On Defining CRPG, parameters overlooked.

[Gahbreeil]

I found it to be interesting although written in broken english. The grammar and punctuation is wrong. And I've liked the part about the ants. It's true it's pure genius that we can think. And continuing with the ants, just above, it's true that it allows us to esentially see the thought of someone and that we can affect it. A character of our own making. It's like living out a dream of being safe from harm and being able to defend others in my example. And doing things that we can't do in ordinary life. Yet coming back to the point, it's fun to see the thought of a character and affect it as if it was the player. Or be someone completely different.
I wanted to say I'm guessing you were talking about how amazing it is that PCs allow to view AI working. Because the characters esentially have minds?

 

[InSight]

It's true it's pure genius that we can think. And continuing with the ants, just above, it's true that it allows us to esentially see the thought of someone and that we can affect it. A character of our own making. It's like living out a dream of being safe from harm and being able to defend others in my example. And doing things that we can't do in ordinary life. Yet coming back to the point, it's fun to see the thought of a character and affect it as if it was the player. Or be someone completely different.

I'm surprised that you could respond/comprehend/fathom in such a way despite the naivety you displayed in your thread https://rpgcodex.net/forums/threads/the-future-of-role-playing-games.137130/. Now I'm compelled to reread it and share my input.

I wanted to say I'm guessing you were talking about how amazing it is that PCs allow to view AI working. Because the characters esentially have minds?

The error here is that you used player character instead of player. If characters had minds they would not behave in the way they do.

Even if a game was in First Person your PC isnt the the one capable of seeing. Further that you do not see with your eyes but with your brain. the eyes only sense and send the info/data/frequencies for your brain to decode it into image/vision/sight.

"Current understanding is that the 6 to 7 million cones can be divided into "red" cones (64%), "green" cones (32%), and "blue" cones (2%) based on measured response curves. They provide the eye's color sensitivity. The green and red cones are concentrated in the fovea centralis . The "blue" cones have the highest sensitivity and are mostly found outside the fovea, leading to some distinctions in the eye's blue perception." http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/vision/rodcone.html

Despite how little blue cones we have and their placement, if you would look at a blue wall you would not see bits of blue.

Take the above and consider the blind spot of the eye which is more of a cobweb of blood veins. So much of your sight/vision/seeing is a simulation. (compare the vision system of pigeons on why they tilt head forward when they walk.)

The amazement should be that a developers/craftsmen/creators have designed/placed/coded these characters in such a way that when viewed/interacted/decoded theu would stimulate the neurons in brain associated with characters. Based on my application of what i read from the book "On intelligence" by Jeff Hawkins
From biological stand point according to the brain they are Real when they are not.

In a brief snip of interview from a documentary i cant remember with a Dalai Lama on whether a computer is conscious or not
his answer was if you think it conscious than it is.
Following that they may have minds but only these that you impart on them. As if you took spark of your breath and breathed life to them. Now what that might hint on?

 

[InSight]

An RPG does not need a wall of text to define it.

It is the game that allows and supports the fullfillment of the statistical character within the confines of the chosen setting.

In short.

Take for example "if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you." type of philosophical sayings/quote how did they
happen/manifested/born? a book can have hundreds of pages. have the quote/definition been written as the first thing and then
expended on from there or the quoted formed/pop up somewhere in the bulk/middle/end of the book?

further examples:
-based on the fact that their is gold in every rock. it is simple so small you cant see/detect/sense it with your eyes. now for a gold
nugget to be visible, would you not require a mountain?
-or if we associate DEFINE with REFINE as we do with iron ores, and iron ores are not mined in their pure form, the
oxygen/water/impurities make that too brittle to use for tool craft/making/shaping. and when you do convert/refine/separate the
impurities you go from iron ore>iron>steel>Damascus depending on the level of purification. Than take a step back and take a
granter/greater/farther view and compare the size of the forge/smithy/ factory required to achieve such results.
-Another member of the codex who's name i cant recall , it is who used to have the red haired mafiosi/crime boss avatar of
wasteland (changed it to a red haired woman from what last i seen), also the author/start of the "rate the last movie you have seen"(or something along these lines) in the codex public library(now hidden for quite a time). And in a thread discussing Game of throne, he mention the following
"when i was a child i thought
to be creative you need to just sit and imagine staff.
now as an adult
to be creative you sit and read 1000 times until you notice a pattern" from how well my memory recollected.

So while it is not limited to as in text=form. The better form of info would be the experience for it encompass/combines/represent in multitude of
forms such as sound, image(1 picture is worth 1000 of words), motion and more. But until the day humanity would communicate
telepathically and thus convey all the info/experience/insight smoothly...

