>>3764576
>Nothing else is implied.
Yes.
>In particular, the mechanics of the game are irrelevant.
No. Without mechanics expressing the separation of player's will and player's character's actions (and more subtle things like background, profession etc. limiting or adding options), the definition becomes meaningless. As anons pointed out already.
The problem with "numbers go up means it's an RPG!" is not numbers being there, it's numbers being slapped on a game that is something else in essence. If make a DOOM mod that gives Doomguy an experience points bar and an attribute that improves his base speed as he gains experience levels it doesn't turn the game into an RPG. It's still exactly the same Doomguy, he is still shooting "demons" but he can run a bit faster eventually. You can start making an argument if it's several attributes and you get to choose but he still runs around shooting "demons" and everything depends on your aim, reaction time and ability to change position well and at the right time. Even if such a mod can be considered an RPG it would be an extremely shitty one. Not as a game overall but as a role-playing game. Also "RPG elements" is possibly the worst shit corporate suits have unleashed upon the industry, right after early access and all that other cancer.
And then there is also the case of first person and even some third person RPGs tending to go horribly wrong. Even when actually done somewhat right, like Mass Effect, the only RPG in the "series", it can draw a larger unintended audience that gets confused because it expects a shooter. And yes, ME has very primitive dialogues and basically no alternative solutions to "convince/threaten" or "shoot them all". It's not exactly great as an RPG in too many ways. But at least it does have backgrounds that the game reacts to a few times and conversation choices do often matter.

Back | Go to board

Board:

/vrpg/

Thread:

>"We asked 100 people to define what an rpg is..."