It's one of those discussions where it's better to just hit back on your browser and go enjoy the game.

People have different ideas about what an RPG is to them. To me it's a free-form open world where I can role-play in. Dice-rolls are annoying... I'm from the baldur's gate era, so I've played more than enough of those. It breaks immersion to reload a savegame because of dying to randomness. Random battles anger me, because they too break immersion for me. Turn based combat annoys me because it also breaks immersion. If a game can carry that style of combat with a strong story (read: persona 4) I'll deal with it. My definition of an RPG extends past "I rolled a dice 50 times during character creation, this is an RPG". That said... Skyrim leaves a bit to be desired in the dialogue options side of things, and have them actually mean something.

True, but increasing Health/Stamina/Magicka each level gives the bonuses that the stats used to provide, if you think about it strength governed how much damage you do in melee, well each of the melee skills already does that anyway, endurance governed stamina and carry weight, which are now covered by directly adding stamina points, intelligence and willpower dealt with magicka pool and regen, admittedly regen is now uncontrolled other than via enchantments but magicka is directly changed now, personality is pretty much covered by the speech skill, all that's unaccounted for is Agility, Speed and Luck, Luck was pretty much just a 'add a tiny amount to everything' option, so all that's really missing is agility and speed, although agility is partially covered already by the relevant skills.

I agree.

I have always believed, and always will believe, that TES are the epitome of true RPG. I believed that the first time I picked up Morrowind, and my opinion hasn't changed now with Skyrim. As far as I'm concerned, Bethesda's game model is the be all end all of RPG gaming.

Could things be improved upon? Absolutely. Are there other models out there that do specific things better? Yes. But as an entire package, I don't think there's a single game system out there that does it better than Bethesda and the last 3 Elder Scrolls games, as well as Fallout 3. The system allows for ultimately more roleplay possibilities than any other RPG I've ever played.

Add stats to any of those games and they magically become rpgs right?

Not even close. There is no choices in character progression. You are a person, and you cant choose who he is. He talks FOR you. Its not even Close to an RPG.



Yeah, they arent covered. You said it yourself.

Also making the skill take the place of an attribute (str) isnt even close to covering it. In real life, a massive guy is going to be naturally good at hockey AND boxing, wheras a smart guy is going to be naturally good at both chemestry and biology. Attributes were a way to represent the persons natural body type and now they are gone. They have not been replaced.

Compared to most every other RPG video game. Yes Skyrim is still very much an RPG.

To me.

RPG is not defined into different archtypes for me.
It's has 5 simple defining mechanics that are needed.

1. Defining the appearance.
2. Defining the abilities.
3. Defining the personality.
4. Defining the morals.
5. Defining the consequences of your actions.

Skyrim has 1 and 2, the lesser ones, but it fails at the other ones.
It has some AnC (Action and Consequence) with builds, but it doesn't that much with quests and NPC interaction, th AnC is mostly related around the abilities.

I cannot define my morals as most quests are linear, in an RPG I should be able to take on a "evil" quest and complete it in a "good" way, but as Skyrim stands it's just as Oblivion, meaning that: If I want to make a evil for teh lulz character then I need to avoid a bunch of content.

And through the simplistic dialogue (which is just an improved topic dialogue basically) I cannot define the personality of my character.

Why Skyrim is not an RPG for me is because of the same reason that Saints Row isn't an RPG.
I can choose my appearance, voice and even gestures in Saints Row along with abilities from completing challenges and activities.
But it doesn't make it an RPG for me. Skyrim is the same, just cause it has something called "skills" does not make it an RPG, just cause I can define my abilities does not make it an RPG.

No, what makes a role playing game for me is being able to define my character as much as possible.
And simply choosing different skill sets with a different appearance is not roleplaying for me.
Cause in the end I still go through the same quests in the same linear fashion and go dungeon crawl. (which is like what? 95% combat and 5% traps and puzzles?)
The only way to really define my current Orc character compared to my Bosmer character is the skillset and change in combat playstyle.
I can choose to exclude myself from quests that don't fit my characters morals, like not doing most Daedric quests if my character is a pure Talos worshipping paladin, but I think that's a flawed RPG design.

