Almost any simulator game.

They could bring in playable characters, NPC's, goals, maybe some RPG elements.

The idea is much more important than execution and functionality.

Orbiter is quite mature.

Not sure about other games.

I could also add Capitalism to this list.

It is funny how this thread becomes obsolete when OP gets his signatures sorted out.

I think this will be my soundtrack for Christmas

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_tXNbDKnpk

Steam works fine preventing piracy.

You must be intelligent to design puzzles, I am not, so I never design puzzles.

I'd like to see some very realistic and serious adventure/exploration games. Biosys was in this direction, but the actual exploration part is quite limited as those who played it knows.

There is also game called Explorer for C64 which could be think as spiritual father...

Myst is also similar, but that tend to be too much biased to fantasy setting and has quite a lot puzzle solving.

Civilization 2

.

[with the controller not even plugged in.]

You guys, they designed a game that can function with the controller not even plugged in.

What if it is a cordless controller?

what's the name for 'people should make the kind of art they want and art can be anything'?

I am thinking something like "positive postmodernist"

a "story game" without fighting is an adventure game.

So does adventure game that has fighting in it, become a RPG?`

 

I was wondering exactly that until I found that life sims, pets game and management game are basically just that. They don't use the rpg tropes that is all. So an "rpg" without combat would be those games in an "rpg" like setting.

I don't think so. RPG as we generally understand it, is almost always quite focused on some sort of story. Those games you mentioned don't have story telling. At least when OP asks for non-fighting RPGs, he is not looking for The Sims.

Does your game have a website? Or somewhere it shows itself off?

I'm sorry there is none, one very wip and old screenshot of dirty hotel:

TIGsource, the RPG. Find a way to prove that games are art through long and drawn out debates. Guest starring Gilbert Timmy and Paul Eres as dungeon bosses.

After loading screen game would crash because of "semantics error"

How would you Design à RPG not based on fighting? What character stats could one use? And how would One Level up/ Advance skills without fighting?

Leveling stats can be used for ANYTHING. By default, they dont have to do anything with fighting. Fighting is just one element/objective that happens in game, and fighting skills tells how good the character is in doing it. Fighting can be replaced with anything, sex, discussion, machine tool usage, flying a helicopter, crime solving,... you name it. Skill levels only measure character ability of doing something in game.

I am already designing RPG/adventure that doesn't feature any fighting. In my game, they are used for example "appeal as politician", "skill of lying", "dating skill", etc etc.

Also just the general feeling of exploring a vast unfamiliar world that you want to see more of, and in a way that allows you (the player) to piece things together themselves, without having stuff shoved in your face.  I can't think of any game I've played lately that has done that.

I want this

You could try Noctis, thou there is no pieces to put together.

The waterboarding video he made is absolutely terrifying.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Efh_6_-tHgY

If you are referring to this, yes it is very terrifying mostly because the music.

1) Sonic The Hedgehog
2) Donkey Kong
3) Kirby (traditional suck-shit-up Kirby)
4) Megaman

Well none of these are my favorites, but I have to give credit to some Megaman musics.

1. I never played single Sonic game, because I was Nintendo-dude.
2. Too old and simple. Was boring already in 80's when I played it in those mini-arcade machines.
3. WAAAY too childish looking. I was into DD2 and Contra and etc style games.
4. Good musics, nice graphics. Way too frustrating.

I think that, yes, you should be better at a game because you know its layout, but I don't think not knowing should make you suck. If I'm running into things every ten seconds it doesn't much motivate me to replay the level until I know the location of every obstacle just to be able to play without sucking. I guess some people like that but to me it's just frustrating and makes me not want to play even more.

20 years back you really didn't have a choice. If you wanted to see the ending screen you had to suffer for it. Also when we were kids, there were a lot more time and stupid persistence in use.