Yes, it's this thread again. The debate about whether Skyrim is as much of an RPG as Oblivion, and in turn Morrowind and in turn Daggerfall.

But rather than debate the games themselves, I wonder at a more baseline level.
What are RPG elements?

Certainly, Skyrim has more-or-less all the same elements Oblivion had, though they aren't really visible to the player, or are condensed. An example, Intelligence only served to increase Magicka. No need for redundancy, right?

But do elements have to be visible in order to be considered genuine RPG elements? Do they also need to be manually selected for increase like they were in Oblivion? What about RPGs that automatically increase your stats for you as you level up, like the Final Fantasy series?
I'd like to hear your thoughts.

First, let's note that RPG's come in a spectrum of complexity. Stats and spreadsheets of numbers meant to define a character are not a mandatory element of an RPG, but are common in more simulationist games.

RPG's put the player into the role of a character (custom or pre-gen).
RPG's give players control over how a story unfolds. Choices that have meaning are important.
RPG's generally allow the player to control character progression.

Are there different sub-genres of RPGs? Yes. Action RPG's, FPS RPGs, etc. All are RPG's.

I'm of the opinion that character sheets and oodles of numbers for the accountants out there, are not necessary for RPG's. But an RPG will have a mechanism in place to determine the success or failure of character action, which is why numbers are so common in RPGs.

Playing cops and robbers can be chaotic.

"I got you, you're dead!"
"Nuh-huh, you missed!"

As soon as a mechanism is introduced that will determine the success/failure of actions, a simple game of cops and robbers can be considered an RPG.

My definition is very simple. RPGs are character-skill-based; first-person shooters are player-skill based.

I quite agree, and while I am one for emergent stats (Attributes and Skills to quantify a character's most innate qualities, contributing toward derived stats), I don't think their absence (or format in the case of Skyrim) necessarily makes a game any less of an RPG.

There's also the difference between a complex and a complicated/convoluted RPG. I would classify Skyrim as a complex one, where it uses simple stats that function in a neat, emergent pattern. Meanwhile, Oblivion would be convoluted; a major example being that to be a particular class you want, you have to choose totally unrelated stats or become gimped as a character - very poor design.

What about games that have a little of both?

Like the Elder Scrolls series?

I have always called Elder Scrolls a hybrid action/roleplaying series.

I won't go on a big rant, and instead I'll just say that numbers and statistics are not what makes an RPG. It's about role-playing and immersion into the game world.

There are also a few shooters that have character based stats for accuracy, speed, etc.

If someone were to ask me if Skyrim was an RPG, I would say yes.
If someone were to ask me if Skyrim was an action game, I would also say yes.

I don't really look at it as an either/or proposition.

I don't either. The main reason I like the Elder Scrolls games is because they have elements of both shooters and roleplaying games. I prefer Bethesda's games or games like Deus Ex (another hybrid) to "pure" roleplaying games like the Baldur's Gate series.

the RPG elements were alot of things, best way i can think to explain it is to point to table top.
stats were used to show how capable the character was.
skills were to show the characters talents.
the rolls were for probability.

these elements were great to take away arguments as to how strong the character really is, or how many hits will really kill him. if you say it takes 45 strength to break a door then you either meet that requirement or you dont. were the stats ever fully implemented in TES? no, they could have done so much more but tech is only going to go so far.

automatic stat increases in rpg games are okay, they dont really offer choice though. if i level up through swinging my sword maby i see that as intelligence in where to hit, or agility for dodging and timing blows better, or strength at handeling the sword better with muscles making it feel lighter. the rpg standing on which stats increased is how the player could figure that stat got better. which is a core rpg element. the stats didnt get limited to basic things until video games.

the first rpg was table top and it wasnt played by just one person, it was run by someone that set the story rules and made judgment calls. But it still needed players, and these players were limited by their minds. video game rpg are limited by whats available. if you make less available it limits the rp element more.

i never really saw the elder scrolls as action/shooterRPGs as a true openended rpg is going to have those elements anyways. saying using weapons and shooting arrows was added to rpgs with elder scrolls is like saying DnD everybody just stood around and talked enemies to death. action has been in rpgs it was just difficult to implement.

should the statistical elements be visable? yes until tech can find a way to totally show how strong i am, keep track of what options my intelligence can give me, ect. the way elder scrolls has used them the stats could be done visually, they way they could do them i have no idea how tech could really catch up to that short of an AI equal to a human.

the elder scrolls were the best attempt at making table top into a video game, i think they have started to worry more about making graphics better and game play more pick up and play then adding more of the table top into the video game world. i know a total conversion of table top to video games is impossible right now, but taking a video game that used alot of it to make its games and then taking more of it away while saying it has more is outright wrong. im oppesed to any video game saying it delivers more and really delivering less and less.