I mean yeah. Most people define genres or categories using association, and they can become a gooey mess at worst. I’ve been arguing for structured definitions for years, but it’s a lost cause. I still believe I am the only person who has a completely sane definition for “role-playing game”. But I digress, fam. ^^
Personally my first thought hearing “RPG” is the classic game with various characters, skills, level system and tons of enemies, but there’s a lot of games that don’t fit this definition that are still RPGs
I’m not sure if I want to go into the full thing because people tend to get defensive about their preconceived notions and make a big, heated argument about it. But I will say this: game genres are defined by gameplay— not by content, by visuals, by storytelling style, or by similarities with other games people assume to be in that genre.
As simply as I can put it— and hopefully not opening up a huge can of worms— I define a role-playing game as a game in which your character(s) play one of several roles, meaning “classes”— each with their own stats and abilities that play differently and support the character(s) differently. You can have a single-character game where the character can choose one or more classes, or you can have multiple characters that each have their own classes, or you can have multiple characters that can choose between their classes. That makes D&D, Pokémon, Kingdom Hearts, Dark Souls, Final Fantasy XIII, and honestly a bunch of multiplayer shooters, etc., RPGs. That does not make Zelda or the first Dragon Quest/Dragon Warrior RPGs.
So the biggest problem with humans and categorizations is that humans are highly assumptive, seeing surface-level features and defining items by those, and defining items by outward similarities with other items that they already assume to be of that category. Because of this, what a lot of people do is confuse the adventure genre— games that use exploration, puzzle-solving, and key items in order to progress— and role-playing games, which almost always are adventure games as well. D&D? Both RPG and adventure. Final Fantasy XIII? RPG but not adventure. Zelda? Adventure but not RPG. But in most cases, RPGs are also adventures; so a lot of people through association mistakenly think games with common adventure elements are simply RPGs.
I know a lot of what I’m saying is going to fly over many peoples’ heads, and they’ll go crazy in the comments. Let’s see how long I can ignore them for the sake of my own sanity…
I can imagine not considering the first Dragon Quest an RPG would create a lot of discussion, I can’t really speak for that since I haven’t played it but I guess some of the “canons” must’ve been missing since it used a password system.
Would Dark Souls count as an RPG in your definition? There’s no definite classes but you’re definitely shaping up your character to be a Warrior, Mage, and so on.
I added Dark Souls into the list before I saw this comment; because usually when I talk about this subject, I list it. I try to use variety in my examples, but I just forgot for a moment about listing Dark Souls ^^
Wikipedia is written by humans, a.k.a. non-objective people, which is why they call it “duodecimal counting” instead of “dozenal counting” and used to have Talk wars on that page about it. The irrational side won.
If a game has classes like I said before, then it’s a class-playing game, a.k.a. RPG. Something can be a roguelike but not an RPG. Also “roguelike” is a pretty dumb name for a genre and itself causes a lot of problems, but I digress.
It’s just one of many genres/subgenres that has one groundbreaking game/saga as origin and all the games that took inspiration from it, like Metroidvania or Soulslike. Just creating a new term for each of them would make initial discussions much weirder, although it would probably be clearer later on (nowadays most people that know what a Roguelike is don’t even know “Rogue” is an actual game)
I mean yeah. Most people define genres or categories using association, and they can become a gooey mess at worst. I’ve been arguing for structured definitions for years, but it’s a lost cause. I still believe I am the only person who has a completely sane definition for “role-playing game”. But I digress, fam. ^^
What’s your definition, out of curiosity?
Personally my first thought hearing “RPG” is the classic game with various characters, skills, level system and tons of enemies, but there’s a lot of games that don’t fit this definition that are still RPGs
I’m not sure if I want to go into the full thing because people tend to get defensive about their preconceived notions and make a big, heated argument about it. But I will say this: game genres are defined by gameplay— not by content, by visuals, by storytelling style, or by similarities with other games people assume to be in that genre.
As simply as I can put it— and hopefully not opening up a huge can of worms— I define a role-playing game as a game in which your character(s) play one of several roles, meaning “classes”— each with their own stats and abilities that play differently and support the character(s) differently. You can have a single-character game where the character can choose one or more classes, or you can have multiple characters that each have their own classes, or you can have multiple characters that can choose between their classes. That makes D&D, Pokémon, Kingdom Hearts, Dark Souls, Final Fantasy XIII, and honestly a bunch of multiplayer shooters, etc., RPGs. That does not make Zelda or the first Dragon Quest/Dragon Warrior RPGs.
So the biggest problem with humans and categorizations is that humans are highly assumptive, seeing surface-level features and defining items by those, and defining items by outward similarities with other items that they already assume to be of that category. Because of this, what a lot of people do is confuse the adventure genre— games that use exploration, puzzle-solving, and key items in order to progress— and role-playing games, which almost always are adventure games as well. D&D? Both RPG and adventure. Final Fantasy XIII? RPG but not adventure. Zelda? Adventure but not RPG. But in most cases, RPGs are also adventures; so a lot of people through association mistakenly think games with common adventure elements are simply RPGs.
I know a lot of what I’m saying is going to fly over many peoples’ heads, and they’ll go crazy in the comments. Let’s see how long I can ignore them for the sake of my own sanity…
I can imagine not considering the first Dragon Quest an RPG would create a lot of discussion, I can’t really speak for that since I haven’t played it but I guess some of the “canons” must’ve been missing since it used a password system.
Would Dark Souls count as an RPG in your definition? There’s no definite classes but you’re definitely shaping up your character to be a Warrior, Mage, and so on.
I added Dark Souls into the list before I saw this comment; because usually when I talk about this subject, I list it. I try to use variety in my examples, but I just forgot for a moment about listing Dark Souls ^^
Oh lol. Then yeah, I think we pretty much agree.
What about Roguelikes? Wikipedia lists it as a subgenre of RPGs but I’m not sure if I’d consider them as such.
Wikipedia is written by humans, a.k.a. non-objective people, which is why they call it “duodecimal counting” instead of “dozenal counting” and used to have Talk wars on that page about it. The irrational side won.
If a game has classes like I said before, then it’s a class-playing game, a.k.a. RPG. Something can be a roguelike but not an RPG. Also “roguelike” is a pretty dumb name for a genre and itself causes a lot of problems, but I digress.
It’s just one of many genres/subgenres that has one groundbreaking game/saga as origin and all the games that took inspiration from it, like Metroidvania or Soulslike. Just creating a new term for each of them would make initial discussions much weirder, although it would probably be clearer later on (nowadays most people that know what a Roguelike is don’t even know “Rogue” is an actual game)