Based on the above:
The probability that loads of text/examples IS required to DEFINE something(to convert it into simple) more often rather/than not.
(or at least a Fundamental process of it.)

Also compare your reply versus mine, what example/explanation/reason have you provided to support/reinforce/ground your claim
and place it on the Use-more/full over Use-less scale.
Take what i provided and May it be of Use.
(in-contrast to healing medicine in fallout 2 you given by the village shaman.
If:
harm>need heal
no harm>no heal =May it be of no use
Than:
May it be of use= use>improvement
No use>no improvement)

If it was not required your definition would not have been blow apart like straw/leafs/petals(few lines over many per
form/construction) so easily as https://rpgcodex.net/forums/members/luj1.21299/ did.

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

there are sports and racing games which could fit your criteria.

i wished you would provided example because despite how easily for the mind to create it, there need something that exist in our
physical realm for even these who know-less/novices/less experienced to refer to.
how about Road Rage, would it fit the bil?

you forgot to say "combat simulation" as this is the root of TTRPG and wargaming CRPGs should be computer adaptations of TTRPGs. the problem is they rarely are.

IF you would take Table Top Role playing a game you would as description than all that would require is a table and at least two
persons (with the addition there can be changes it the roles/dynamics and like wise changes/dynamics in the outcomes) between them to further to reinforce/emphasis/highlight the "Role Play". This makes it distinct "combat simulation" and other table top games (monopoly, 1 role type). From what i been told/read/imagine the "combat simulation" is hassle(as in effective use of time spend per action) in the TTRPG. what do you do most of the time while playing? talking no? if not that remember that chess is too a combat simulation and thus even a greater root and core but not for the RPG(although even chess does portray some form/degree/varies of dialog, either i can predict your move/read your move as if i read your thoughts/predict based on the placement of figure or you mine until a tie/draw/repetition or checkmate is accomplished).

CRPGs should be computer adaptations of TTRPGs. the problem is they rarely are.

Even on the rare cases they are, if you do the math/calculation/compression you will find that RPG is still a small/minor/micro amount. Popamule/nerd commando would supporting such claim based on one of his pafthfinder kingmaker videos.

 

[luj1]

Character elements without combat don't auto translate to RPG.

 

[InSight]

Thank you for the examples but i assume other reader would appreciate if you would have included their names.

Character elements without combat don't auto translate to RPG.

What are the character elements? with examples.
I can claim that:
Character elements without combat auto translate to RPG.
How would a reader determine which one is truth/correct/valid providing all factors are equal (if they have not played a single rpg/crpg in the life).

But you would be more correct if you typed.
Character elements without combat don't auto translate to CRPG

( That is still without knowing exactly/guessing/estimating what Character elements are)

These are impactful such as in M16 and F16 one is a rifle the other is fighter aircraft, 1 difference in letter and colossal difference in money. And the legal system make great importance of such differences based on a example chapters of the book "Its Not The Law" by
Wayne Frank Barbuto.

 

[Hag]

InSight
If you're serious about what you are writing, you may want to read the Philosophical Investigations by Wittgenstein.
You may also want to stop whatever shit you're smoking, but that's up to you man. Start with Wittgenstein.

 

[*-*/\--/\~]

How do you make scrambled eggs?

He follows his own unique recipe, but gets his balls stuck in the oven door by the time he reaches it's third page.

 

[InSight]

Continued from here:https://rpgcodex.net/forums/threads/the-future-of-role-playing-games.137130/page-7#post-7174937

Combat, exploration, and character progression/customization are all integral elements to the RPG genre; interactive storytelling is not, and an interactive story-telling game lacking combat, exploration, and character elements is far removed from being an RPG.

why are they integral? It is not enough to simply state in one thing without explaining. that is why I requested to elaborate( all you did is show an old video game menu), with example of where they are integral and example of a game where they are not, to compare/contrast. What are the character elements? how is interactive story-telling not an integral to rpg? most stories mentioned usually include characters some of them change(thus dynamic) in personality such as Achilles(from peaceful to raging/grieving) in the Iliad, but the outcome of the story doesn't change regardless of how many times you read in contrast to video games where it can change.

consider the following allegory:

Take the doctor as the role/function of the healer who usually wears a lab coat. Is the lab coat integral to the healer?
take a men who wears the lab coat but does not treat or heal patient or demonstrate any knowledge procedure or tools
and compare it to

a men without the coat but treats and heal patients and demonstrate the knowledge/skill required. Are cloth integral to a men? my answer is no.(can you even imagine a cloth wearing a men.) a men can wear cloth but a cloth cannot wear a men thus is not integral( integral -necessary to the completeness of the whole. )​

​

Then why it is when we take combat, exploration character progression/customization and apply them to other genres like cloths and they would fit just fine.

such as:

• Castelvania series Bloodstained its has exploration, character progression(level ups),customization(skill, equipment's) combat a plenty. but at its core it belongs to action genre.

