Interestingly enough, Wikipedia doesn't have a proper definition of electronic RPGs. While the definition for PnP RPGs is quite clear and, well, definite, the articles for computer and console RPGs (which are separate) just list some common features.

Wikipedia states the following on PnP RPGs:

A role-playing game (RPG; often roleplaying game) is a game in which the participants assume the roles of fictional characters and collaboratively create or follow stories. Participants determine the actions of their characters based on their characterization, and the actions succeed or fail according to a formal system of rules and guidelines. Within the rules, players can improvise freely; their choices shape the direction and outcome of the games.

But then on Computer RPGs:

Despite a spectrum of features and game styyles, there are some elements common to the CRPG genre. Perhaps the most salient is that of the avatar, with its quantized characteristics that evolve over the course of the game, and take the place of the gamer's own skill in determining game outcomes. Another common element in CRPGs is a well-developed fictional setting.

RPG means Role Playing Game as in you play a role in the story usually the main character, who is on a quest.

Otchron69

No. In gaming terms, both computer and Pen and Paper, the expression "Role-playing" has a specific meaning. Basically it implies a focus on character interaction and being presented with choices which affect the story and define the character throughout the game. Which means that the "character upgrade" element is not necessary (or sufficient) to set RPGs apart from games of other genres.

http://wowsucksalot.ytmnd.com/

I feel thats the best def. of a rpg to me :P (mmos at least, and some rpgs)

Kool_j

Interesting definition. Couldn't see the connection with Jeff Buckley however, though I like the song.

all RPGs play a bit with all what you said ... no developper is gonna limit themself to a definition of RPG just because they are making such game

i am 100% for devs creating variety in the gameplay

waza000

The thing is, it seems to me that many developers nowadays (not just Bethesda) are very much content with having a few gameplay elements labelled "RPG certified", an inventory and character sheet, a few FedEx quests and a bunch of elves and goblins, and call it an RPG, a the expense of role-playing which is the essence of RPGs as a I see them. I posted that extract about Wasteland to show that it wasn't always that way. It doesn't have to be that restrictive, but as long as people say "that's the way it is, why bother questioning it", game developers will keep concentrating on fiddling with the latest DirectX, and forget about old-fashioned concerns with creative talent, artistic qualities and innovation.

Call me elitist, pessimistic and cynical, but I think if Bethesda had been able to produce interesting NPCs and dialogues or a good atmosphere for instance, we'd know it by now. So unless they hire someone who can actually write (which is a remote possibility), Fallout 3 will be nothing but a sci-fi Morrowind at best. It might be a decent enough game, but still an insult to the Fallout series. After the commercial success Oblivion enjoyed and all the awards it received, I'd be surprised if Bethesda was seeking redemption for it.

I do hope I'm proven wrong.

JRPG doesn't apply to choice 2. They are linear story, everything is in the story in a JRPG. Oblivion goes in number 2. Final Fantasy goes with story tralala.

Anofalye

I see what you mean. Then if you define JRPGs by a linear story, it doesn't fit in any of the two categories and your vote would have to be Option 4.

I do believe though that JRPGs have strong "Category 2" elements (combat strategy, inventory, character management, free-roaming).

I'd say option one sounds more like the adventure game genre than an RPG. You guide a character with pre-determined attitudes and abilities through an adventure but have little chance to shape and mold the character's abilities or personality. I go with option 2.bogaty

Group 1 is precisely about deciding throughout the course of the game what to do with your character, through your choices of speech and action. Group 2 has nothing to do with personality, it's more about the technical aspects, which are, for the most part, pre-determined. I humbly recommend that you read the original post again, just to make sure that your vote really reflects your opinion.

I agree with your definition of adventure games, but it's very different to what's implied by Group 1 as I defined it.

I will have to go with group 2 then.
visceron

Be careful though. The poll isn't about what genre you like, but what characterises an RPG. Vote 2 if you think JPRGs are really RPGs.

Another way to express the idea that Group 2 does not define an RPG:

Neverwinter Nights had a toolset. People made new adventures for NWN using that toolset. On the NWN Vault, where all mods are kept, these are categorised according to their genre. Some are centred on puzzles, others combat, others role-playing and so on. Others are hybrids. Nevertheless, these adventures which clearly belong to different genres all share the same character management system (DnD gameplay), interface and way of interacting physically with the world.