next »

[C.A. Sinner]

From what I've heard about Dwarf Fortress's Adventure Mode, it's quite close to what you're describing (lots of freedom, very few pre-made scenarios, a reactive world).

DF Adventure mode isn't ALL that reactive at the moment though that's going to change in a big way with the next update out due this or next month.

Maybe even closer than a lot of table-top RPGs, which also direct you through linear storylines.

I've played RPG sessions that were almost 100% pure improv. The linearity of a pen and paper RPG is up to the DM.

I don't know, is it useful to say that we don't have "true" RPGs? What's a "true" fighting game? Or a "true" platformer? Are we defining these genres by what they imply semantically, or is it based more on convention?

I personally think all the discussion about RPG being a "misnomer" is kinda pointless because genre names don't have to be descriptive (Rock music is a misnomer because it's not actually made with rocks derp derp).

BUT the problem with the (C)RPG genre is that there isn't a universally agreed on definition of it. We know what a "true" platformer and a "true" fighting game are (i.e. we can identify their core qualities) but we don't really know what a "true" RPG is.

I came across a flowchart recently (y'know the kind Gimmy likes to post) purporting to describe "every RPG ever" that was really just a listing of JRPG cliches. When someone says "I like RPGs," they could mean anything from Gothic to Dragon Quest to Diablo, all very dissimilar games.

[Paul Eres]

It's rare that RPG's push game mechanics anywhere new, and if they do, they tend to not be considered RPGs anymore.

i don't see this as true at all -- plenty of rpgs each year innovate the rpg game mechanics drastically, and still fall within the boundaries of what is considered a rpg. it's not like they're all using the standard d&d ruleset, they invent new rulesets and new systems for practically every single rpg

[starsrift]

I think the only true role-playing game is this thing I like to call "real life."

I wanna reroll my stats.

[David Bailey]

The definition of 'role-playing game' was established back when most games featured a dot rolling across the screen eating other dots. The distinction was easier to identify. These days, it's a bit more difficult to define if only because most games live up to the traditional definition of role playing game today in some capacity - most games feature the user living out some role in the avatar. The best way to define a role-playing game is how the game is completed and how you progress through its obstacles. 

[Craig Stern]

So do Bastion, Desktop Dungeons, Realm of the Mad God.

Action RPG; puzzle game; shooter. As stated in the article.

[Ooops]

I think the only true role-playing game is this thing I like to call "real life."

I wanna reroll my stats.

 

[iffi]

I think the only true role-playing game is this thing I like to call "real life."

I wanna reroll my stats.

Too bad, save/stats scumming is actively prevented here.

[brog]

Action RPG; puzzle game; shooter. As stated in the article.

And Frozen Synapse is definitely a tactics game.  My attempt at constructive contribution has failed.

[st33d]

Desktop Dungeons, although everyone says it is, is not really a puzzle game in my opinion. There's luck involved: you have to pick an unexplored area to investigate. If it was a puzzle, there would be no fog of war. There would always be a perfect solution and if you took the time to think about it, you would reach that solution.

To be brutal, I doubt a full RPG would get proper play time for the IGF.

[Craig Stern]

That's a fair argument. I realize that RotMG and DD are borderline cases, which is why I hedged in the article and ran the numbers both from a "they count as RPGs" standpoint and a "they do not count" standpoint.

I could argue the "they aren't" side more forcefully here, but it seems like a side issue.

[cynicalsandel]

As much as I love RPGs, especially JRPGs, I don't really mind that many don't win the IGF. I feel that if you make an RPG, you have to realize that quite a few people who play indie games won't want to play it or won't like it. I feel like puzzle games and platformers are more popular because they are more inclusive than other genres, and I don't see that changing.

[Glaiel-Gamer]

There's no storytelling category in the IGF. It's been suggested a lot, I'm unsure why it hasn't been added yet. I'm not sure most RPGs would really be able to qualify for any of the other categories unless they do something different enough to distinguish themselves from a genre that's been extremely well established since the NES final fantasy games.

And the ones that do break the mold a bit (DD, rotmg), or have extremely polished art or music, do tend to get some recognition in the IGF.

There's gonna be an argument about "well what about platformers? that's a well established genre with a bunch of formulaic games in it too! and they get IGF!"

Here are the platformers in this year's main IGF

FEZ
Spelunky
Gunpoint
Walking Mars
Beat Sneak Bandit
Way

I just picked every game that was side view and had shit moving on it to be as all encompassing as possible. Most of these I was like in my head tagging them as [sorta-kinda not really].

FEZ & Spelunky, no comment, they're the "most traditional" of the ones listed here.
Gunpoint, I don't know what it is but it looks more like a puzzle game than a platformer?
Walking Mars is an ecosystem simulator I believe.
Beat Sneak Bandit is... I don't know the trailer for that didn't really tell me what the game was and I didn't play it, looked kinda puzzley to me.
Way is a platformer but was nominated because of its interesting use of limited communication.

(sidenote: is To The Moon an RPG? I never played it)

[hanako]

To The Moon is built in RPG maker but it has none of the usual key elements of RPGs. There's no character customisation of any sort. You move from point to point reading the story and solving small puzzles in order to proceed; it's an adventure game.

[Glaiel-Gamer]

To The Moon is built in RPG maker but it has none of the usual key elements of RPGs. There's no character customisation of any sort. You move from point to point reading the story and solving small puzzles in order to proceed; it's an adventure game.

Yeah, I'd probably consider that RPG-ish enough.

I think the problem is you're (people in general, not you hanako) defining RPG too narrowly. If you defined Platformer very narrowly (linear sidescrolling game with collectibles where mastering the jump mechanics is the core of the game), there could be equal arguments for them being underrepresented (super meat boy being the only one I can remember from the past 3 years, possibly spelunky also)

[AndySchatz]

Have I missed the post in this discussion about RPGs where specific RPGs were mentioned that were egregiously overlooked?

Doing statistical analysis on such a small data set (and I'm not talking about all games submitted, but all GREAT games that were submitted) seems a little pointless.  Discussing the merits of individual games would be a better way to show that the IGF has some sort of inherent bias against RPGs.

Here, I'll even do it for you!   FTL.

EDIT: As implied above, it's also possible that the award categories don't skew towards RPG.  If there were a narrative award (as I've been pushing for for years!) I suspect we'd see a number of RPGs being nominated.

Also, btw DOFUS was mentioned earlier as only getting a Visual Arts nom, it also was a Grand Prize nom in 2006.  Strange Adventures in Inifinite Space was a short-form Rogue-like/Strategy-RPG in 2006, it was nominated for the Grand Prize and won for Audio.  One COULD also define Aquaria as an RPG, broadly. While there may be some minor underlying bias against certain genres, I don't think it's systemic nor do I think it's really even statistically significant.

EDIT #2: and to make one last little point: I also think it's unwise to try to argue that the number of games submitted in a genre should be statistically similar to the number of games that win from a genre.  That's like saying that because 30% of Hollywood movies are action movies, 30% of Oscars (across all categories) should go to Action movies.  I do understand that we each have predilections towards certain genres (I particularly like Strategy games, RPGs, multiplayer game, "art games", and slow-paced action games, I also place high value on story and atmosphere), and so it's disappointing when games in our favorite genres aren't recognized.  I also see danger in the possibility that the juries remain too static from year to year (thus rewarding the same types of things consistently), but in the past couple years it doesn't seem like people are really unhappy with the finalist selections as a whole.