• In games like 4x such endless legend units rank up which allows you to customize your units.(explore,expend,exploit,exterminate)

• in RTS Starcraft exploration(unraveling fog of war, looking for resources, the enemy base), plenty of combat and each units can be characterized by its appearance, function, what upgrades you chose thus customizing, the zealot leap attack upgrade in starcraft 2) Some Command & Conquer units have rank up(level up), Jurasic wars if memory serves elaborate stats, levels represented by hp bar color, and customization through equipment(weapons items)

• In fighting game genre ( street fight,soul caliber ect) you too explore the moveset of characters, study their combinations and study the opponent and analyze the outcome of the previous round. all are a form of exploration. Soul caliber 6 has character customization

Fighting game have combat, exploration(both in ABUNDANCE) and character elements(you have yet to explain it)/character progression/customization(plenty of the latest fighter offer a lot of visual customization but customization none the less) yet are far removed from being an RPG.

All forms of exploration are integral to all video games. How than they can be integral to rpg thus defining it, makes it unique to it? (if all 3 are required Combat, exploration, and character progression/customization)

also compare
Role-playing games are games in which players assume the roles of fictional characters and collaboratively create stories. Players determine the actions of their characters based on their characterization, and the actions succeed or fail according to a system of rules and guidelines. Within the rules, players can improvise freely; their choices shape the direction and outcome of the games.

from the Encyclopadia Britannica

vs your

"Combat, exploration, and character progression/customization are all integral elements to the RPG genre; interactive storytelling is not, and an interactive story-telling game lacking combat, exploration, and character elements is far removed from being an RPG."
Definitions

Spoiler

elaborate

Spoiler

elaborate
e•lab•o•rate i-lab'?r-it?

adj.
Planned or executed with painstaking attention to numerous parts or details.
adj.
Intricate and rich in detail.
intransitive verb
To work out with care and detail; develop thoroughly.

integral

Spoiler

integral
[ in-ti-gruhl, in-teg-ruhl ]
See synonyms for: integral / integrals / integrality on Thesaurus.com
adjective
1of, relating to, or belonging as a part of the whole; constituent or component: integral parts.
2necessary to the completeness of the whole: This point is integral to his plan.
3consisting or composed of parts that together constitute a whole.
4entire; complete; whole: the integral works of a writer.
dictionary.com/

interactive

Spoiler

interactive
[ in-ter-ak-tiv ]
See synonyms for interactive on Thesaurus.com
adjective
acting one upon or with the other.
of or relating to a two-way system of electronic communications, as by means of television or computer: interactive communications between families using two-way cable television.
(of a computer program or system) interacting with a human user, often in a conversational way, to obtain data or commands and to give immediate results or updated information:

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
An to your question "( )do you even rpg?" i assume you meant bro do you even role play?
in CRPG yes but most of roles you are (except CRPG in First Person view such as vampire bloodlines) as Ventidius put it best

I typically play the role of an invisible, omnipresent, telepathic tactician whose squad of slaves each plays the role of a different type of murder machine.

If you mean in the Table top variant. except the few short DnD session of 2-3 players (contrast to the optimal 7-6 players) decades ago, no.

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

classifying d*sco communism as an RPG has led directly to this thread

Actually it is the info provided by Zed duke of banville of a Gary Gygax's interview in which he took the RPG term from psychology. That made me realize/aware/accept that their is indeed a deeper root than its Table Top War gaming origin.

 

[EldarEldrad]

What a shitty/dumb/retarded thread/OP

 

[Devastator]

I refuse to communicate with people that can’t be bothered to use basic grammar and structure.

Go here, OP: https://writingcenter.uagc.edu/grammar-punctuation.

 

[Nifft Batuff]

 

[Ol' Willy]

InSight if you want autistic genre-talk, I'm in. Because I've already stated my point earlier, we'll start from here:

What is an RPG? The favourite RPG Codex question. But the answer is simple. RPG is a Role-Playing Game, danke schön, Captain Obvious. But what is a Role-Playing?

A lot of people confuse Roleplaying and LARPing. Like, "I play a good character, so I tend to do good thing and don't lie to people". That's LARPing, my friends. You can LARP like this in any given game. Even in Doom. Like, "My Doomguy was raised on farm, where his father taught him how to shoot with his old Remington. Because of this I tend to use shotguns most of the time. And, being a farmboy, my Doomguy dislikes Energy weapons.". Entirely possible.