So yeah, an RPG for me requires most of those defining mechanics, I can stand being without apperance, but the other ones are crucial, and Skyrim fails to deliver on all those points.
It has dialogue, but too simplistic and not branching at all.
It has some quest choices, but the majority of quests are linear, meaning you have to lock yourself out of content depending on what your character's morals are.
It has some AnC, but it's mostly related to combat or it's way too lenient.
And most of all, the game always steers you down dungeons, whether it's through exploration on your own or the Radiant Storytelling quests or the actual quests or just overhearing a conversation from the NPC's, the game always steer you down dungeons.

Skyrim is a great dungeon crawler adventure game with a touch of RPG mechanics, but it's most certainly not in any way a true RPG.

/In my opinion. :wink_smile:

[edit]

Oh and The Sims is probably one of the best RPG franchises out there.
It has:
1. Fully customizable appearance, sure the DLC's are a crap moneymilking move but [censored] it.
2. Jobs have certain requirements you must meet, and those abilities can be improved upon.
3. The personality in the later Sims games is great, you can create so many unique variations of Simolian personalities, then it's just up to the player to think up what their actual dialogue is like.
4. You can with the traits mechanic tweak character morals to a much greater extent that fully flows on it's own.
5. And if your character messes up the other Sims will remember it and you'll have to work hard towards regaining their trust.

Sims, despite it's milking method with the expansion sets and exclusion of vanilla content, is still one of the best RPG's for unlimited roleplaying.

It is about the numbers. The numbers are vital. But you're right that these numbers don't need to be visible to the player at all.


There's a difference between hiding the numbers from the player, and getting rid of the numbers completely. Take Athletics for example. Bethesda haven't just hidden that skill from the player - they've removed it from the game. It's not possible for me to make a character who's naturally faster than other characters.


If the numbers are just hidden, but not removed then the game is still an RPG. I can understand why people would still complain though. The thing you have to appreciate is a lot of people actually like playing around with stats and carefully planning what kind of character they want to make. The character creation aspect of the game is really enjoyable to them. Sure, if they just play the game and let the character evolve naturally they may get the same end result... but they're missing out the fun of actually creating a character build beforehand and then thinking about it carefully throughout the game as they progress.


I would agree that it's the next step for RPGs looking to get closer and closer towards virtual reality (which includes TES). In a truly immersive RPG, there should be no UI at all - which includes stat sheets. But not all RPGs need to go in that direction. I think there's room for immersive action RPGs like that, as well as more traditional RPGs which keep the stat sheets, tactical combat, etc.

However thats the general problem with video games and rpgs. Defining your character is a tough one. Most Japanese rpgs, you play as a certain character, whether you like them or not; and they are still very much consider RPGs (to some people).

However I can't think of any RPGS that left you define your character other than whatever story you make up in your head. Even games like Dragon Age or mass effect with its branching conversations still end up largely the same.

At the end of the day it appears most die hard rpg fans want a fantasy life simulator and not play through a game that has a story its trying to tell.

Play Fallout 1

role play game - in its pure name tag sense it could fit anywhere, for me beth make the best rpg, damned if its an action adventure game just because im in control, ledgend of zelda or meteriod prime are action adventure games, as for action rpg i can see that fitting but if thats the case i cant think of many non action based rpg, harvest moon perhaps, well maybe thats a sim like say truck/train driver, but you defo rping in those games so are they simulqtion rpg? who the [censored] cares really i know what tho, it is a really great game.

I've played them all. And when they first came out too. I've also played table top rpgs as well.

Try playing fallout 1 today and you will see through the smoke and mirrors. While there were some funny and witty and serious lines in there at the end of the day the story was largely the same. You could bump things around differently but the outcome was largely the same. The market for rpgs in the 90s was also way different than it is today. For better or worse.


EDIT
BTW fallout one was an awesome game. Played the heck out of it. At the end of the day I just don't see a "true" rpg coming out thats going to make everyone happy. From a business stand point, it just has to make "enough" people happy.

Sims = RPG for women.

Role playing involves some level of interaction with the characters around you, that they would recognise you and respond to choices, whether they be heroic or evil (or passive).

In skyrim my character is in a social vacuum, the only interactions are those that are scripted - and even these are all linear. Look at the conversations you have with quest characters. I cant remember a single instance where I was offered a choice (even a simply binary one) that would impact the gameplay.

Don't get me wrong - I like Skyrim - it's a great action/adventure game, but there is no way in hell it is an RPG. Everyone is of course entitled to their own opinion.

Ugh, the "numbers are what make an RPG" argument.

