WHAT DOES IT MEAN FOR A GAME TO BE AN RPG?

Posts

Pages: first prev 123456 last
Thiamor
I assure you I'm no where NEAR as STUPID as one might think.
63
author=Radnen
I'll double post so you could see it:

I see where the contention mainly comes from. You guys are upset of my use of the word 'every'. :(

It's perhaps not every. I wished someone would have kinda suggested that. But peoples hubris - as well as my own - got in the way.

My guidelines are just that, guidelines. If you follow them you would have an RPG - albeit cookie cutter. Stray too far, and we've gotten into the realm of sub-genres and one-off's, which could still indeed be RPG's.


You mention that RPG is what you make of it. But then you go and say that in which I used Bold, as well as saying "just know that if others think you don't have an RPG, would suggest you probably don't have an RPG." Well if I think I have one then I have one. It matters not if others don't think so. You contradicted yourself quite a few times, actually. Saying one thing then going and saying something else.

The RPG Genre is, though, based on mostly what the consumer thinks of it, but also if I made one and said it is an RPG, then to me it is.
Thiamor, the idea is to find a definition that all of most of us can agree, if you think you're right, but no one agrees with you, is that a valid definition? If I think the definition of "car" is a floating object, and I think I'm right, even though everyone disagrees, then I don't think it's a good definition.
Thiamor
I assure you I'm no where NEAR as STUPID as one might think.
63
But a car will always be just that. A car. There is no, sub-anything for a car that would change what it is. There is no other way to do it without being unrealistic. This is the same as saying I'm wrong about liking RPG when someone else doesn't and that I should follow the same opinions as them.

There is no one, solid definition. The moment more than 1 way to explain something comes out, the moment 1 more person will choose different than other people.

You can try as hard as you like. But you'll have a hard time getting one solid piece to work with to get most to agree on it.

But what I was mainly trying to say was how he contradicted himself a few times.
that's exatly my point, if there is more than one definition, the idea is to get to a general consensus, not just saying "I'm right, even if everyone disagrees"
The problem is scope. If you give a broadly sweeping definition, everything fits. Every game could be called an role playing game because you're playing the role of the main character. But if you try to give a finer definition, you run the risk of excluding RPG games that meet most of the criteria without meeting them all.
author=Thiamor
You mention that RPG is what you make of it. But then you go and say that in which I used Bold, as well as saying "just know that if others think you don't have an RPG, would suggest you probably don't have an RPG." Well if I think I have one then I have one. It matters not if others don't think so. You contradicted yourself quite a few times, actually. Saying one thing then going and saying something else.


Unless I'm saying two things! :)
kentona
Your mom is a hero
20851
author=Tymyshoesuka
http://insomnia.ac/commentary/on_role-playing_games/
That was an interesting read, but man, is he full of himself or what? It was very hard to take him seriously. He also finds it unfathomable that someone can find a JRPG fun, which I find amusing.
I managed to even make a realistic racing game (Gran Turismo 2) fun with a buddy by picking the Grannymobiles and racing while making loud noises and desperately trying to sideswipe each other while moving at the speed of smell. Making games fun just needs some imagination!
Pages: first prev 123456 last