Humble Bundle Thread

i actually dont take issue with fakeybro buying indie games at full price. Im not sure why he posts here....but if he has the scratch to blow more power to him
I think he likes fucking with us honestly. He knows it's like nails on a chalkboard to some of us.

Like my sister will tell me how she bought her or the kids such and such game at full price and I'm all like nooooooooooooooooo in slow motion.
 
Yup, Borderlands is Diablo with guns. Even one old fart here (I won't utter this person's name, I've had enough cat scratches for one lifetime) says so. If we're all gonna be nitpicky as hell, might as well say Diablo isn't an "100%" RPG as well, which is silly, because it is. The only difference between Diablo and Borderlands is the combat system and story/setting, and neither of those things invalidate a game's genre.
I notice that your definition of RPG is quite broad, which is just fine. But for general purposes, I wouldn't recommend Borderlands to someone that says they're looking for a good RPG.

As videogame genres evolve, lines are becoming blurred. It's pretty fashionable to include things like leveling, stats, and unlocks in just about everything from platforming games and racers to shmups.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
That's what I find funny as well. A lot of the "pure" games only had basic, limited combat systems with little to no action because that's all that could really be done with the technology at that time. If they had the ability to create a first person action RPG at the time, they would have, and this entire argument wouldn't even exist.
Bard's Tale (1985, the year NES debuted stateside)
Jump to the 2:15 mark

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M663sND0AcQ

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I notice that your definition of RPG is quite broad, which is just fine. But for general purposes, I wouldn't recommend Borderlands to someone that says they're looking for a good RPG.

As videogame genres evolve, lines are becoming blurred. It's pretty fashionable to include things like leveling, stats, and unlocks in just about everything from platforming games and racers to shmups.
I would recommend Borderlands to someone who liked RPGs, as long as they didn't mind FPS games as well. You could say the same thing about most RPGs. One person may like RPGs, but dislike strategy elements, or active battle systems, or action RPGs, etc. Again, just a combat style.

And yes, that's true, but if all Borderlands did was throw levels into the mix that would be one thing. The entire game is a very intricate and complex ARPG system full of elemental damage types, skill trees, critical rates, etc. It's not like I'm sitting here saying Forza is 100% an RPG because you level up.

Bard's Tale (1985, the year NES debuted stateside)
Jump to the 2:15 mark
Notice I said first person action RPGs. I've actually played Bard's Tale a lot, but it's turn based of course.

 
ARPG

JRPG

TBRPG

MMORPG

OMGWTFBBQRPG

3918000-6683507572-ani-h.gif


 
Last edited by a moderator:
I consider this the first RPG I ever played

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6-zN_eaRd8

Hey I slayed a dragon (that looked more like a duck but still) so it counts!

 
I knew GamersGate was an RPG!

I have a Level 2 Bargain Hunter equipped with a short, dull and nearly dead 20% off coupon. Life's rough when you scavenge for blue coins.
An obviously disgruntled Level 4 Glitch Hunter is clearly eyeing your coupon.

Do you:

[1] Offer your coupon to the Level 4 Glitch Hunter.

[2] Try to sell your coupon to the Level 4 Glitch Hunter.

[3] Fight

[4] Flee

 
I notice that your definition of RPG is quite broad, which is just fine. But for general purposes, I wouldn't recommend Borderlands to someone that says they're looking for a good RPG.

As videogame genres evolve, lines are becoming blurred. It's pretty fashionable to include things like leveling, stats, and unlocks in just about everything from platforming games and racers to shmups.
Agreed.

Call of Duty and Battlefield have several of the traits you mentioned, therefore are the best RPGs of this generation.
 
That's what I find funny as well. A lot of the "pure" games only had basic, limited combat systems with little to no action because that's all that could really be done with the technology at that time. If they had the ability to create a first person action RPG at the time, they would have, and this entire argument wouldn't even exist.
That's absolutely incorrect but color me surprised you'd be wrong about something again. RPGs were turn based to mimic the behavior of table top pen and paper RPGs and early strategy games from the likes of Avalon Hill. It's idiotekque as hell to say the tech didn't allow real time combat when plenty of other games in the same era were. There's no such thing as an ARPG.

 
Anyone remember Little Ninja Brothers for the NES? It was a role playing game complete with world map and villages and what not but when you ran into an enemy the actual combat wasn't turn based, it took you to a screen where you go and punch enemies Double Dragon style.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9okMZOsXF0

It wasn't riveting action combat or anything but it was doable if they wanted to do it.

 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9jcUTTm6RA
That's pretty cool, never heard of it. Of course that's still more akin to active time battles (similar to what you find in most Final Fantasy games), not action (like Diablo).

That's absolutely incorrect but color me surprised you'd be wrong about something again. RPGs were turn based to mimic the behavior of table top pen and paper RPGs and early strategy games from the likes of Avalon Hill. It's idiotekque as hell to say the tech didn't allow real time combat when plenty of other games in the same era were. There's no such thing as an ARPG.
I never said all RPGs of the time would have had action combat systems. I'm aware how turn based combat is similar to a pen and paper game. As always, you read my posts wrong just so that you can claim that I'm "wrong".

