«

[Eagle of Fire]

Yeah, well I exagerated slightly. Big deal.

The point I was trying to bring in, because yes there is quite a long reasoning behind all this, is that the tiny RPG-like elements in Diablo and Diablo II are insignificant in comparison to other elements. Sure, let's call Diablo II an Action/RPG/Adventure/Puzzle/Strategy/Simulation/Arcade game then. It does have some elements of each genre, isn't? (And I won't take no as an answer... )

Why is the game Dune branded as an Adventure game? The whole game consist of a Strategic view of the world in which you issue commands. But because the whole game resolve around the story taken from the books, its Adventure elements were deamed greater than the Strategic elements which were added simply to help further the main goal, which is to tell the story.

So why would Diablo II be an RPG title? No sense in this reasoning.

Whenever someone ask me what genre Diablo is, I always answer straightforward Action. And if they ask what kind of action game it is, I answer Hack & Slash.

Because it's the truth.

[Pex]

Ah, a good old 'Is Diablo an RPG?' argument I participated in a few of those and in the end settled down to call it 'Action RPG'.

Why? Well, it has more RPG elements than any other typical action game and at the same time has too much action to be a clasic RPG.

So, you can end your argument now and just agree with me

[Szilvio]

It is a bit silly if we want to strictly classify games, RPG, advanture, whatever. Most of the good games has mixture of all classes. Eg: Good flight simulation game has mixture of simulation, RPG, and advanture.
I know, that producers had to classify them, but do we need it?

[The Fifth Horseman]

Frankly, what defines RPG genre for me is the freedom of choice and being able to affect the plot.

If Diablo was an RPG, you would be able to:
* Join the forces of evil and lead them against the world of men
* Do different things with items than required to complete the quests - and possibly that may prevent you from completing them. Like reading the "Fungal Tome" or eating the black mushrooms.
* Find a different way of lifting King Leoric's curse
* Wear a goatman skin and bullshit the goat-things (you know what I'm talking about) into believing you're one of them
* Refuse to help someone. Or demand compensation in return for your help. Or refuse to be compensated for it.
* Slaughter all of Tristram on a whim. Just because you feel like it.
* Find a love interest in Gillian. Or perhaps in Adria.
* Instead of solving the problem of the poisoned well by killing demons, solve it by collapsing the cave they're in.

And so on. The only quest in Diablo where you have any choice is the one with the tavern sign, where you can either bring it to Ogden and get a magic trinket or bring it to a pack of demons and be attacked by them in return. Where, I ask, is the option to cleave the pack's leader through the skull and proclaim yourself the boss?

Now, let's take Fallout.
You talk to Killian and take the job of bringing proof against Gizmo.
You can talk to Gizmo and take the job of assassinating Killian.
If you feel like it, you can also just kill them both.

You can refuse to save Tandi from the Raiders.
Or you can demand compensation for it.

You can defeat the Radscorpions by killing them all.
Or you can do it just by collapsing the entrance to their caves.

You can leave the Ghouls to die with no water supply.
Or you can help them repair their water pump.

And on the list goes.
CRPG is not the same as regular role-playing, of course, where your choices are literally unlimited. But the ability to choose and the fact you will have to deal with the outcome of your actions sooner or later matters a real damn lot.

Let's take a look at Arcanum now.

King Praetor, the King Of Dernholm asks you to retrieve the taxes from the Mayor Of Blackroot. Talking with Dante (a rather bitter priest in the Sour Barnacle), he will offer to assist you. You don’t actually need him to solve any of the quests.

