GameBanshee Forums

[QUOTE=Paranitis]Exactly. And that IS part of being linear, you have to go from Point A (beginning) to Point B, because without Point B you can't do Point C or D..not meaning that Point C or D will be harder without Point B..but the fact that you CANT DO Point C or D without Point B.

You specifically NEED the ladder to get through certain points to complete stuff..which you get in another dungeon which you NEED a certain other item from another dungeon, etc.

And actually from this discussion I was actually thinking about Baldur's Gate 1 on PC. Without looking at the character specifics..the game itself (even though you can talk to whoever you want and get more and more info from random people walking down the street..that doesn't take away from linearity) is pretty linear. You have to go from the beginning of the game to the mines (yes, you can go to other towns first) and beat that before you can even get to access the bandit forest maps, and then you must go through there and beat it before you can gain access to other maps, etc.

It's basically the Invisible Wall effect. You can't bypass a certain area until other areas allow you to. So even though WHEN you unlock the ability to travel to these other maps, you can go from the map next to it..WITHOUT aquiring the ability beforehand, you can't walk off the edge of the map to the one you want to get to.

So basically EVERY RPG game is linear. You HAVE to go from point A to point Z to complete the game..but you can go ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ, or you can go AHRBSVCXZ, the point is..you must make it between two points with however long a line you want to walk.[/QUOTE]By this whole argument, you've essentially stated the prime reason for playing most games: To complete them. That isn't what linearity is, though.

A linear game is a game which pushes and forces a set progression of story upon the player, with little or no option for side quests, or exploration. I'll use the Zelda series as an example, again. If anything, the Zelda series is one of the most open games out there, for the simple fact that you could complete the temples/dungeons in virtually any order you chose to. Of course, in some instances, you would need a certain item to progress, but those instances were rare, and were mostly for completing side quests. I remember in playing Link to the Past (the SNES contribution to the Zelda series), you could complete the every dungeon, quite often only needing the specific item you gained in that dungeon. Of course, having other items could make it easier, but the possibility was still there.

The linear game would go like this: A to B to C to D and so on. A non-linear game (or as close to as possible) would allow A to D to B to Z to L and so on. It offers more freedom in how you complete the game, not whether you complete it or not.

I guess one of the things that makes me choose the PC platform is the keyboard mouse controllers. RPG's in games are usually - usually, see that I say usually - filled with menu-submenu-subsubmenu-command you want and that makes me a bit frustrated. Not that I havent played Chrono Trigger in my snes time, but I really used to dislike the menu sistem.

Baldur's gate, in the other hand, is fully customisable, so I can have a control config with all comands I need for a character with one keyboard button and a mouse click. Also, I can play my older games when I change my computer, improving my use of the game, what dont happen in consoles. Change console, and only in a few cases you may keep using your older games.

I was really a video game maniac when I was younger, but computer has got my heart ever since the first 486 dx2 with The Savage Empire installed... Those were times...

[QUOTE=Aegis]
The linear game would go like this: A to B to C to D and so on. A non-linear game (or as close to as possible) would allow A to D to B to Z to L and so on. It offers more freedom in how you complete the game, not whether you complete it or not.[/QUOTE]

But for real, many many non pc platform video games are very linear, to extremes, leaving you to only a few choices that affect your destiny. For example, there is the n-64 RPG (Hybrid Heaven, I guess). I started playing it with my cousin, but after seeing three minutes of the game I knewed almost everything I should do to finish the game, after twenty minutes I could recognize all patterns, and after the third time I went there play with him I gave up the game cause it just had no choices to be made except on level ups.

Diablo, that in my opinion is one of the most linear wanna be RPG games, was far more full of choices than that game. But Diablo is the mouse slayer (click click click every atack). Nevermind, that game was the joystick slayer...

My opinion says that fighting games (street fighter genre) and platform games (sonic) are really awesome for console, racing and sports games are similar on both platforms, and RPGs and FPS's should be PC only, for the sake of good gameplay.

Personally as far as the wording goes "Role Playing Game", so far I am liking Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas more than any other RPG. I consider it an RPG because you definately have a role to play in the game. There is also a story in the game to which you really don't have to care about at all if you just wanna drive around shooting chops and doing huge jumps in your motorcycle.

It is also highly customizable in that you can steal a bunch of different kinds of cars..get different paint jobs on it..throw on different automotive extras (such as dollar sign hubcaps..which I use), different kinds of bumpers, and all kinds of weird crap. You could also customize your character's look..give him whatever clothes you want, change his hairstyle, want him to look like a basketball player? Go for it..want it to look like a gay cowboy? Go for it.

You don't HAVE to really do anything in the game at all if you don't want to, and when you ARE done with all the storylines and all that stuff, the game doesn't end like other RPG games do (look at BG2..you do what you can, make a choice on how to end things..then there is the end, and nothing more..you can't decide after beating the game to go back to the towns and destroy everyone in sight, or to see about getting more and more rediculous levels.

