Let's settle this once and for all! Who's the Top Dog?

[Grunker]

I had trout for lunch. I'm thinking about pasta for dinner.

So guys, what else is going on?

 

[Derper]

I had trout for lunch. I'm thinking about pasta for dinner.

So guys, what else is going on?

That reminds me, I have to eat something soon. Thanks Grunker!

OM NOM NOM NOM NOM

 

[Hobbit Lord of Mordor]

Looks like the storyfags are up to no good, DU check it out please.

 

[janjetina]

Looks like the storyfags are up to no good, DU check it out please.

 

[Burning Bridges]

What about Ultima VII? It had everything that made Arcanum great, just a couple of years earlier.

 

[JarlFrank]

What about Ultima VII? It had everything that made Arcanum great, just a couple of years earlier.

But it only had one musket, Arcanum had more.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Actually rpgs are about customized characters and dice. Combat just happens to be the best way of putting the two together. Combat can offer dozens of possible choices at any time and each one will reference an attribute. Dialogue gives you four choices and at most one of them will even acknowledge that you are playing a character at all.

Rephrasing Racofer:

Guys I've just reached an astonishing conclusion: some people like RPGs for one reason, while others like it for other reasons.

How can such thing be possible :

Now the Codex is still debating what RPG is and isn't. Recently the dominating opinion shifted to "RPGs are about combat, choices are LARPing so fuck' em". The results of the poll merely illustrate it.

As opposed to the previous 'RPGs are about narratives, combat is an obstacle, so fuck it'?

The way I see it, RPGs are about choices. Combat is important but as the best RPGs demonstrate is hardly a requirement:

Arcanum
PST
MotB
Geneforge
Bloodlines
Daggerfall
Etc.

 

[Vibalist]

"A role-playing game (RPG; often roleplaying game) is a game in which the participants assume the roles of fictional characters"

Like in Halo?

You don't think there's a difference between being able to play a wide array of characters and being able to play just one?

 

[mondblut]

"A role-playing game (RPG; often roleplaying game) is a game in which the participants assume the roles of fictional characters"

You don't think there's a difference between being able to play a wide array of characters and being able to play just one?

Wikipedia clearly doesn't.

 

[mondblut]

Combat is important but as the best RPGs demonstrate is hardly a requirement:

I fail to see best RPGs in that list. To me it only demonstrates that with a broken combat and shoddy game mechanics no amount of great setting-plot-hypertext-whatever makes a quality RPG, resulting in a wasted opportunity.

 

[Derper]

"A role-playing game (RPG; often roleplaying game) is a game in which the participants assume the roles of fictional characters"

You don't think there's a difference between being able to play a wide array of characters and being able to play just one?

Wikipedia clearly doesn't.

Then it's settled.

 

[mondblut]

"A role-playing game (RPG; often roleplaying game) is a game in which the participants assume the roles of fictional characters"

You don't think there's a difference between being able to play a wide array of characters and being able to play just one?

Wikipedia clearly doesn't.

Then it's settled.

For "Junior Boy", it should be

 

[Derper]

Googlefights says Fallout is better.

 

[Castanova]

You don't think there's a difference between being able to play a wide array of characters and being able to play just one?

So Mortal Kombat is an RPG?

 

[Derper]

Rerail: Which of the three does the following better, fill out and post:

Story:
Setting:
Atmosphere:

Combat:
Character building:
NPCs:

C&C:
Mainquest:
Sidequest:

Fun:
Immersiveness:
Replayability:

Feel free to add more factors and add reasons why...

 

[Brother None]

I do wonder though, why you are calling us nu, which is the thirteenth letter of the greek alphabet?

This. It is very apropos.

 

[Derper]

Rerail: Which of the three does the following better, fill out and post:

Story: PS:T
Setting: Arcanum
Atmosphere: Fallout

Combat: Fallout
Character building: Arcanum
NPCs: PS:T

C&C: Fallout/Arcanum
Mainquest: PS:T
Sidequest: Arcanum

Fun: Arcanum
Immersiveness: Fallout
Replayability: Arcanum

Feel free to add more factors and add reasons why...