But I stand by the fact that if the technology of the time allowed for a game like Diablo or Borderlands, it would have been made in addition to the turn based games. "There's no such thing as an ARPG"? No idea what you're even going on about there. Are you so needlessly difficult to consider Diablo not an RPG? Because if that's the case, there's not much I can say to that.

All I was saying in the first place is that if technology at the time allowed for action combat systems, ARPGs with various combat styles (including first person, like in Borderlands or other first person RPGs like Arx Fatalis) would have been commonplace alongside some of the first RPGs like Rogue, and then maybe you nitpickers wouldn't be so sure about your little "OMG Borderlands is not an RPG because you shoot stuff" argument. Who knows, you probably still would, so it was likely pointless to say since it just gave you another thing to nitpick.

Anyone remember Little Ninja Brothers for the NES? It was a role playing game complete with world map and villages and what not but when you ran into an enemy the actual combat wasn't turn based, it took you to a screen where you go and punch enemies Double Dragon style.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9okMZOsXF0

It wasn't riveting action combat or anything but it was doable if they wanted to do it.
Ha, I actually still own Kung Fu Heroes, the one that came before that game. Fun little games, and those are legitimate ARPGs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J25UZpk2Yns

I actually looked it up, and the first "true" ARPG was a game called Dragon Slayer (heard of it before, but never played it).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ra4T_0wWM24

This came out in 82, of course, so yeah, 70s technology couldn't build something akin to Diablo or Borderlands. Even this little Dragon Slayer game is hard to compare to those games, which is easy to see from looking at the gameplay here.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I was trying to stay out of this, but leave me no choice.

One quintessential point of RPG combat/sneaking/extraordinary feats for me is that in a RPG outcome depends on the character's skills & gear*, with only tactical input from player, thus the outcome of any single action is largely determined by the evolution of the character.

Diablo actually manages to preserve this to a good extent (non-tactical player skills are largely limited to getting away from bad stuff fast enough).

Borderlands preserves this to a surprising degree, but outcome of far more dependent on player skill to aim and maneuver in a 3D environment.

Fallout 3, which no one has mentioned, with it's VATS system, is a more pure RPG, while being a FPS.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Fallout 3, which no one has mentioned, with it's VATS system, is a more pure RPG, while being a FPS.
I wanted to mention Fallout 3/NV multiple times throughout this little soiree, but I figured it would be best to only argue about one FPS being an RPG at a time. Plus then Tripjack might magically appear and lend a hand in combating the great and evil Idiotekque of Unpopular Opinion.

Come to think of it, I almost never use VATS in those games because it makes it too easy for me. I've played F3 and FNV so damn much over the years and gotten so used to very hard mode that it's funner to tie my hands a bit. That's why I love the Project Nevada mod, since it allows you to use your AP for other things, like sprinting.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I wanted to mention Fallout 3/NV multiple times throughout this little soiree, but I figured it would be best to only argue about one FPS being an RPG at a time. Plus then Tripjack might magically appear and lend a hand in combating the great and evil Idiotekque of Unpopular Opinion.
^_^ I also feel quest/decision-wise Fallout fits the traditional RPG in allowing you "bad" decisions like "I'm going to kill -everyone- in this village" whereas Borderlands choices are inconsequential.

 
^_^ I also feel quest/decision-wise Fallout fits the traditional RPG in allowing you "bad" decisions like "I'm going to kill -everyone- in this village" whereas Borderlands choices are inconsequential.
True, that's a big reason why Fallout (the old ones as well) are some of my favorite games. I love choices.

That said, while MysterD seems to equate choice to being a key factor of the RPG genre, I don't really think so. Many, many "true" RPGs are extremely linear and devoid of player choice, especially older ones.

I've been getting into Grim Dawn (the new ARPG from the Titan Quest guys), but haven't gotten too far. I'm really hoping there are some "choices" in it... Regardless, amazing game so far. Titan Quest needed guns.

 
True, that's a big reason why Fallout (the old ones as well) are some of my favorite games. I love choices.

That said, while MysterD seems to equate choice to being a key factor of the RPG genre, I don't really think so. Many, many "true" RPGs are extremely linear and devoid of player choice, especially older ones.

I've been getting into Grim Dawn (the new ARPG from the Titan Quest guys), but haven't gotten too far. I'm really hoping there are some "choices" in it... Regardless, amazing game so far. Titan Quest needed guns.
Agreed. In tabletop RPGs the amount of decision leeway you have varies greatly depending on the DM/GM's preparation and skill. It's not uncommon to have "Railroaded" campaigns, especially in time-limited settings, like at a CON.

Degree of freedom of choice however changes the feel of the game from hand-hold-y to open-world.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Agreed. In tabletop RPGs the amount of decision leeway you have varies greatly depending on the DM/GM's preparation and skill. It's not uncommon to have "Railroaded" campaigns, especially in time-limited settings, like at a CON.