Roleplaying presumes indirect interaction of player with the gameworld through the medium of player character. That is, games with direct interaction have a hard time being proper RPGs: it's not your character, it's you and your skill. It's you who controls movement and aiming directly in any given FPS, so it's your fault and lack of skill on your side if you miss or fail to dodge the incoming attack. The character in any game with direct control is your "puppet", totally depending on your skill. In RPG, it's your character who aims and shoots, and any miss is lack of skill on your character's side. That's why isometric perspective with indirect controls is the best medium for a RPG game. Though, FPS and third-person games where skills affects your controls to a greater degree could be described as RPGs (see Deus Ex). Also, now you can see why minigames have no place in RPGs: they test player skill, not the character's. While games with direct control put player at the position of "doer", games with indirect controls put player the level above - at the position of "choicer".

That's roleplaying. The columns, on which the roleplaying lies are:

1) Player character as indirect medium between the player and gameworld.
2) Outcome depends more on character skills and less on player' skill. Player chooses, character does.
3) There should be a lot of such interactions, obviously.
4) And choice, after all. Otherwise, it would be "Predetermined character playing game".

Everything else falls into these categories. You have dialogue: lines, that your character can come up with. Maybe you, player, know something, but you can say it because your character doesn't know this. Interactions with objects: maybe you, player, know how to fix three-phased electrical motors, but your character doesn't have Repair skill and thus fails. Etc.

 

[InSight]

Is fallout 2 a parameter?

Since you did not specify the purpose of the parameter; what should it measure and compare to,
the question can be answered as yes 50% of the time and no for the other 50%.

The grand answer is no
Because fallout 1 came before fallout 2(no fallout 1=no fallout 2), it is fallout(1997) that should be the parameter.

inner scale:

• " That is, a parameter is an element of a system that is useful, or critical, when identifying the system, or whenevaluating its performance, status, condition, etc."

How well fallout 2 perform compare to fallout? does it share the same rules/mechanics/cogs?

outer scale:

• "generally, is any characteristic that can help in defining or classifying a particular system (meaning an event, project, object, situation,"

Does it have jump suits,having to save your home, the 50's idea of sci-f, super mutants, post nuclear disaster or the like .
You look at a game from screenshot and immediately identify it.

You can use it to measure the likeness of other games based on it such Atom RPG(2018), Underrail(2015).

 

[InSight]

What a shitty/dumb/retarded thread/OP

Thank you for mimicking me. It would have been better if you imitated the essential/inner/seed aspects of my writing such:

as More explanation, More consideration More examples.

Beware of using such negative combinations for you have made 3x times the damage to yourself. The body is 70% and the first place such words/thoughts/vibrations go trough is your body.

Based on dr Emoto Masaru

Thank you for reminding me to take caution as well.


perhaps you would require a read. https://archive.org/details/thesecretlifeofwaterbymasaruemoto2003/page/n15/mode/2up
instead.
Perhaps you should have used what a silly/clumsy/tedius thread/op instead.

 

[InSight]

Spoiler

What is an RPG? The favourite RPG Codex question. But the answer is simple. RPG is a Role-Playing Game, danke schön, Captain Obvious. But what is a Role-Playing?

A lot of people confuse Roleplaying and LARPing. Like, "I play a good character, so I tend to do good thing and don't lie to people". That's LARPing, my friends. You can LARP like this in any given game. Even in Doom. Like, "My Doomguy was raised on farm, where his father taught him how to shoot with his old Remington. Because of this I tend to use shotguns most of the time. And, being a farmboy, my Doomguy dislikes Energy weapons.". Entirely possible.

Roleplaying presumes indirect interaction of player with the gameworld through the medium of player character. That is, games with direct interaction have a hard time being proper RPGs: it's not your character, it's you and your skill. It's you who controls movement and aiming directly in any given FPS, so it's your fault and lack of skill on your side if you miss or fail to dodge the incoming attack. The character in any game with direct control is your "puppet", totally depending on your skill. In RPG, it's your character who aims and shoots, and any miss is lack of skill on your character's side. That's why isometric perspective with indirect controls is the best medium for a RPG game. Though, FPS and third-person games where skills affects your controls to a greater degree could be described as RPGs (see Deus Ex). Also, now you can see why minigames have no place in RPGs: they test player skill, not the character's. While games with direct control put player at the position of "doer", games with indirect controls put player the level above - at the position of "choicer".

That's roleplaying. The columns, on which the roleplaying lies are:

1) Player character as indirect medium between the player and gameworld.
2) Outcome depends more on character skills and less on player' skill. Player chooses, character does.
3) There should be a lot of such interactions, obviously.
4) And choice, after all. Otherwise, it would be "Predetermined character playing game".

