Mr Happy
Scholar
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2006
- Messages
- 574
I mean, Jesus. Let us start from the hopelessly broad definition that RPGs are about defining a character or party, because this umbrellas both stats and character development as well as gameplay-oriented “choice and consequence.” Your standard strategy game or squad tactical game has got stats covered. You typically select some sort of state or team or whatever with particular characteristics or attributes compared to your other options. You generally develop certain characteristics of your nation (etc.) exclusive of others through research, training, recruitment, and in-game choices. Bam, character creation and development covered. Often with at least as many stats as your average RPG. Of course in some strategy games you can become (or even start as) as jack of all trades, but same with fucking Morrowind. Condense your nation into a character or party, throw some mediocrely written dialog on top of your diplomacy system and you have a solid CRPG.
But the gameworld of competing nations/factions (or even just two, you and the enemy) with various internal measures of health (wealth/economy, manpower, stability, size, etc) that strategy games typically present the player provides a far superior mechanism for the playing out of “choice and consequence” than is just about ever the case in an RPG. Strategy gameworlds allow for different approaches to victory (strategically, and some times with a choice between combat and other approaches), provide non linear narratives, react to your strategic and developmental choices, and in general provide a dynamic arena for gameplay. In an RPG, the only arena even approaching level of responsiveness to character traits is combat, which usually sucks anyway. Fallout’s variety in ending slides pales in comparison to the various possible states of the world even at the end of a Total War game. Consequences to choices are substantive in strategy games, not superficial, and can profoundly affect how the game plays out, instead of meriting a brief and inconsequential mention in dialog. Many strategy games provide a far better system for defining a character than RPGs, and that isn’t even their goal, they’re just attempting to provide some fun strategic gameplay. Strategies beat RPGs at their own game without even trying.
I don’t even know why we keep this site dedicated to RPGs anymore, we should switch to covering strategy games exclusively, because they align far better with what we claim to be our interests. Maybe rename the site something like “Tacticular Cancer,” as a nod to one of the more serious pathologies afflicting our age group.
But the gameworld of competing nations/factions (or even just two, you and the enemy) with various internal measures of health (wealth/economy, manpower, stability, size, etc) that strategy games typically present the player provides a far superior mechanism for the playing out of “choice and consequence” than is just about ever the case in an RPG. Strategy gameworlds allow for different approaches to victory (strategically, and some times with a choice between combat and other approaches), provide non linear narratives, react to your strategic and developmental choices, and in general provide a dynamic arena for gameplay. In an RPG, the only arena even approaching level of responsiveness to character traits is combat, which usually sucks anyway. Fallout’s variety in ending slides pales in comparison to the various possible states of the world even at the end of a Total War game. Consequences to choices are substantive in strategy games, not superficial, and can profoundly affect how the game plays out, instead of meriting a brief and inconsequential mention in dialog. Many strategy games provide a far better system for defining a character than RPGs, and that isn’t even their goal, they’re just attempting to provide some fun strategic gameplay. Strategies beat RPGs at their own game without even trying.
I don’t even know why we keep this site dedicated to RPGs anymore, we should switch to covering strategy games exclusively, because they align far better with what we claim to be our interests. Maybe rename the site something like “Tacticular Cancer,” as a nod to one of the more serious pathologies afflicting our age group.