 

[Squeek]

The way I see it, RPGs are about choices. Combat is important but as the best RPGs demonstrate is hardly a requirement....

With respect (and I do respect many of your opinions), I think you don't quite get it when it comes to RPG combat.

Like the books that inspired this genre, the stories in these games are set in dangerous worlds where folks in them are usually well armed and prepared to defend themselves. Why would you want to ignore that or downplay it? It's part of the whole idea.

Unlike other games, these involve roles, and roles imply drama. Drama requires conflict, not necessarily fighting, but in a violent world violence is an obvious source of potentially interesting conflict.

And why not? It can be cool. Right? I know I enjoy a good fight, anyway.

 

[Chaotic Lulz3r]

Planescape: Torment.

 

[Dark Elf]

Behead those who insult Arcanum.

 

[Darth Roxor]

Both are an important part of RPGs

I don't disagree with that, but my point is the 'fuck combat' crowd is as rabid as the 'fuck c&c' one in many cases, and somehow, having the story-fags 'in charge' is p. ok, but god forbid the combat-fags from voicing their opinion.

In other words, this:

The way I see it, RPGs are about choices. Combat is important but as the best RPGs demonstrate is hardly a requirement:

Arcanum
PST
MotB
Bloodlines

THUS SPOKE VD, PRAISE IT.

I fail to see best RPGs in that list. To me it only demonstrates that with a broken combat and shoddy game mechanics no amount of great setting-plot-hypertext-whatever makes a quality RPG, resulting in a wasted opportunity.

THUS SPOKE MONDBLUT, HATE IT.

 

[Vault Dweller]

The way I see it, RPGs are about choices. Combat is important but as the best RPGs demonstrate is hardly a requirement:

Arcanum
PST
MotB
Bloodlines

THUS SPOKE VD, PRAISE IT.

Just an opinion, mang.

I don't disagree with that, but my point is the 'fuck combat' crowd is as rabid as the 'fuck c&c' one in many cases, and somehow, having the story-fags 'in charge' is p. ok, but god forbid the combat-fags from voicing their opinion.

It's the Codex. The only crowd that isn't rabid is the trannies and only because they like taking it up the ass.

 

[Crispy]

While the crowd begins to distract itself bickering with a lack of any real action in the ring, the three greatest RPG's in existence continue to woefully and pathetically scratch at each other. None has the strength to fight any longer, yet none will quit.

We look on with both awe and pity.

This is what you called for, Codex; observe!

 

[Vault Dweller]

The way I see it, RPGs are about choices. Combat is important but as the best RPGs demonstrate is hardly a requirement....

With respect (and I do respect many of your opinions), I think you don't quite get it when it comes to RPG combat.

Like the books that inspired this genre, the stories in these games are set in dangerous worlds where folks in them are usually well armed and prepared to defend themselves. Why would you want to ignore that or downplay it? It's part of the whole idea.

Unlike other games, these involve roles, and roles imply drama. Drama requires conflict, not necessarily fighting, but in a violent world violence is an obvious source of potentially interesting conflict.

And why not? It can be cool. Right? I know I enjoy a good fight, anyway.

I think you misunderstood me. I like combat in RPGs and I like dungeon crawlers. I bought KotC after playing the demo for 5 min and Arcanum shitty combat was one of the biggest disappointments to me, as I expected at least something on par with Fallout and hoped for a lot more. So, I'm not trying to ignore or downplay it.

Take shooters, for example. I don't think that anyone would argue that story/setting/interesting characters/even multiple solutions aren't important and will be useless. The focus, however, is on shooting mechanics and level design.

In RPGs that aren't focused on killing things (examples of those are Wiz and other dungeon crawlers), combat takes the back seat and loses the importance, becoming a nice to have feature instead of the core of the game. That's my point.

 

[Reject_666_6]

Rerail: Which of the three does the following better, fill out and post:

Story: Torment
Setting: Arcanum
Atmosphere: Torment

Combat: Fallout
Character building: Arcanum
NPCs: Torment

C&C: Arcanum
Mainquest: Torment
Sidequest: Arcanum

Fun: Fallout
Immersiveness: Tied
Replayability: Fallout

Feel free to add more factors and add reasons why...