Everything else falls into these categories. You have dialogue: lines, that your character can come up with. Maybe you, player, know something, but you can say it because your character doesn't know this. Interactions with objects: maybe you, player, know how to fix three-phased electrical motors, but your character doesn't have Repair skill and thus fails. Etc.

Wonderful I expect golden comments based on the avatar you use.
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Live Action role playing
How people even confuse between the two? visually all ones as to do is imagine is a group in passive position(sitting) for RPG at least of Table Top variant and imagine the "kid in costumes throwing bags saying and fireball at a larger dude wearing monster costume" video. The key difference is the word game.
movies -out come set in stone. Romeo will always dies in the script.
games- out come not set in stone. the first action in side scroll can be move right/left/jump or shot depending on the game but it allows for each start to be different and so its end(at least the type of cant or can).

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Even in Doom. Like, "My Doomguy was raised on farm, where his father taught him how to shoot with his old Remington. Because of this I tend to use shotguns most of the time. And, being a farmboy, my Doomguy dislikes Energy weapons."
Entirely possible.

All is possible in our world(base on Quantum superposition) but how is it possible in the Game World? what mechanics/rules there are that allows, that potray, that react to "doomguy dislikes energy weapons because he was raised on the farm." The world portrayed in doom does not show a farm, if in doomworld a farm does not exist from the game logic/percepctive/point of view.
How then can Doomguy claim/prove/show he was raised on a farm if the other party does not simulates its for him.
You need the other side of the coin for head or tails, two legs in odrer to walk, and two(better if 3) players for different roles in RPG.
From pictures I see LARP does provide such conditions.

In practice the actions, constant visuals, sounds ,simulation of stress, searching for the key and door would distract you from the LARPing if you play the game properly. Unless you use a super substance that trancends these limits or some form of Toxoplasma gondii in your brain that shall create the other player for you.
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
When you roleplay you imitate , you deceive, create an illusion And for that to happen you require the other party.
That is why multiplayer is a fundamental impotence, core aspect in RPG. The actors needs the audience to judge, to gauge to see the results/effects/impacts of his acting. (the other side of the coin.) unless he is a master of the craft and can predict the results beforehand 99% of the time.
These that do deceive them self must have supreme deception skill but how many examples can you give me of that? Is the snake not immune to its own poison?
(raptor)

Even in single player CRPG, the makers of the game placed their character reaction in advanced by anticipating and portraying it usually through dialog response and in some cases either they decide to attack you or not or even leave your party if they were its members. 3 variations.
examples: Pallegina if you destroy households Piller of Eternity 2, Baldurs gate 2 if you ignore retaking of the castle.

In contrast to Doom (1993) where they see you they attack you always. 1 constant.
One genre provides Veriations/change/dynamics in behaviour the other doesnt or in fixed manner. you cant kill the fat programmer in F.E.A.R the laws of bullets dont apply in his case.

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Roleplaying presumes indirect interaction of player with the gameworld through the medium of player character.

Majority of the actions are quite direct(direct as obvious) so would the interactions. you attack then you either miss or hit. the results show themself in seconds. exception would be the witcher series where the result of the events/quest/missions would show up in later chapter (minutes to hours of play time) but such events are few.

3) There should be a lot of such interactions, obviously.

Agreed when applied to points 1 and 4.

 

[InSight]

InSight
If you're serious about what you are writing, you may want to read the Philosophical Investigations by Wittgenstein.

Thank you.
If circumstances allow it I will.

You may also want to stop whatever shit you're smoking, but that's up to you man.

What I'm on is far more lasting then smoke. It would be a sacrilege to refer to it as such.
You too would be on it if you were aware of it but that is for a future thread in a later date, to be continued...[/QUOTE]

 

[gurugeorge]

To Summarize/Compress/Refine
-Multiplayer and thus human player(and their like)
-Not factoring/using Stats(for all electronic games are based on stats, numbers 0's and 1' even physical sport game such
as Football (the counting of score/goals).
-The multitude/Variety of roles from the pc and the npc, the warrior, the shopkeeper, the thief the healer, the farmer, the
lower animals and higher beings ect.
-The dynamics betwen the roles, that they are interchangeable, their behavior from friend or foe, good to evil and vise
versa.
-The multitude/Vareiety of action/interactions/reaction betwen the above two(roles and behaviours) on micro(characters,
objects) and macro(factions,settings, world.)

