere to evoke our senses. How mechanics, with goal/purpose and tone/atmosphere come together is the formula for an experience.
With trying to really deconstruct how games incorporate the design of role playing into their gameplay I've come to the following criteria:
THE PLAYER DEFINES THE ROLE: This is probably foremost what differentiates RPGs from any other action/adventure game. Even when some make use of the xp leveling and powering up, it's more often linear and ultimately still attached to a fixed character, one that's been designed by the game makers in a very specific way. Take for example so many established icons; Link, Samus, Master Chief, Marcus Feenix, Solid Snake, Nathan Drake, Lara Croft, Ezio, Mario, Kratos, Dante... you get the idea. In all cases their personalities and traits have been completely pre-scripted by the devs to determine their behavior and attitude in how they'll approach any given situation, react to other characters words and actions, and present their outlook to the world they live in. Even with TR where you can assign skills to Lara, her emotional responses are still determined by the devs. Kratos will always be an angry man, Drake will always crack wise and flirt with the ladies... the player has no say in their character development.
This is where RPGs make their mark, where the player can shape the character to be how they see that person's role in the world and how they take to the quest. When it's done really well the player has a real connection to the character through which they can express themselves, either to play as them self in the role or adopt a new identity and assume that role as a way to explore alternate sides of their self and create an alter ego in the world. In either case it's the player directing the character development. Or to put it another way, it's when the gameplay makes the character to be an extension of the player.
It does help when a character is fully customizable, from gender to race, facial features, fashion expression and so forth, that it executes making the character an extension of the player, either as their own self adapted into the world or their alter ego. But even in cases with the Witcher, where Geralt is pre-determined in name and appearance, the developer control ends there and once in the players hands they shape Geralt as they see him, or to put it another way can determine their own version of Geralt unique from other players. Who Geralt sides with that determines his political alignment, who he decides to save, who he's friendly with or antagonistic, to commit to a romance or wildly sleep around, his attitude in conversations... all this the player still has agency to shape his role in the story.
You've probably heard the argument, "all video games are RPGs because you're always playing the role of <character X>" Not only does this make the genre meaningless, but it's flawed in its assessment of what makes role playing. Just because you can direct the combat for Lara, Ezio, Kratos, Chief, Snake, etc... doesn't mean you're role playing as them. Not when their roles are pre-defined and not player defined. It's the difference between controlling a character and role playing that character.
WORLD INTERACTION: If we're talking about defining a role, that means there's more to exploring the world than simply traversing it from point A to B. That's what happens in any given action game. Having freedom to define the role means the freedom to have meaningful interactions with the world and its populace that has an effect on it. In other words the world isn't just a visual backdrop for the action, or just a set of obstacles to navigate to reach a goal, the world is in itself a character, and one that your interactions with will shape it, that in turn shapes your role in the story.
CHARACTER PROGRESSION: So yeah, while I did say that xp leveling and stats do not alone define the RPG genre, I do still recognize that it serves a function. But with so many games adopting the mechanic it's important to remember what purpose it has. There's a reason I refer to "character progression" and not simply "stats and levels". In those other examples, the stats/levels does empower the character, but it's also separated from shaping their role. Progression isn't just about getting stronger, more indestructible, and attaining better spells/abilities. It's the progression of growth to develop a skill set that lets the player adapt a play style for how they see their character, as brute force, tactical, manipulative, defensive, offensive, stealthy, controlling, charming, threatening, or any number of unique specializations. Essentially it's about how the player has the flexibility to overcome varying challenges, and in what ways they'll interact with the world.
By no means does this have to be reliant on the formulaic old school stats (STR, CON, DEX, INT, WIS...) as it should be contextual to the setting, if it's magical, technological, historically thematic, futuristic, and of course what abilities that circumstances of the story have created, and what's needed to meet different challenges. Ultimately the progression shapes the experience with a sense of growth that is more than just a rise in power, but the means to explore the world in how the character grows to fill their player determined role.
aaaaand yeah, there's another long ass post by AdobeArtist. But hey.... this is the role I choose to play in System Wars ??
Log in to comment