In Morrowind and GTA:SA you can do a whole bunch of optional stuff, and then when you are done with the story part, you can keep going on with your character's life of doing whatever he was doing before hand. But with Morrowind, once you hit a certain level, you can't become anymore powerful, and you can't really get any better equipment which won't kill someone in one shot. In GTA:SA though you don't have any physical levels that you attain, you can always try to make bigger and better jumps, see how long you can last with 6 police stars, kill people randomly, you always have to defend your turf (which I personally think is stupid..if you take away all the Ballas turf, how do they keep coming back in such large groups right in the middle of their previous area trying to take it back?), etc.

Best RPG: Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas!

Comparing GTA and RPG's is rather like Apples and Potatos. GTA is not, and has never been, an RPG. The argument you pose to make it thus, is one that could be applied to any game. RPG's are far more defined that 'taking on the role of a person'.

Keep in mind, also, that the sole purpose of an RPG is, in fact, to tell a story. That's why it remains one of the few genres that holds an emphasis on storyline, while other genres place it in if there is time and resources to do so.

@Luis: Yes and no. Many console RPG's are linear, but most of those are the new generation RPG's (and Hyrbid Heaven is more an Action/RPG than pure RPG), but many of the CRPG's are also horribly linear (Revenant, Septerra Core, Divine Divinity). Not only that, but linear does not necessarily mean that there is a pattern in development, or you can easily figure out how to complete the game, rather a linear game is one that pushes the player to certain objectives, without allowing for a freedom of exploration.

While not an RPG, the GTA games are, in actuallity, a good example of a non-linear game. As is Morrowind. The issue that lies in games as open ended as these, though, is the fact that the story often takes such a back seat, that many people do not actually complete the game/story, but either grow bored with the game, or simply amuse themselves with other aspects of the game.

Ever game needs some instance of a linear nature, otherwise there wouldn't be enough push factor for some players to actually finish the game. The true question lies in how much of a push is really needed. Some games find this balance (Baldur's Gate 2, Planescape: Torment, the Zelda series, Chrono Trigger), while others do not (Morrowind, Knights of the Old Republic, Mystic 64, Breath of Fire 3).

[QUOTE=Paranitis]Personally as far as the wording goes "Role Playing Game", so far I am liking Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas more than any other RPG. I consider it an RPG because you definately have a role to play in the game. <snip>
[/QUOTE]

By that definition, Doom is a roleplaying game. As would even Donkey Kong be back in the 80s, with small hand held electronic games. In most all games you asume the role of somebody doing something.
This however - does not make a roleplaying game per se. (as Aegies also states.)

[QUOTE=Xandax]By that definition, Doom is a roleplaying game. As would even Donkey Kong be back in the 80s, with small hand held electronic games. In most all games you asume the role of somebody doing something.
This however - does not make a roleplaying game per se. (as Aegies also states.)[/QUOTE]

Right. If we automatically include any game that gives you a "role" as "roleplaying," then we have nothing to discuss. The defined genre becomes so large that the definition seeks to have any relevance. An analogy might be defining all Germans as "anybody who has ever mentioned Germany." Since that includes most people in Europe, the Americas and Asia, there's no way we can really discuss anything relevant to Germany after that point.

Rather than attempt a definition of roleplaying games, let's stick with bellwethers that illustrate the term: PnP roleplaying, and computer games like BG2, King of Dragon Pass, and Ultima VII.

I am just saying that in the GTA games you are living someone elses life, and it isn't all about..kill the boss, now kill the next boss, now the next boss. GTA:SA has a pretty decent story, and you actually live through the main character. Your character can get fat, people can lose respect for him, it isn't just about a mindless guy that runs around a level killing monsters to beat the game like Doom is.

In BG you are attacked in a random encounter out in the wild, or a scheduled attack when you reach a certain part of an area's map, or by monsters who are put there specifically to attack you..and who are ALWAYS in that area until you kill them.

In GTA:SA you could be walking down the street minding your own business when some guy pulls a gun and starts shooting at you..and it isn't a specific guy, they are random people in this place that do it. You can be walking through your gang's territory when a car drives by and shoots at you and your buddies, these cars don't show up at a specific point, and even walking through an enemy gang's territory you might not once see a group of rivals walking down the street in that area.

Even the Sims is an RPG to me..when you get away from the housebuilding, you are taking control of a person's life and you get to choose how they live it.

That's what I am saying an RPG is. Not exactly 'any game where you assume a role', but any game where you have full responsibility over the actions of a character and where you can CHOOSE what you are going to do with the character. In Doom or other games like that you have a specific objective, kill the bad guy, then do it over again..and again..and again. In Donkey Kong you have a specific objective, rescue the princess, then do it over again..then again..then again. In Donkey Kong Country you have a specific objective, get from the left side of the level to the right side of the level, then do it again, and again, and again.

Your arguing two seperate things, Parantis. One, what an RPG is, and the other, what a linear game is. The two are not directly related.

