Fallout 3: A Reflection on the Writing

Most computer video or adventure games have a token character which the player is controlling. However, a game is sometimes termed "role-playing" if the character can gain experience, items, and other improvements over multiple sessions. I think it is called this because historically the experience and item gaining are inspired by tabletop RPGs.
Click to expand...
That's a good explanation though I'm not sure about the wording of the first sentence, adding the possibility of plural to the character mention would probably be helpful.
 
Ausdoerrt said:
In Planescape: Torment, you are not assuming the role of the Nameless One, you're simply controlling him =)

There is a small distinction but it is indeed arbitrary.
Click to expand...
You do assume his role. You choose what he does and what he says, and what kind of a person he is. You think "what would my character do?"
 
^ In HL2 you assume the role of Gordon Freeman, and are free to decide whether you kill everything that moves, or hide and run away from foes, or set up mines to stealthily blow them up.

Arbitrary =)
 
Ausdoerrt said:
^ In HL2 you assume the role of Gordon Freeman, and are free to decide whether you kill everything that moves, or hide and run away from foes, or set up mines to stealthily blow them up.

Arbitrary =)
Click to expand...
What does that have to do with roleplaying? Nothing, because HL2 is not a roleplaying game. Combat decisions don't make HL2 a roleplaying game any more than combat decisions make Fallout a roleplaying game. Tell me: when you play HL2, do you actually determine every action you take by asking yourself what Gordon, as defined by you, would do? Outside of these debates I have not once, not ever, heard of anyone playing HL2 that way. Clearly the only arbitrary thing here is your argument.
 
failout said:
I've noticed that many people have a strange need to stretch the definition of roleplaying so far that every game, or some game in particular, meets the criteria for being a CRPG. It's as if a game is magically elevated to some new level of excellence because you slap the label of "CRPG" on it. I've seen people do this with JRPGs, sometimes in a very hysterical way.
Click to expand...
I was pointing out how general your statement is and yes, I can see what you were trying to get at but you just didn't have the specifics to make it clear. Also notice that we aren't talking about CRPGs, that's a subgenre of RPG with much more specific and detailed requirements. RPG is a broad and general genre and thus has limited use. It's like the Action genre, it's extremely large and not overly useful, it's left to the subgenres (FPS, hack-and-slash, top-down shooter, beat-em-up, etc.) to really narrow it down to be really useful.

failout said:
You do assume his role. You choose what he does and what he says, and what kind of a person he is. You think "what would my character do?"
Click to expand...
No you don't, you control him and select from a list of options which path you want to take. The Nameless One can be played in a number of different ways making him a number of very different characters. It is an arbitrary distinction assuming that there is any at all. Keep in mind that all single player RPGs are very limited, especially in role playing options which are basically turned into a choose your own adventure game rather than role-playing.
 
UncannyGarlic said:
I was pointing out how general your statement is and yes, I can see what you were trying to get at but you just didn't have the specifics to make it clear. Also notice that we aren't talking about CRPGs, that's a subgenre of RPG with much more specific and detailed requirements. RPG is a broad and general genre and thus has limited use. It's like the Action genre, it's extremely large and not overly useful, it's left to the subgenres (FPS, hack-and-slash, top-down shooter, beat-em-up, etc.) to really narrow it down to be really useful.
Click to expand...
We have quite obviously been talking about CRPGs, as have other people. CRPGs do not really constitute a subgenre, they're simply computer representations of roleplaying.

No you don't, you control him and select from a list of options which path you want to take. The Nameless One can be played in a number of different ways making him a number of very different characters. It is an arbitrary distinction assuming that there is any at all. Keep in mind that all single player RPGs are very limited, especially in role playing options which are basically turned into a choose your own adventure game rather than role-playing.
Click to expand...
Like I said, due to technical limitations CRPGs can only offer multiple choices, but it's still roleplaying (unless you yourself reject all notions of roleplaying and choose to treat it as a choose-your-own-adventure game). And of course you control the Nameless One; how else would he move around? How would a character in a PnP RPG move around if you didn't choose where it goes?
 
Bukozki said:
Fallout 3 was my first Fallout experience. However, I've talked to at least a dozen people who've played the first two games and I've read some of the lush conversation trees from Fallout 2. I also YouTube'd some of the cinematic possibilities to flesh out my understanding of the series a bit more.
Click to expand...

If you're going to think about this subject as much as you are, Bukozki, you probably ought to give Fallout 1 a try. You can pass it off as research. :D

I guess I'd side with those who say that true RPGs can't be done on a computer, at least to date. Once you start talking about CRPGs, you're already stretching the definition, because the limitations of a computer program mean you can never approach the openess and improvisational potential of a group of people interacting with one another. The confusion of terms originates with the attempt to translate something untranslatable.

