But unfortunately that is too generalized, by that logic most games could be considered RPGs. Super Mario would be a RPG, you assume the role of Mario or Luigi and decide which enemies to jump on when confronted with them, which blocks to headbutt, which pipes to go inside of, if you should get that mushroom or that flower, if you should try and jump the highest possible for the level end flag, if you go right or left, etc.
They are, in fact, roleplaying games with the two most famous LARP communities being Vampire: The Masquerade and Call of Cthulhu.
Yes, but in LARP many times the rules are not followed or are bypassed by the actions of the players. In LARP the rules usually take a back step. In LARP the narrative, plot and player actions are more important than the ruleset. In actual RPGs the rules are absolute unless the GM changes then in some way (house rules) and then those house rules are absolute and the players have to obey them, while in LARP the players many times can avoid, bend or even break the rules so they can act the way they want. Basically LARP is more like a improvised theater play than a real RPG (role playing is not the same as roleplaying game, anyone can roleplay by pretending to be a specific character without any strings attached, but to play a roleplaying game you need to follow that game universe ruleset and have your own set of character stats, rules, strengths and weaknesses to interact with it).Okay, before I address the rest, people realize that LARPing stands for Live Action Role Playing, right?
By that definition you are excluding several sub genres of RPGs. For example most jRPGs do not give you any choices that will affect the story. jRPGs always had a story set in stone, you would control this characters and follow this stories and quests, the only choice you had was what to name the characters you could control, what to equip, what attacks or spells/abilities to use during combat, what items to use and when. The same with many Action RPGs, for example in Diablo you have no choices about story at all, same with the Sacred games, the Titan Quest games, and the list goes on and on. Tactical/Strategy RPGs are also the same, all of them had missions where you played battles in maps (usually by turns) but most didn't let you choose anything story related either.
But in RPGs, you don't just get to 'choose' and 'affect' the story, the RULES and the SYSTEM should still on top priority on dictating whether or not your 'choices' correspond well with your CHARACTER BUILD and how the BUILD affect the OUTCOME.
Since it doesn't seem anyone properly address this, I'm just going to remind you to remember well those two different quotes from both Tim Cain and Todd Howard, and how their differing mindset objectively affect how they make their games. On top of that, Mister Caption pointed out in his newest reviews how there was some guy (maybe even Todd Howard themselves) in Bethesda admitting how the character/skill system of the original Fallout(s) were too complicated.
I do consider some CYOA books RPGs, the Dungeons and Dragons old CYOA books had dice rolls and involved stats for combat and some spells, same with the Fighting Fantasy books too.
Now that you mentioned it, yeah I remembered there was some Codexer sharing the pic of those D&D's CYOA bookcover. I assume that, since it's CYOA, no GM/DMs needed when playing one, then?
Yeah, doesn't need a DM. It already comes with a character sheet containing your character stats IIRC (I can't remember if we had input on the base stats or if they were already assigned). I used to have some when I was a kid, if I wasn't living on the other side of the world I would go dust them off and check. I even remember where I keep them in my parents house. I loved TSR's AD&D CYOA books when I was a kid, I also owned like 30 Fighting Fantasy books, then I played actual D&D and couldn't get into those books anymore since they were so simple and we were so limited in them.
It's even below-average action, even Borderlands made a way better FPS(-RPG) for meThis is Fallout 4 and 3, in a nutshell:
Fallout 1 is about actuall role palying, where Fallout 3 and 4 are about power-fantasies, which is what you usually get with shooters.
i missed this. i guess you didnt understand what i meant. it wasn't hostile, its just another general comment of frustration finding myself straining over a question of what would make fallout more interesting when there won't be any more interesting fallout games (the very fact being why i and probably enough other people come back to questions that always just make us feel worse)
WTFITFAS?
oh ya im not assuming maliciious, but i shitpost and he's a mod, and frankly idk what i have to say. i'v had ideas before but they'v not really meshed with this group. i'm not saying it's a conventional ban, but i'm tired, i have nothing to say, i just lurk; having a banned tag on my name might give me a chuckle. unless u want me to start talking abt synth vagina or something (you dont)
that was actually the official pr response
Dude, it was a joke based on the fact that NMA is the most infamously hopeless community when it comes to Fallout... Basically, asking hopeless questions is all this community ever does. There was absolutely no threat in any of that, if you perceived it so, I apologize. I did not intend to scare you or anything, it was really just a bit of self-deprecating humour and the usual noob-bashing that just happens when your account is younger than a year
I'll become a man in a month!I did not intend to scare you or anything, it was really just a bit of self-deprecating humour and the usual noob-bashing that just happens when your account is younger than a year
Shut up noob!I'll become a man in a month!
OldfagShut up noob!
the usual noob-bashing that just happens when your account is younger than a year