I'm glad to see so many self declared "creative" types of gamers who totally can't think outside the box and need numbers to hold their hand and tell them what their character is. Truly sad, indeed.

:sadvaultboy: :sadvaultboy: :sadvaultboy:

Oh Willis no... I hope that never happens... I wish people would stop with the whole "It's gotta be immersive!" crap and accept that games are games, not some kind of Alt Reality Simulators.


Well in Fallout I have an easy enough time to roleplay, it's branching dialogue allows me to pick the responses most fit to my character. Sure enough there aren't a dozen choices for each branch but it has more choices than Skyrim does.
And it has multiple quest outcomes so I can choose to screw people over if I want to or truly help them.
Like, Keely in Vault 22 for example, I went down there with a character that loathes mutants (not an ex-Enclave) and it was a great opportunity for me to stab her in the back.
In REPCONN I could choose to kill off the Nightkins and crash the rockts for [censored] and giggles.
In Freeside I mocked Grecks to the point where he attacked me.
I Chose to end Tabitha's reign but also kept Raul locked up all alone in his little shed.

It is possible to design an RPG that can help you define your character in multiple ways.
Bethesda just has a thing for spreading themselves too thin over something too ambitious.

Is Skyrim a RPG? Yeah, I'd say so. An Action-RPG at least, with an emphasis on the Action part.
It does however lack most of the staple features of RPG's in general.

* Character development. While you can develop your own character with the Perk trees, there's virtually no change to NPC's around the world. They don't grow, they hardly expand their stories, they don't much change roles - all NPC's are quite static.

* No impact on actions. You can become head of various guilds, you can lead either side of the rebellion to victory, you can murder very significant persons, but none of it have any sort of impact on the game world, save perhaps a rename of the generic guards.

* Lack of options. There might be a buttload of quests, but the vast majority of them have no variation or choice. You can do them or you can ignore them, but other than that, they're all very linear. Sometimes you might get various options to respond, but they all lead to the exact same result.

* Changing/evolving world. Partly covered in the notes above, but the world is generally very static. No matter what actions you make as a player, or as time passes, there's virtually no change in the world - it's quite static.

* Roles. You might be able to play many roles, a fighter, a mage, a thief, or a mix of them all, but the game doesn't really recognize it.

Generally, I'd say Skyrim are quite good at giving the illusion of being full of options and choice, despite actually being quite linear.

Skyrim is a mix of many genres, and the RPG is one of those genres. I wouldn't say it's a predominately part though.

Some of the best times I had playing D&D growing up were sessions with no combat. All 8 of us up at 3am and a single dice has not been rolled.

Wars were averted with words.
Bonds were forged with friendship.
Enemies were made with guile.

I agree numbers do not make the RPG.

Sadly, it couldn't be any more true.



That's sixist yknow.

It's heartening to see some pen n paper dicerollers being so open minded about what makes an RPG. I always had the impression it was the crotchety old farts like us (Mudders/tabletop gamers) who were so mad about stat removal. But it turns out it's the younger opinionated players who seem to be so up in arms about Skyrim ditching it's clunky RPG aspects.

That's like saying that observing that football games are for men is sixist.

It is.

Claiming that football (proper, or the American version) are for men IS sixist.
You can argue that it's primarily watched by men, but that doesn't mean that i's FOR men.. there's quite the difference..

And this have nothing to do with the discussion of Skyrim's "RPGness"

gabriel77dan

You brought up a number of good points and please take into consideration I was also just offering my opinions. Hardly facts.

Still I know where you are coming from.

I tend to be a glass half full person though I find life more enjoyable. I take Skyrim as it is and enjoy it as Skyrim. Same for Fallout. Same for Dragon Age. Same fro Chrono Trigger. Same for Shining Force. Same for Ultima. Same for Dungeons and Dragons curse of the Azure bonds.

Do I ever play the those games and sigh and think of what they could have been? Of course! I've never come across perfection of anything in my entire life. Except my wife of course

Especially those really good games that get you going. You always want more out of them. However being interactive lines of code they can only provide you with so much.

My suggestion to everyone is take it as it is. I got a friend who played skyrim and didn't like it at all. Hes one of those "morrowind or bust" crowd.

Is he wrong? Nope.

Is he right? Nope.

He didn't like. So he played something else. And we argue about it over a good board game every Thursday night too!

IIf you like arguing points and playing games add send me a message on live and i'll try to prune my full friends list. StormbringerGT

It is..