Remember/Know that just as we don't live in a vacuum, that one stands on two legs, and that at least three points are
required to compare for how else we would determine which of two equal/same sized object in outer-space would be the
higher or how far they are apart without a 3rd point of reference, so is it that one should not define things based on one
factor or less than three (despite what most poster do based on their one liner/short posts). Which is the most significant
among them is another question which too can be measured an answered.

I agree with the poster above who says you're wrong about stats (stats are simulations of your character's ceiling potential in various dimensions, that's something you're given, that you don't create through any form of interaction, that you can only change - if at all - with difficulty, slowly, over time, just like in real life). As another poster said, you also can't ignore the genetic lineage from wargames to TTRPGs to CRPGs - combat is an intrinsic part of RPGs, and always will be, because combat is the limiting case of interpersonal strife (it's "part of life" and will never be excised, contrary to our fondest wishes).

But to say something that might or might not be relevant to your post:-

I only ever did hardcore roleplaying in an MMO once, for a few months. I played with a small rp guild in the Conan MMO when it was still an MMO. What I realized is that rp is very similar to jamming in jazz (I'm a musician): there's a story somewhere out there in possibility space, and everyone takes their turn in the spotlight, and the pressure's on to say or do something cool that furthers that ongoing story in an interesting way (that leaves options open for further development, for others to contribute to, etc.) Or perhaps better to say, it's like a cross between jamming, and a bunch of people trying to tune into a mysterious radio station that's broadcasting a story in the ether, and everyone is trying to tune into that mysterious radio's signal and realize the story together. (Of course actors who do improv do a similar sort of thing.)

Hardcore rp is actually even more of an adrenaline jag than PvP, possibly the most exciting and fun thing you can do in a videogame - if you have the chops for it, and a taste for it. (If you picture the sense of being on tenterhooks you have when working in a team in PvE in a tricky dungeon or a raid; working in a team or gang in PvP is beyond that in terms of excitement; but doing hardcore rp is beyond even that in terms of excitement, because it recruits even more of your whole being and your intelligence. Team PvE, all you have to do is remember some sequences and timings, and be reasonably competent; team PvP, you have to be even more on your toes, because other humans are much more tricksy than videogame AI; but team rp goes way beyond either of those.)

The only thing that beats it (as a non-porn computer pastime) is rp-ing the same way in a PW in NWN/NWN2, DM-ed by a good DM - in which case not only are your party interactions alive, but also the game world itself comes alive around you, NPCs act intelligently and converse with you, etc. From the combination of the two, you get an extraordinary sense of hyper-reality, immersion and presence (sense of "being there") unmatched by any other form of entertainment. (The only problem is that it's exhausting and requires a lot of time commitment.)

It is simply not possible (at the present state of technology) to simulate all that from the computer's side. Computers just aren't smart enough yet. Therefore most computer games are simulations (of rich human-human, and human-world interaction) that at some point fail to be simulations and are forced to fall back on abstraction, with the failure point/abstraction point defining the "genre" (e.g. stats are a kludge, but unavoidable for the above-mentioned reason). And the history of computer games is the history of various aspects of simulation jockeying for advancement along their own tracks (from graphics, to audio, to rule design, to modes of user interaction, etc., etc.).

 

[InSight]

you also can't ignore the genetic lineage from wargames to TTRPGs to CRPGs

It is precisely because we cant ignore the genetic lineage from wargames to TTRPG to CRPGs, we cant also ignore the the even deeper/higher/essential lineage of Psychology to the Role Playing in theater and child’s games to/along side wargames to TTRPG to CRPG. And Psychology(study of soul) and RP don’t include stats as we know it (although we can derive stats from anything) And the stats I imagine being portrayed/used/shown in wargames applies even more strongly to other genres specifically tactics/strategy which as I have written, inestimably consist of over 90% in CRPG. So it is not what should be evaluated; other wise any JRPG or game portraying 9999 point of damage would be the most awesome/exciting thing( which is is not.).

This reminds me of a quote “Psychology is the mother of all science”.

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

combat is an intrinsic part of RPGs, and always will be, because combat is the limiting case of interpersonal strife

How is combat not intrinsic part of many games outside of RPG?

in•trin•sic ĭn-trĭn′zĭk, -sĭk
►

• adj.
  
  Of or relating to the essential nature of a thing; inherent.
  
  
• adj.
  
  Situated within or belonging solely to the organ or body part on which it acts. Used of certain nerves and muscles.
  
  
• In pathology, pertaining to the internal parts or to the structures proper of an organ.
  

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/combat



Take a user such a anvi, who says all he who care about is combat yet in one of is favorite games “Everquest” much of what can be described being done there is outside of combat(chatting, traveling, managing items, trading, preparing, exploring, joining/creating guilds) now compare Everquest(which is an RPG) to any game in the fighting genre(Virtua fighter, Tekken, Guilty Gear…) where in 3..2..1... you already in COMBAT and just tap right/left(short distance) away from your oppenent. A great ignorance.

