So, do you think most RPGs have real roleplay?

[Erik_Twice]

I think not. I can't roleplay if I don't have any options or choices. Most RPG are completely linear and the only choice you have is combat or puzzles.

So, if you don't have any choices about your character you can't really call it roleplay. I think that most games are going to have a very low roleplay factor but in most RPG that factor is zero.

So, what do you think?

[dsheinem]

I think WRPGs, especially recent stuff like Dragon Age and Fallout 3, are great in part because they do give you so much control over your character. Granted, you still have to fight and solve puzzles, but otherwise you'd probably be looking at something like The Sims.

[Rurouni_Fencer]

Don't forget to check out games like Fable and Red Dead Redemption.. Their morality system, combined with sandbox-like gameplay make for quite the personal, decision-bearing experience.

Sure, as video gamers, when we think of "Role Playing Game" we picture Final Fantasy or Chrono Trigger. But don't forget that those games were influenced and derived from elements of old D&D tabletop games. That was 10 - 15 years ago. And honestly, there have been plenty of changes in the so called "video game RPG" genre that definitely bears little to no resemblance to the tabletops and basement games they took their inspiration from.

Look not at the entire genre for fault, but at it's modern progression..

[AppleQueso]

I think not. I can't roleplay if I don't have any options or choices. Most RPG are completely linear and the only choice you have is combat or puzzles.

So, if you don't have any choices about your character you can't really call it roleplay. I think that most games are going to have a very low roleplay factor but in most RPG that factor is zero.

So, what do you think?

Yeah if you're only talking jrpgs then sure.

JRPGs evolved directly from the Ultima series, while their western counterparts evolved directly from tabletop games like Dungeons and Dragons.

[MidnightRider]

Haven't been much of(if any at all) an RPGamer in recent years, but I agree. As long you're sticking to JRPG's, the characterization is laid out for you, because they want to tell a specific story, and you need to know who your character is ahead of time for that.

WRPG's are closer to actual roleplaying in that they generally give you moral choices that may affect the outcome of the game. Technically, it still isn't there either, as this isn't entirely far off from, say, choosing when to fight Lavos in Chrono Trigger, or if you know what to do, getting better or worse endings in Igavania, or something similar in any game with more than 1 ending.

As long as a predetermined story is set in place, no video game will ever be true roleplaying, so you just have to take video game RPG's for what they are.

[Gamerforlife]

The evolution of the RPG genre is sort of like the evolution of gaming as a whole. We created it here in the States with pen and paper rpgs like Dungeons and Dragons, but then Japan sort of took the ball and ran with it much like how we created video games but then Japan made it a part of their culture and also gave us here in the States most of our classics for many years like Super Mario Bros. Of course, many computer games over here stayed closer to the pen and paper formula it seems so it's like the genre evolved down two paths

I think it's important to note that even though "role playing game" inplies a game where you play a part, the stats and probability of combat and performing actions is key as well as well as having some control over how your character develops their abilities and statistics. Japanese rpgs have stayed true to that. Also, japanese developers have taken the choice factor out in many games when it comes to story, but still understood the actual importance OF story because they focus on it more than in other genres

What's interesting to me is that we complain about a lack of choice in what our characters do in Japanese rpgs, but in the old D&D days wasn't it really the Dungeon Master who controlled everything that happens in the story anyway? Can't we just view japanese developers as dungeon masters who are simply taking a more larger role in directing our stories?

Anyway, glad to see people acknowledge the differences between western and japanese rpgs. It's a pet peeve of mine when people don't, much like how some people won't acknowledge that fighting games and beat'em ups are different

[brunoafh]

If you play a game and assume the role of another character, and follow the character and their exploits, is that not the definition of role playing? Nearly every RPG ever made leaves you pretty much completely free. The games throw you in a world, and you build your characters and travel freely, this is the norm.

Every game is linear to a basic degree. The developers made point A and point B. Starting the game and getting to point B is ultimately your goal in the vast majority of games (nearly all of them). The label "RPG" barely holds only any real semblance to why we play RPGs anyway. The genre could be called "XYZ" and it would still mean the same thing to me. Even if you have "choices" in an RPG, it's usually only meant as a distraction. They are just rails going in different directions that the developers built to make the journey to point B more varied and less boring. These additional rails can be great fun, but the game is still just as "linear" as ever.

[blackmagepwns]

If you play a game and assume the role of another character, and follow the character and their exploits, is that not the definition of role playing? Nearly every RPG ever made leaves you pretty much completely free. The games throw you in a world, and you build your characters and travel freely, this is the norm.

Every game is linear to a basic degree. The developers made point A and point B. Starting the game and getting to point B is ultimately your goal in the vast majority of games (nearly all of them). The label "RPG" barely holds only any real semblance to why we play RPGs anyway. The genre could be called "XYZ" and it would still mean the same thing to me. Even if you have "choices" in an RPG, it's usually only meant as a distraction. They are just rails going in different directions that the developers built to make the journey to point B more varied and less boring. These additional rails can be great fun, but the game is still just as "linear" as ever.

What he said, don't be so damn picky and enjoy the fact we have video games.

[Erik_Twice]

If you play a game and assume the role of another character, and follow the character and their exploits, is that not the definition of role playing?

Just following what a character does does not make it roleplaying. Otherwise even movies would be roleplaying. You need choices and in , say, FF X all you do is telling them what attacks to use and what things to buy, it has as much roleplay as an economic simulator or chess.

Nearly every RPG ever made leaves you pretty much completely free.

In your average JRPG you are on pretty tough railroads. As I said, all you can do is tell them how to attack and what weapons to buy.

but in the old D&D days wasn't it really the Dungeon Master who controlled everything that happens in the story anyway?

Only bad DMs railroad and control everything that happens in the story. I have not played in the early days od D&D (I wasn't born!) but it seems to me that there was a bigger focus on Dungeon Crawling, so it was also pretty low on actual roleplay more often that today.

I mean, if you play Tomb of Horros or The Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan, pure dungeon crawlers, you are not really going to show your diplomatic skills and you are not going to show how much of a flirt your character is. You are playing Dungeons and Dragons but probably you didn't roleplay at all.

However even in those modules you can stop and try to roleplay, you can be shelfish and keep all the potions to yourself while taunting the other players or you can wangst without any requirement if your character works that way.

Games like Etrian Odissey are called RPG altough you don't even have those options. You just kill and loot, there's nothing resembling roleplay in those. That doesn't mean they aren't fun only that they are not roleplaying games.

[KillemallCFH]

What's interesting to me is that we complain about a lack of choice in what our characters do in Japanese rpgs, but in the old D&D days wasn't it really the Dungeon Master who controlled everything that happens in the story anyway? Can't we just view japanese developers as dungeon masters who are simply taking a more larger role in directing our stories?

The difference is that in D&D, the DM controls the over-arching story and the events that take place, but you ultimately decide what your character does. In a JRPG, when an NPC says, "Will you join our cause?," you're usually given a choice of yes and no, and 9 times out of 10 saying no does nothing and you can't actually continue the game until you say yes. In D&D, you can say yes, you can say no, you can say "yes but only under these conditions," you could walk away, or you could stab the NPC in the heart. And whichever action you choose will have a unique reaction from the DM.

That being said, I kinda prefer the JRPG way of doing it, where you're more or less just watching the story unfold with a few chances to interact with it. You get a much more coherent and developed story this way, and it puts the focus of the game on actual gameplay.