Is the term "RPG" misused?

[Sir Kenneth]

Having been on the RPG wagon for around 10 years now, I have started to doubt if the term "RPG" is really fitting in most cases. "RPG" stands for Role Playing Game, but how many RPG's actually have roleplaying elements in them?

Most western developed RPGs seem to have a pretty decent dose of roleplaying elements in the game. You get to interact with other characters and make decisions, and through this process you usually influence the storyline or the world around you in some way. Japanese RPGs however usually seem to have little to no actual roleplaying elements in the gameplay. Sure sometimes you get to choose between 2 different lines for the protagonist to say, but they rarely have any actual impact on the game more than a couple of seconds into the future.

So what defines an RPG to you? Does it need to have roleplaying elements in it, or is it enough that 3 characters line up in front of a row of enemies in a turn-base battle sequence?

Discuss

 

[Mitsuki]

::Thread Moved to Rocket Town::

 

[Vladislak]

Define "role playing elements" for me.

To me, a game with role playing elements simply puts you in the role of a fictional character and has you play out his or her role. Whether you have a great deal of control over that character or just a little control is irrelevant to me, you're still using the character to fulfill his role.

And you obviously have some control over the character, even if it's just where he or she walks or what attacks he or she makes. If you didn't, it would be a movie, not a game.

So to me the term "RPG" refers to a rather wide variety of games. I don't think the term is misused.

 

[M1ghty Mous3]

Any game that allows you to upgrade your chars or level up in some way is what i consider an RPG. It also has to be fairly lengthy, or thats just me preference.

 

[Sir Kenneth]

Define "role playing elements" for me.

To me, a game with role playing elements simply puts you in the role of a fictional character and has you play out his or her role. Whether you have a great deal of control over that character or just a little control is irrelevant to me, you're still using the character to fulfill his role.

And you obviously have some control over the character, even if it's just where he or she walks or what attacks he or she makes. If you didn't, it would be a movie, not a game.

So to me the term "RPG" refers to a rather wide variety of games. I don't think the term is misused.

I will respectfully disagree and say that you need a certain amount of authonomy and freedom if you are to play out the role of a game character. If you only get to act out a 100% scripted storyline that includes little action on your behalf apart from running from A to B, and taking care of the occasional battle, then you are not really acting out the role of the character. The character's lines and and actions are already predetermined by script, so YOU are not really playing the role. Also if you look at the terminology of "roleplaying game" I dare say that it should essentially be a game where the roleplaying is the focal point of the gaming experience. Therefore I think that your definition of RPG is a bit too shallow. Just my opinion of course.

Any game that allows you to upgrade your chars or level up in some way is what i consider an RPG. It also has to be fairly lengthy, or thats just me preference.

This seem to have become the definition of an RPG as far as the Japanese RPG's goes. I understand the reasoning behind it, but I disagree with it. In traditional "pen and paper" roleplaying games, which is where the RPG has its roots, the battle system and such things was just a means to an end. The point was still to play a role and interact with your fellow players and/or characters played by the GM.

 

[Dark n Disturbed]

I completely agree that the term is misused. In my opinion, a Role Playing Game (RPG) is a game that allows you to control the actions of your characters. I think a lot of games, especially games online, call themselves MMORPG when they really aren't. Developing a character does not make it an RPG. I can develop a character on Madden all I want but it isn't going to make it an RPG. Even if I can level up that character, it isn't an RPG if the character controls his own actions. My classic view of an RPG is a game that has a battle screen allowing you to click Attack, Magic, or Item LOL. Although I know there are more types of RPG than that, it's what I think when I think of the term RPG. Plus, that really is the classic type of RPG. Now RPG has developed some, but not every Online game can call themself an MMORP or an RPG because not all of them are. Neither are half the games for Consoles that consider themself an RPG.

 

[Vladislak]

I will respectfully disagree and say that you need a certain amount of authonomy and freedom if you are to play out the role of a game character. If you only get to act out a 100% scripted storyline that includes little action on your behalf apart from running from A to B, and taking care of the occasional battle, then you are not really acting out the role of the character. The character's lines and and actions are already predetermined by script, so YOU are not really playing the role.

I would say only partaking in a battle or running from A to B is still taking on the role of a character, despite even if your character's words are predetermined, for the battle and for the running, you are in that character's role. So if the term "role play" is taken literally as playing a role, it would still be an RPG, even if it's only in those few moments in which you can control the character.

And by saying that the player would have control over "where he or she walks", I'd say that could significantly affect things in terms of freedom. What town to go to, what people to walk up to, etc, it could certainly effect things beyond just walking.
Same with combat, if you die, game over, I'd say that alters the character's actions quite a bit. He/she's dead, you've now altered the course of the game a heck of a lot.

 

[Lockhart]

i thought games like final fantasy were like... adventure or action adventure games, haha i didnt know they were roleplay games. they dont seem like a roleplay game at all. because in final fantasy you follow a story, just like when you read a book but you get to do things too like talk to people and fight but i dont thinkt hats roleplaying because you can go talk to people and fight in games like mario and donkey kong too

 

[Scarlet]

I would say only partaking in a battle or running from A to B is still taking on the role of a character, despite even if your character's words are predetermined, for the battle and for the running, you are in that character's role. So if the term "role play" is taken literally as playing a role, it would still be an RPG, even if it's only in those few moments in which you can control the character.

So pretty much every game that's out there. Okay, so I'm playing Half Life 2 running around as Gordon Freeman, I see a bunch of Zombies. I choose to either run away or fight them. That's doesn't define what a role playing game is. By your definition, that's almost every game out there.

And by saying that the player would have control over "where he or she walks", I'd say that could significantly affect things in terms of freedom. What town to go to, what people to walk up to, etc, it could certainly effect things beyond just walking.
Same with combat, if you die, game over, I'd say that alters the character's actions quite a bit. He/she's dead, you've now altered the course of the game a heck of a lot.

Not really, because in most Final Fantasy/JRPGs games when you talk to NPCs it doesn't determine your character's fate. Doesn't matter if the characters have options. The ending of the game is still the same. (Expections Chrono Trigger and Cross.) Like in Fable 2, depending on the expressions you show towards NPCs, it determines whether or not they like you. It may determine if they're going to give you a free item, raise or lower their prices, questing, marriage, and more. That's role playing.

Role playing is you as the player choosing the fate of the character. (Class, race, good or evil, where to go, etc.) In Final Fantasy, your fate is already scripted and you do not control what your characters do. (I mean in terms of their fate.) Although there are some JRPGs where you can choose the classes of your characters but it doesn't change anything.

Look up the definition of role playing. None of them fit to what you're saying. Dungeons and Dragons is the perfect example of a true role playing game. Also Fallout, The Elder Scrolls, and Might & Magic series, those are actual role playing games.

 

[Aztec Triogal]

This thread makes my dick hard. I'm not gonna lie. And I'm also not going to lie that I didn't read any of these posts except the original one.

I think it's a great question. Role playing, by definition, is when you assume the identity of another character, act, and pretend to be them. In JPRG's, you moreso follow the story of a group of characters than you do assume their identity. In WRPG's, you do sometimes actually play the role of a single person and pretend they are you.

You interact with other people in your group but you only are suppose to be "one" person out of the group of people, even if you can influence other people's opinions and decisions. You can choose what decisions you would like to make (usually a set list of options in a predetermined circumstance) but the decision is yours, nonetheless. I think your question (or point) is very valid. JRPGs are not actual role-playing experiences. I don't think the term will ever change, or that it should, but you are technically correct... and that's a good thing.