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////



Conflict is "part of life" , combat is only a variant of it. Drama is a variant of it, it is the summarized/compressed/encompassed interesting parts of life (10% of it) often portrayed without combat as in war, weapon(swords) and does show interpersonal strife

Spoiler

interpersonal ĭn″tər-pûr′sə-nəl

►

• adj.
  
  Of or relating to the interactions between individuals.
  
  
• adj.
  
  Existing or occurring between individuals.
  

(hmm interpersonal is one of the terms I was looking for, that can describe a core/defining/parameter in evaluating the RPG in CRPG.)



other example of forms of conflict:

Romeo of Juliet a potrays love in conflict between two hostile/opposing houses

The little mermaid the conflict of love due to different species.



Love too is “part of life” and even more vital/essential/important part of it.


If you dug dipper, considered more over less of what there is to know, you too would conclude that combat is not intrinsic part of RPG.



\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

For the rest of your post

Hardcore rp is actually even more of an adrenaline jag than PvP

Is it? That is new to me, not something I could consider as a mostly competitive player. Then I envy you(in a positive way) for your experience.


I thank you greatly for your post it as been very “Insightful” to me. I have encountered something that might interest you.

The only problem is that it's exhausting

May I suggest that you take Melatonin(which is the fountain of youth),niacin flush and consume alot vitamin c.

While I have no experience with Melatonin( I base it on Cleve’s and other info), I can confirm Niacin flush should reattach the snapped bits in the brain , and consume large amount of cabbage/sauerkraut (preferably blended to reduce the acidity on your teeth). You can discern the dose of Melatonin, you need by taking 0.5 mg increase each time 5 minutes before sleep until you wake up drowsy(that means you found the limit and reduce the does to the amout you took a day before). Melatonin is harmless, some trail research mention in a book, have patient take it in 75 grams with no ill effect. Melatonin is also good against the scam of a threat that forces you to wear a mask outside.



Introduced by Cleve in around 2015-2016 if memory serves when the public library was available, you should read his thread if you can.

 

[InSight]

By that point I will go as far to state that Panzer General is, in fact, an RPG.

It has C&C up your ass, more profound C&C than any of the RPGs ever. You get major in Warsaw, you go to Norway. If not, you don't see this map ever. If you get major in France you get to Sealion40, and there you can knock out England out of the war with another major. That is, you will never ever fight British again in that campaign. Overall, the campaign progression is quite nonlinear, with your performance deciding the course of the campaign and sometimes overall choice.

It has stats. Each unit has initiative, movement, offensive and defensive stats that directly determine the usefulness of unit in combat.

It has experience. Unit gain experience through combat, and experience levels are crucial. Five star FW190 rips and tears through enemy aircraft while zero star FW190 is way less potent.

Everything is decided with rolls. Units roll for initiative, roll for misses, suppression and kills.

There's no "build" for each unit, but there are builds for your core army, similar to party composition of party-based RPGs. You can invest heavily in airforce, tanks or artillery and this will shape up your offensive or defensive actions. It's just that instead of paladins, wizards and clerics you have tanks, artillery and aviation.

It has no dialogues, but who needs that shit? Storyfags?

There's no loot, but you gain prestige by capturing objectives and destroying enemy units and this prestige is used to purchase new units or reinforce existing ones.

And oh boy, there's Panzer General 2 that has even more of that, for example, special abilities gained with level-ups - read "perks".

Am I serious? Decide for yourself.

An example that supports the topic. That many of the parameters used to praise/describe/look for in CRPG where actually of the Tactical/stategy genre. It would have been better to state that majority of CRPG are games of tactics and/or strategy and often poor on these aspects at that.


I’m still waiting for rebuttal/continuation/comments from you Ol' Willy, your post shown to be enthusiastic/eager/willing about it.

 

[InSight]

These threads never provoke any good discussion because noboody cares about anyone else's autistic, personal definitions.

If you would have bothered reading, you would realize these are not my personal definition:


“Role-playing games are games in which players assume the roles of fictional characters and
collaboratively create stories. Players determine the actions of their characters based on their characterization, and the
actions succeed or fail according to a system of rules and guidelines. Within the rules, players can improvise freely; their
choices shape the direction and outcome of the games.
from the Encyclopadia Britannica “


That is a definition of professionals. And is also the opinion of players who played both TTRPG and CRPG adding to it various bits I found in the internet and my own decades of experience.

