
When people talk about where role-playing games come from, I'm pretty sure that pen and paper systems like Dungeons & Dragons come to mind. In truth, people have been role-playing for centuries, spanning from improvisational theater to murder mystery types of parlor games to even a child's game of pretend, even though we don't think of them as role-playing games.
So that begs the question: What exactly is a role-playing game? The term "role-playing" in modern times has been thrown around so much that is has seemingly lost its meaning. The traditional definition of a role-playing game encompasses a fairly wide range of games in which a player assumes a role in a fictitious setting. Success and failures within the game are determined by a set of rules and guidelines. The goal of any good role-playing game is to tell a collaborative story, crafted out of the choices and consequences of its players.
This is how it usually works: Each player chooses or is assigned a role or a character. Each player is in turn in charge of using that character to interact with the setting for the sake of progressing the narrative. The point is that, the players are responsible for choosing paths from their character's point of view. It's all about viewing something from another person's perspective and deciding what they would do, not you.
The game world, at least in a traditional pen and paper role-playing campaign is represented by a dungeon master, who is generally in charge of managing the setting and creating any details or encounters that the players would come across on their adventure. The dungeon masters also serves as a referee, enforcing the game's rules and providing player guidance. In a computer based RPG (CRPG), the dungeon master is represented by the AI.
So what makes a computer game apart of the role-playing game genre? First and foremost: Computer role-playing game is a misnomer: CRPGs lack the distinct ability to allow players to choose. Many of the newer RPGs such as Mass Effect, do allow for some degree of choice but ultimately lack the ability to create emergent stories based solely upon a player's actions. At heart, a role-playing game is a story created by its players. The setting is just a construct.
A more accurate description would be interactive fiction. The player assumes the role of a character and plays through a predefined story. The game still tells a story, but a linear one. All video game narratives are linear, some just hide it better than others. But if having a story and playing an entity is the definition of a CRPG, then all computers games would be of that genre. In Mario you assume the role of Mario on a quest to save the princess. In Half-Life, a game that is ironically closer to a role-playing game than many actual CRPGs, you are for all intents and purposes Gordon Freeman. Valve has been very careful about not breaking your point of view within the game.
However, neither of these games, to say the last, are considered even close to CRPG by modern standards. Traditional CRPGs were defined by gameplay, being largely stat based and heavily influenced by D&D. Nowadays, the RPG genre spans such a wide variety of titles that gameplay itself is almost irrelevant to its definition. So again, what exactly defined a computer based role-playing game? What exact criteria separates an RPG from a non-RPG? Two things:
- Character progression: All CRPGs have either a leveling or an advanced skill/stat based character progression system in effect. Above all game mechanics and combat systems, character progression is the one technical element that all CRPGs have in common.
- A narrative: A narrative must contain (my loose definition) a setting, characters, conflict, story and dialogue. In regards to computer games, role-playing games usually have more developed story interaction than most other games of other genres. By definition, all RPGs feature a character or role that the player fills.
Both Deus Ex and Half-Life are first person shooters yet only one is considered to be a part of the role-playing genre. Even though Half-Life, as mentioned before, could arguably be truer to a role-playing game than most actual CRPGs, it is not because it has no character progression system in place. The same is true of many other RPG sub-genres: For example: Final Fantasy Tactics vs StarCraft, Puzzle Quest vs Bejeweled. Though many games have a narrative, in order to be considered a CRPG they must also have character progression.
Interesting exception: Sleep is Death. It's a two-player collaborative story telling game. One person creates and controls the world the other persons plays an entity or a character in that world. The player and creator alternate turns: The player interacts, moves or speaks and the creator in turn alters the world. Each turn is automatically screenshotted and compiled into a story. That's the closest thing to role-playing that I've ever seen in a computer game. Specifically because of the role player choice has within the game and the focus on actual story telling.