As has been stated, there is more to an 'RPG' than simply taking the role of a character within a story. Using the same line of reasoning you've put down, I could easily say that once I create a custom player for a sports game, it's all of sudden become an RPG (and before the comment is made, simply because you don't control every aspect of your characters life, doesn't mean you are not filling in the 'role' of said character).

Part of what makes an RPG, is it's story. You are taking the role of a character, within a story that has a set begining, middle and end. GTA does not have those concepts to the same extent. It does contain a story, but it's tied together loosely, and the premise of the game is geared more towards the random havoc and mayhem that appears in those games.

Also, you've stated that you can walk down a street, and some random person will start shooting you. Well, they aren't random. People will shoot at you for a reason, often that reason being that you're from an opposing gang, or some rivalry, or what not. The only thing random about the person shooting, is when and where it takes place, much like a random encounter in an RPG.

As for scripted events, you can possibly think that GTA is free of scripted events? Every game that attempts an vague impression of a story has scripted events, and the GTA games are no exception. Using that, and random encounters in this argument is a flawed idea, and have no bearing on what makes a game an RPG, or what makes a game linear.

Lastly, you've somehow begun to compare GTA to Doom, which, again, has no real bearing on the discussion at hand, as Doom is not an RPG (nor is GTA), and has been established by everyone in the discussion that an RPG is more than simply taking the role of a character.

I would say GTA:SA is still not a RPG, since you have to complete an X amount of missions to get to the next island/part of the game.

And you have to do Mission A to one guy before you can do mission B.

IMO the game is more based on shooting other people and gain respect.
(i don't think it has a good story)

I guess this is a bit off topic but...

Well, I guess GTA really has nothing to do with RPG's even though it has customization. But in racing games that exist since the sega genesis (perhaps before) and even in motorcicle games.

Alas, mistaking customization with leveling up and shaping destiny is something rather frequent.

Whats up with the sims? No, no no no, it aint a RPG, please, my sys cant have that argument against me...

Hey fable, you ever played Secret of Mana for SNES? Your little chess knight avatar is an enemy from that game, FYI.

[QUOTE=fable]
So how do console RPGs differ from PC-based ones, in terms of linearity, ability to pick your own party from NPCs, length of game, huge number of side quests, writing, difficulty, combat, etc?[/QUOTE]




After playing MW on the x-box for nearly over three years, I have switched to the PC in search of mods to change it up and make it fun again. I have to say, while the mods are a blast, the interface is lousy. I really miss the 'feel' of the x-box game pad and battles are not nearly as much fun without the rumble effect and the ability to have complete control over your attack modes and defenses. I think the game has a completely different feel to it now. The mods are a fun trade off, and I am having a blast with the construction set, but this all appeals to the code cruncher side of me. For sheer love of the game, I thing the console wins out..no contest.

[QUOTE=Ruds]Hey fable, you ever played Secret of Mana for SNES? Your little chess knight avatar is an enemy from that game, FYI.[/QUOTE]

No, really? Can't say I have. I simply found this one day on the Web, and liberated it.

[QUOTE=Scayde]

After playing MW on the x-box for nearly over three years, I have switched to the PC in search of mods to change it up and make it fun again. I have to say, while the mods are a blast, the interface is lousy. I really miss the 'feel' of the x-box game pad and battles are not nearly as much fun without the rumble effect and the ability to have complete control over your attack modes and defenses. I think the game has a completely different feel to it now. The mods are a fun trade off, and I am having a blast with the construction set, but this all appeals to the code cruncher side of me. For sheer love of the game, I thing the console wins out..no contest.[/QUOTE]

Innnnterestin'. My view is exactly the opposite: it's so much easier for me to use the keyboard and the mouse, and I feel so constrained by the gamepad. Each to their own.

One of my favourite console RPGs was Phantasy Star IV for the Sega Genesis. It was released in the waning years of the Genesis and is considered by many to be the last great game on that console. It offered three huge worlds to explore, a very good story, and an excellent battle system. Characters were very distinct and well-developed. Spells could be combined in practical ways to form "combo" spells but these combos had to be discovered by the player. For example, a "wind attack spell" could be combined with a "fire attack spell" to make a "fire wind spell" or something to that effect.

The Shining Force series on the Genesis was also very good. It was a blend of turn-based strategy with role playing elements. Its probably the reason why I enjoy strategy and role playing games today.

I enjoyed many rpgs for the SNES, Chrono Trigger, the Secret of Mana and the Secret of Evermore, and Earthbound to name a few. Chrono Trigger is still great fun, great story, characters, and combat system.

I'm not sure if console rpgs and CRPGs can be generally weighed against each other, I've had fun with games of each platform, and bad experiences with games of each.

[QUOTE=Floyd_theBarber]One of my favourite console RPGs was Phantasy Star IV for the Sega Genesis. [/QUOTE]

Yeah... one of the best console RPG's I've ever played, too bad at that time I was still addicted to... ... sonic the hedgehog