And it would be also the opinions of these that can objective. These that can view/judge/separate without being effected by the opinion that is formed by peer pressure(group-think) and/or the sea of dopamine one is exposed to as a child(rose tint glasses). To see beyond, to its depth in critical manner. (factor more.)

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
And who is “nobody”? Are you their representative to make such claim on behalf all the user of site?


Perhaps if I made a game then many would care, but take the following examples:

Developer coined term such “immersive sims” which could be used to describe simple a “good game”. Or MOBA. the A stands for arena a word used for sand area/ring/stage. And the only game that match it perfectly (that im aware of) would be bloodline champions or its 2nd version battlerite.

Many bushiness men who don’t play video games would also make definitions or subvert them to their marketing plans, It does not make them any more correct or accurate.



And why one need to provoke? Must I bend or twist the truth in-order to summon/anger/trigger many who will amend it as my viewing experience shows.

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Another reason why they might not add to good discussion is because I covered must of what there is to say, leaving little to the poster to add.( I hoped for greater examples for and/or against.)



Their either nod in agreement and move on or simply ignore it (in this case also repulsed by its structure.)

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

Don't let your IQ bother you; if it is not already so, soon much of conversation in the internet would be done by an AI since they are already capable of surpassing the average human IQ, making it impossible to distinguish based on text along, unless an ESP type method is employed.

 

[anvi]

I used to type huge posts :D

 

[Ol' Willy]

I'll be short

Live Action role playing
How people even confuse between the two? visually all ones as to do is imagine is a group in passive position(sitting) for RPG at least of Table Top variant and imagine the "kid in costumes throwing bags saying and fireball at a larger dude wearing monster costume" video. The key difference is the word game.
movies -out come set in stone. Romeo will always dies in the script.
games- out come not set in stone. the first action in side scroll can be move right/left/jump or shot depending on the game but it allows for each start to be different and so its end(at least the type of cant or can).

RPG Codex definition of "larping" is "roleplaying in your head" - when game does not acknowledge player's roleplaying. I agree with that and thus, any real RPG should have roleplaying acknowledged by the game. "Larping" possible in any game, my Doom example is possible when you actually think about it.

When you roleplay you imitate , you deceive, create an illusion And for that to happen you require the other party.
That is why multiplayer is a fundamental impotence, core aspect in RPG. The actors needs the audience to judge, to gauge to see the results/effects/impacts of his acting. (the other side of the coin.) unless he is a master of the craft and can predict the results beforehand 99% of the time.
These that do deceive them self must have supreme deception skill but how many examples can you give me of that? Is the snake not immune to its own poison?
(raptor)

Even in single player CRPG, the makers of the game placed their character reaction in advanced by anticipating and portraying it usually through dialog response and in some cases either they decide to attack you or not or even leave your party if they were its members. 3 variations.
examples: Pallegina if you destroy households Piller of Eternity 2, Baldurs gate 2 if you ignore retaking of the castle.

In contrast to Doom (1993) where they see you they attack you always. 1 constant.
One genre provides Veriations/change/dynamics in behaviour the other doesnt or in fixed manner. you cant kill the fat programmer in F.E.A.R the laws of bullets dont apply in his case.

I have some troubles understanding this part, but if you mean the difference between opposing characters in RPGs and FPS games, there's a lot of RPG with always hostile characters by default.

Always hostile opponent also found in wargames

Majority of the actions are quite direct(direct as obvious) so would the interactions. you attack then you either miss or hit. the results show themself in seconds. exception would be the witcher series where the result of the events/quest/missions would show up in later chapter (minutes to hours of play time) but such events are few.

Now you don't get it.
Games with direct controls - input - where the press of a button results in direct movement or action by character: action games, FPS games, and such.
Games with indirect controls - input - where player gives directions, targets, but the actions themselves done by the character: isometric RPGs, E.G. Fallout, and such.

RPGs presume indirect controls because the indirect control is the soul of roleplaying.

 

[urmom]

What makes RPGs different from other genres? Statistical character development. Otherwise every game is an RPG. Has to be broader in scope than just football. Though "sports RPG" is a legitimate concept.

 

[King Crispy]

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

this is some weird fuckin' shit

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

 

[Twiglard]

Let me pull a Wittgenstein here.

A game can be barely-an-RPG if it observes certain genre conventions. If it doesn't, it can fulfill all of them and still not be an RPG. KoTC is definitely an RPG. JA2 presents itself as turn-based tactics. Blackguards 2 is somewhere in the middle.

But you can't stretch the definitions too far. Horizon Zero Dawn observes many of the genre trappings, but is too much of an action-adventure game even if we're being generous.

Regardless of whether the problem is linguistic or neurological, I'm having problems getting through OP's walls of text.