It's Role-Playing, Not Roll-Playing!

[GameBanshee News]

Hooked Gamers brings us an oddly named editorial discussing the nature of RPGs.

What most developers miss when they make computer RPGs is that RPG stands for role-playing game. It does not stand for adventure game, nor does it stand for hack'n'slash. Although both are part of a good RPG (who doesn't like some action now and then and adventures are a must, naturally), RPG is also much more. You aren't just going through and adventure, killing enemies and looting treasures, you are supposed to be playing a role. Unfortunately, most so-called computer RPGs forget this entirely and treat the genre as if it was simply a fancy name for adventure and hack'n'slash combined.

But, what does playing a role actually mean? What could the computer RPGs do better to take into account this facet of the genre? In the following, I'll study some aspects that will make a game feel like a real role-playing game.

He centers the debate on character design, character interaction and non-linear storytelling. Especially on that last point he's being a bit too narrow for my tastes, basically painting Oblivion as the perfect non-linear storytelling because Oblivion doesn't force you to do anything. Sadly, Oblivion also doesn't really tell much of a story, so it's more "non-linear something" than "non-linear storytelling".

Spotted on RPGDot.

[Wolfwood]

Great to see my blog starting such discussion!

Anyway, just to explain the title of the article: "roll-playing" is a sometimes used derogative term for such role-playing game players who treat the game as simple board game (_rolling_ dice, min-maxing their characters, looking for holes in the rules). In my article, I used it to refer to the CRPGs that fail to address the role-playing side of the game and concentrate on action, adventure etc.

And, my intention was not to praise Oblivion as the best CRPG of all time. It was merely the best example of a game where the player can actually choose to do whatever he or she wants to do, instead of being directed along a narrow path designed by the game developers.

Please note that my previous blog entry concentrated on the narrowness of the game systems, while this latter one concentrated on role-playing.

[Tricky]

Well, that's one of the few things Oblivion has got going for itself. Go anywhere you want, develop whatever character you want. However, between 'Turn Undead' and Mithril armor, there is a substantional amount of fiction and gameplay borrowed from D&D settings, if not general fantasy. Not all of them were around in Morrowind, so it shows how much Oblivion aims to please. It's not criticism on your blog entry, but find that ironic.

What you are saying applies just about only to character development. I have no reason to call the world of Cyrodill any less extensive than that of Amn. However, as Buck or Brother None stated there is just no way this applies to quest and therefore the storyline in general. Considering these things, I can conclude one thing that has been said before on countless occasions. Oblivion plays like an MMO, it *again* aims to please. And what is the one advantage single-player games have over MMO's? Their storytelling mechanisms. Not much of that in Oblivion either.

I haven't exactly been brought up with D&D rulebooks, so if I look purely at Oblivion's and Neverwinter Nights' methods of character development, I just see two different things. Not necessarily one thing that could be better than the other, just one that happens to interest me more than the other. Personally, I love the math jobs, the process of figuring out how to take advantage of a D20 system that is essentially restricting. "Roll-playing" in any case doesn't really do that justice. Heh, I can do that for hours if I'm not careful and I don't even have to play the game in the mean time. And I can just as well see how someone might prefer to hack and slash MMO style, get some frustration worked out or something.

Heck, these are just two reasons, and they're not like two sides of óne coin at all. Maybe.. more like 20-sided dice.

[Lady Dragonfly]

You try to take into account all sorts of gamers: those who like magic, those who want to rely mainly on their melee skills and those who like playing the rogue/ranger bowman, or any mix of the above, and design quests and adventures that serve all of them. This way, you make sure that they all have something to do and you do not force them all to play through the exact same quests - this also greatly increases the longevity of the game, since the gamer may want to take on a different role the next time and thus chooses different quests to take. Also, you never ever force the player to play through the main plot if they don't want to do so. Let them play around in your world with as few restrictions as possible.

All good points.
Personally, I can imagine playing a game while bypassing the main plot only if the main plot is about as engaging as a laundry list. Oblivion is a good example, here. So, yes, we should be able to bypass the main plot, without penalty.
A good story should be concentrating on PC and must be intellectually and emotionally compelling enough to at least keep our curiosity awake.

[Wolfwood]

Heh, Oblivion surely aims to please, as you said, Tricky. I'm also wary of the MMO like gameplay in it (as well as the weak, unmotivated main plot, fantasy armour and swords, the way jumping is handled etc.) but it does give you a pretty nice character creation system, where you can choose your strengths just the way you like 'em and the skill and level progression is as unobtrusive as I've seen in a CRPG.

Still, a good look at Runequest or some other pen-and-paper RPG would do much good to the whole CRPG genre. I'd especially like them to look at HARN for the realism factor (at least as far as armour goes), since I hate those ludicrous fantasy swords and impossible-to-wear armour that most games have (I blame MMOs for this) to no end...