That said, there are games that try to simulate true RPGs (like Fallout and Arcanum), and games that don't, like "Fallout 3" and Diablo. Those two are computer games with RPG influences.
 
failout said:
What does that have to do with roleplaying? Nothing, because HL2 is not a roleplaying game. Combat decisions don't make HL2 a roleplaying game any more than combat decisions make Fallout a roleplaying game. Tell me: when you play HL2, do you actually determine every action you take by asking yourself what Gordon, as defined by you, would do? Outside of these debates I have not once, not ever, heard of anyone playing HL2 that way. Clearly the only arbitrary thing here is your argument.
Click to expand...

Just like I said, I do not think HL2 is a cRPG, I'm just f'ing around with the definition you posted to point out its flaws. The distinction between "assuming a role" and "controlling" in a computer game is close to 0, and definitely not as clear-cut as you are trying to make it out to be.

failout said:
We have quite obviously been talking about CRPGs, as have other people. CRPGs do not really constitute a subgenre, they're simply computer representations of roleplaying.
Click to expand...

CRPGs are first and foremost computer games, so they must represent a genre of computer games.

Like I said, due to technical limitations CRPGs can only offer multiple choices, but it's still roleplaying (unless you yourself reject all notions of roleplaying and choose to treat it as a choose-your-own-adventure game).
Click to expand...

All computer games are based on the choice-consequence system, it's just that it plays out differently in different genres. An FPS is created with real-life experience in mind, yet it's not the same as real-life war; cRPG is not the same as roleplaying in PnP.

UniversalWolf said:
BloodyPuppy said:
Yeah, but Diablo 2 is actually pretty good.
Click to expand...

But is it a Role-Playing Game? :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

NOOOO!!!! You've asked the taboo question!!
 
failout said:
We have quite obviously been talking about CRPGs, as have other people. CRPGs do not really constitute a subgenre, they're simply computer representations of roleplaying.
Click to expand...
There is the CRPG genre and RPGs for computers (which usually but not always does not include consoles), they are two entirely different subjects. The discussion was not originally about CRPGs and if there has been some switch then it certainly wasn't one that was clear. CRPGs are not a PC exclusive genre just as JRPGs aren't a Japan exclusive genre, CRPGs can be and have been made for consoles. It's a subgenre just like ARPG, JRPG, and TRPG.

UniversalWolf said:
But is it a Role-Playing Game? :mrgreen:
Click to expand...
Yep, it very much so is, it's just a linear one that focuses entirely on the action and combat aspects of the genre, hence the subgenre of ARPGs. One can (and I'm sure some do) do the same thing with PnP RPGs. Are you role playing? No, not really but you are playing the game using the system and the rules.
 
I would argue that there really should be no distinction between CRPGs and console RPGs. Consoles are just computers devoted to gaming. There are factors born of standardization, stagnation and issues of uniformity, but when it boils down to it a console is a computer gaming platform that gets upgraded every five to seven years.
 
Bukozki said:
I would argue that there really should be no distinction between CRPGs and console RPGs. Consoles are just computers devoted to gaming. There are factors born of standardization, stagnation and issues of uniformity, but when it boils down to it a console is a computer gaming platform that gets upgraded every five to seven years.
Click to expand...
Yeah... who said differently? I've certainly been applying the genres to all video games and I haven't seen anyone say anything different.
 
There is a slight difference because of game mechanics/joystick use but otherwise not much. PnP-emulating CRPG conversions to consoles have not been very good.

But the big argument, I thought, was over PnP and cRPG.
 
Bukozki said:
I would argue that there really should be no distinction between CRPGs and console RPGs. Consoles are just computers devoted to gaming. There are factors born of standardization, stagnation and issues of uniformity, but when it boils down to it a console is a computer gaming platform that gets upgraded every five to seven years.
Click to expand...

There is a slight distinction. Console RPGs are dumbed down cRPGs; mostly due to control issues. A good example of this is the changes from Morrowind to Oblivion. Either that or they are JRPGs. I've been using "console RPGs" descriptively, not necessarily to mean a totally separate genre. We've been over the uselessness of "RPG" in general.
 
^ I don't like the word "dumbed down". How about we just call them action RPGs (for what they in fact are)?
 
UncannyGarlic said:
failout said:
I've noticed that many people have a strange need to stretch the definition of roleplaying so far that every game, or some game in particular, meets the criteria for being a CRPG. It's as if a game is magically elevated to some new level of excellence because you slap the label of "CRPG" on it. I've seen people do this with JRPGs, sometimes in a very hysterical way.
Click to expand...
I was pointing out how general your statement is and yes, I can see what you were trying to get at but you just didn't have the specifics to make it clear. Also notice that we aren't talking about CRPGs, that's a subgenre of RPG with much more specific and detailed requirements. RPG is a broad and general genre and thus has limited use. It's like the Action genre, it's extremely large and not overly useful, it's left to the subgenres (FPS, hack-and-slash, top-down shooter, beat-em-up, etc.) to really narrow it down to be really useful.
Click to expand...
I can only agree with this. The Term RPG has become in many ways controversial and confusing till the point where one would call Doom the Cellphone game a RPG.

When a term gets to generic it looses its credibility to be a definition.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top