Degree of freedom of choice however changes the feel of the game from hand-hold-y to open-world.
I assumed he was speaking more of early "CRPG"s (as they used to be called) like Bard's Tale, Might & Magic or the SSI Gold Box games. Even in those though, there was a chance for making choices or approaching things in different manners. You might parley with a group of Orcs and intimidate them into leaving or choose to attack an NPC and loot him rather than perform his quest. Ultimately the quest line was the quest line (unlike Elder Scrolls games where you can ignore the quest forever) but there were still elements of decision making unlike Borderlands where the answer to every problem is "more bullets" or Diablo/Torchlight/Titan Quest where the answer is "more swords/spells" and the only real RPG elements are mechanical: levels, skill points, classes, etc.

That choice making is, in my mind, what sets an RPG apart from an ARPG. I have no issue with the term ARPG but I don't think of it as "action-based role playing" but rather "action game with mechanical RPG elements". Borderlands is an ARPG but I wouldn't call it an RPG.

But, once again, I don't really care what anyone else calls it. I'm just posting for the lulz and because there's not much else going on.

 
That said, while MysterD seems to equate choice to being a key factor of the RPG genre, I don't really think so. Many, many "true" RPGs are extremely linear and devoid of player choice, especially older ones.
That basically only became a thing when Bioware popularized it. Like you said there are plenty of RPGs without significant choice that came before and after those Bioware games.

If you go by choice being a defining factor for an RPG then most visual novels would be RPGs. Like you could say deciding whether or not to make Heileen a lesbian (if you pay extra for that version) would be some hardcore roleplaying.
 
I think we can all agree RPGs suck and computer RPGs were only invented because rpg nerds were too lazy to put on their capes and pointy ears and walk across the street to the next RPG loser's house so they made computer rpgs so their lazy nerdy asses could sit at home and pretend to be mythical creatures while feasting on mountain Dew and fried anything.

wow-south-park-o.gif


 
I think we can all agree RPGs suck and computer RPGs were only invented because rpg nerds were too lazy to put on their capes and pointy ears and walk across the street to the next RPG loser's house so they made computer rpgs so their lazy nerdy asses could sit at home and pretend to be mythical creatures while feasting on mountain Dew and fried anything.

wow-south-park-o.gif
You forgot Doritos.

 
I think we can all agree RPGs suck and computer RPGs were only invented because rpg nerds were too lazy to put on their capes and pointy ears and walk across the street to the next RPG loser's house so they made computer rpgs so their lazy nerdy asses could sit at home and pretend to be mythical creatures while feasting on mountain Dew and fried anything.
Nuh uh. They were invented for nerdy nerds so nerdy that even other nerds wouldn't D&D with them.

"You'll never call me a dweeb, Ultima II...."

 
All of you are...

nerds-3.jpg


[customspoiler=Besides, everyone knows this is the real deal when it comes to RPGs.]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_ekugPKqFw[/customspoiler]

 
An obviously disgruntled Level 4 Glitch Hunter is clearly eyeing your coupon.

Do you:

[1] Offer your coupon to the Level 4 Glitch Hunter.

[2] Try to sell your coupon to the Level 4 Glitch Hunter.

[3] Fight

[4] Flee
I... choose... [1] Offer my coupon to the Level 4 Glitch Hunter (if it's transferable) and then [4] Flee. Because... "Don't you be messin' with asheskitty. That girl be from the STREETS, yo."

 
Er... am I missing something?  FPS games are heavily dependent on the player's skill and not the character's skill.  You could breeze through FO3 without investing in any perks whatsoever and 5's across the board in SPECIAL stats.

 
An obviously disgruntled Level 4 Glitch Hunter is clearly eyeing your coupon.

Do you:

[1] Offer your coupon to the Level 4 Glitch Hunter.

[2] Try to sell your coupon to the Level 4 Glitch Hunter.

[3] Fight

[4] Flee
So, now we're turning GG into a text-adventure like Zork?

 
True, that's a big reason why Fallout (the old ones as well) are some of my favorite games. I love choices.

That said, while MysterD seems to equate choice to being a key factor of the RPG genre, I don't really think so. Many, many "true" RPGs are extremely linear and devoid of player choice, especially older ones.

I've been getting into Grim Dawn (the new ARPG from the Titan Quest guys), but haven't gotten too far. I'm really hoping there are some "choices" in it... Regardless, amazing game so far. Titan Quest needed guns.
I think choice matters in a RPG.

Whether it's choosing your class, skills; abilities; perks; actual # and point value of your base stats (which are in the total extreme here in ARPG's)....

or lots of choices that can impact the game-world, quest-ending, ending of the main-game, and its inhabitants...

...either way, there's chances that the game's gonna be played differently and/or even turn out much differently in a replay.

I think that's really the key for a game classified as a RPG.

Many games that are RPG's, they have some kind of mix of both elements. Percentages of what they using - well, that can vary.

It's just ARPG's normally very heavily emphasize the 1st element, in most instances.

I don't know - but if a game's labeled RPG is great, it's great. That's what matters.

Doesn't whether it's a classic cRPG, ARPG, FPS-ARPG, ARPG-FPS, RPG-strategy, some kind of hybrid of RPG and something else, or whatever.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
bread's done
Back
Top