So will we ever see a "true" single-player or massively multiplayer role-playing game? One day, but not now. At the moment I don't think that gaming technology has progressed to the point of being able to create a fully emergent story. But that said, the CRPG genre is constantly changing so the next great game could be just around the corner. I don't think I covered everything that I wanted to cover in this post. So at some point I would like to type out at least two more articles: 1. The Appeal of Role-Playing, why we like it and what we learn. 2. Eastern vs Western Style CRPGs.

Comments (6)
Don't forget Neverwinter Nights. Its multiplayer experience is right on par with Sleep Is Death, and is so well done that people (including me) continue to play it to this day. Most games are crafted by the DM and follow a somewhat linear progression, but there are also several persistant servers for an MMO-style experience, but with more role playing. There are even some servers that are hybrids, being open MMO-style but with DMs roaming and controlling certain aspects. Definitely multiplayer RPG gold.
And you already know of Fallout 1 and 2 and Arcanum. Granted they're slightly more linear, but the route the player takes is where the player can really play their role. Few games have done it better.
You made some great points there. I haven't thought of Half-Life in that context, but with what I have seen of it I think you're right; it is a lot closer to being a RPG than most "RPGs". Very similar to this would be portal.
You're spot on with pointing out that computer games labeled as RPGs these days are only tangentially related to the meaning of the phrase.
It would be awesome, but I honestly don't think that we'll see a "true" software based role-playing game in our lifetimes, if they ever come about. It would require a monumental amount of pre-written content (or flexible content generation) to just simulate the experience. As you say, some games are working on this route. To fully automate a DM, though, would require nothing short of an A.I. Anything less would just be huge piles of content spruced up to look spontaneous and reactive.
And Keiya, did Dave give you my dice? O_o
Speaking of NWN, I was thrilled to discover that a co-op sequel was in the works...until I had read who was making it. Everything Cryptic Studios touches turns to mediocrity QQ
I left out a paragraph that I was going to include about the Sims franchise and its appeal as a game that encourages the creation of emergent stories. It's obviously not a roleplaying game in any sense, but that one element is what has always fascinated me the most about the series and why I return to it again an again (despite gaping and frustrating flaws).
It's probably possible to simulate a DM with clever mechanics. It would still be a "man behind the curtain" situation but it still may work.
Haha Lee you must also have a set of blue dice. The blue d20 is untainted...unlike the black die in the back.
Just stick with NWN1. The mods have made the game a rich experience to last. (And it runs on Linux.) NWN2 was fundamentally flawed, and NWN1 (aka Neverwinter) is likely going to abandon everything that made the first two decent. (Coop? NWN1 had that years ago! It's an old hat.) Pity Bioware has moved on to watered-down, consolized stuff with "Stoy." (DAO was half decent, but it had its own issues.) It will be a long time before we get another game like the original. If at all.
As for "emergent gameplay," I never was a fan of that for single player games. I've always felt that a game should have direction and goals for the player to accomplish. Without that the player just ends up fooling around and there really is no challenge. (On occasion one will be hit by inspiration and cool stuff will happen, but really . . . how often does that happen.)
Going further, even a true RPG still needs to have some form of direction or goal. If the player is just given a sandbox and told to go role play away, nothing significant will come of the game. The player needs the developer/dm to guide them through the game and provide a creative counterpoint. (Do you think a player could role play through Dragon Age without any direction?) As was mentioned, an AI would have to be exceptionally smart, so the only real solution for a true RPG is a human DM, which NWN pulls off nicely (though with the limits of the engine).
"NWN1 (aka Neverwinter)" should be "NWN3 (aka Neverwinter)"
Hmm forgot to add in the article that almost all role-playing games, table top or otherwise are linear (unless your group of players goes off on a true tangent >_>); Pen and paper systems mask it better since there is an actual person DMing the setting.
Most CRPGs are not only linear, but straight up on rails, particularly those of the JRPG flavor. I would love to play a game that allows the player to actually have true influence on the outcome of the game, but as mentioned above, doubt that is happening soon.
Oh hey that's right, NWN has DMing tools. See, why don't more games nowadays do that?
Also, "dice curse" isn't exclusive to phyiscal dice lol.
Post new comment