What ?! Diablo a "true RPG" ?!

RPG come from "role playing game" as of "Pen and Paper" role playing game. The "defining aspects" of this were the immersion into an alien world via a character or role you played. That character was defined by stats and his "growth" was achieved with level ups. Elements of this have spread amongs many of genres.

And if there are "true RPGS", they are those that let you create your own character and immerse yourself in a different world. A world were you can actually make a differnce on how you act. Best examples would probably be Dragon Age or Fallout (Morrowind to a certai degree).

here we go with the debate of "what makes an RPG a RPG" shit man the RPG genre is so complex it's practically the rock/metal genre with so many sub-genres

I don't usually post just "I agree" messages but...

I agree!

Following a pre-program story where you can have no influence on the outcome is not an RPG, it's just a game.

Read my post again before raging. And yes, like it or not, ARPGs are true RPGs.

OK, I will.

So Diablo had any of those?
Developing you character at level up is not a choice & consequence within the world type thing, it's a metagame thing. Chosing what control scheme you use on your keyboard is as much a meta choice as leveling is.
C&C applies to the story, not the metagame.

Of all the things you mention only a) & f) are in any way necessary to an RPG, if you had none of the other elements then you could still have an RPG ( c) would count but it's just a subdivision of a) ).

Yah. And as SimonG pointed out, the sign of a true RPG is "c) interaction and reactivity with the world." STALKER is far more of an RPG than Diablo.

I propose that RPGs as a genre don't actually exist any more than vegetables exist as plants.

Edit: Corrected spelling mistake that seemed to warp my statement's intended meaning.

... and yet another thread turns to pizza...

But I agree, RPG as a definition is done and gone. I like it when people describe game "genres" by their defining games. Back when FPS were Doomlikes....

Well since RPGs constitute my favorite type of games., typically J-RPGs (Raging from Final Fantasy Serie, to Wild arms, Passing By suikoden, grandia and Breath of fire)
I can assure that RPGs are a genre in its own...

It is not, in my opinion , the fact that you can affect the world, more than the fact that you "Live" and "Experience" with the protagonist/s.

People in above messages have given the definition of American RPG's, inspired by true Role playing games with dice, etc where you could directly affect the world where you play, and live an experience as an entity you controle from a to z.

While J-RPGs are more restrective, it retain the same concept.
You control a character or bunch of character with distinct personalities, the story evolves around them and take into consideration their relationship.
So a "true" RPG for me is a game where you control and develop character/s with a freedom to a certain extinct, but also with important personalities.

While under these qualifications Final Fantasy I wouldn't qualify as an RPG (Since the protagonists lack real personality traits in this game) I believe the definition of RPG have since changed from personalizable characters, to characters you can relate to.


This is why I believe that The Legend Of Zelda isn't an Action-RPG like the majority states, but rather just an Action-Adventure game with little rpg traits...
You'd have to compare The Legend of Zelda : A Link to the Past and Secret of Mana to start seeing the difference between an Action-Adventure Game and an Action-RPG (As opposed to a Turned-base RPG)



As for the American made games, I don't believe that Hack & Slash games like Diablo constitute an RPG, but then again.... why wouldn't they ?.



Sorry if the message was long.. RPGs are one of my soft spots.

Actually it was popularized by Master of Magic, Age of Wonders and Warcraft 3.

Then why are you grinding for it? Logic fail here...

Mechanics largely don't matter (and shouldn't), the reason you play the game does (and how it makes you feel, i.e. the kind of experience you have when playing). If you don't like CoD games why are you playing them? With the vast amount of multiplayer shooters around it seems just silly to play one you don't like.
Anyone who doesn't want their hero slowed and then owned?

Too late!

Reply 1: No I do not only play call of duty and the soon to play battlefield 3 I'm just giving my experiance in TF2 and of course most shooters that have these grindfest

reply 2: what do you mean: "Anyone who doesn't want their hero slowed and then owned"

Call of Duty is a "stand in", it doesn't matter what game title I put in there, why are you playing shooters you dislike when there's clearly a ton of shooters that work exactly as you want?

As for #2, it means what I said, anyone who didn't want their WC3 hero to get farmed for easy XP doesn't typically run around solo. Your snarky comment about not needing units in addition to a hero was untrue even at the entry level of the ladder (and I sucked at the game, btw).