Talking with the Mayor, he has decided for Blackroot to align with Tarant. You can convince him to rejoin Cumbria by :

# Showing him the newspaper article found in Dernholm and telling him of the dangers of being in the middle of the conflict.
# Pick pocketing the taxes and then telling him you have got them. By doing this you show him that the guards are incapable of protecting him and he decides to rejoin.
# Retrieving his ceremonial dagger from the thieves (these can be found west of the train station across the river). He will rejoin if you return the dagger to him. To do this you can

# Kill them all and take the dagger
# Steal the dagger from them
# Buy the dagger for 300 gold (depending on your skills this can be negotiated down to 150 gold)
# Procure some Poison from Grunwalde (telling him you are going to use it on some orcs). This costs 100 gold.
# Steal item from the Hedgewizard for them (this is a small shack in the southern outskirts of town). You can either steal the small statuette from the locked chest using thief skills or make a deal with the Hedgewizard to double-cross the thieves (he gives you a scroll of create undead to do so).

Returning to Dernholm, you can accept your reward. If you have Dante in your party, you can give him the credit for returning the taxes and he will then rejoin the king.

This is role-playing.

If it was Diablo,

King Praetor, the King Of Dernholm asks you to retrieve the taxes from the Mayor Of Blackroot.
Talking with the Mayor, he has decided for Blackroot to align with Tarant. You can convince him to rejoin Cumbria by :
# Retrieving his ceremonial dagger from the thieves (these can be found west of the train station across the river). He will rejoin if you return the dagger to him. To do this you can
# Kill them all and take the dagger

[gregor]

Originally Posted by The Fifth Horseman

Frankly, what defines RPG genre for me is the freedom of choice and being able to affect the plot.

So where does in your opinion Ultima Underwolrd 1&2 fall then? or Arx fatalis. I kind of always thought of them as RPG. I thought they made them like that so they wouldn't be too static and dependant on "dices".

I can't put my finger on Mount and blade (since it wants to be all or nothing) or Boiling point with it's side missions.

meh.

[Pex]

I agree with that. I'm not saying that Diablo is a classic RPG, only that it has some RPG elements, that most of of action games don't, for which reason I decided to agree with calling it 'action RPG'. It's definitely more than hack&slash action game.

If anyone asked me to recommend a RPG for him, I would never go with Diablo. But if somene asked 'Do you know a RPG that doesn't have a really complicated level advance system or character creation and lots of action in it?' then Diablo would be my first choice.

[Simoneer]

In response to The Fifth Horseman: Yeah, you just described what YOU personally want in an RPG. That doesn't make Diablo less of an RPG, though. We all have things we personally want in any game. Personal freakin' preference. It doesn't... uh... ''factually'' affect anything.

I, for one, want to be able to make builds rather than having any attribute points distributed automatically. And yes, I want some freedom and choices (that covers a big area; Anything from being able to take different directions in the story itself to deciding if you want to kill someone or not).

I won't say Final Fantasy isn't an RPG because it lacks manual attribute point distribution, freedom, and choices, however. It's still an RPG. Or, by the modern definition: A JRPG. Still an RPG, though. And it has its depth, especially in the battles.



But that's just my view on things. Still, fact remains, your personal view on something doesn't make everyone else's view on them incorrect. Same goes for me, I suppose.

...I think I just led this arguement into a dead end.

Yeah. So let's end it.

[The Fifth Horseman]

Originally Posted by Simoneer

In response to The Fifth Horseman: Yeah, you just described what YOU personally want in an RPG. That doesn't make Diablo less of an RPG, though. We all have things we personally want in any game. Personal freakin' preference. It doesn't... uh... ''factually'' affect anything.

Let's approach the matter from a different angle, then: what makes Diablo an RPG?
Apart from the sticker on the box.

I, for one, want to be able to make builds rather than having any attribute points distributed automatically.

Customization isn't restricted to the RPG genre, however. Neither is having an experience/development system.

And yes, I want some freedom and choices (that covers a big area; Anything from being able to take different directions in the story itself to deciding if you want to kill someone or not).

My point is that in the roleplaying genre, the action elements are at best secondary.
Consider the very source of the name: Role Playing. Playing a role. That in itself indicates that the "gameplay" is plot-driven and the defining part is the "player" experiencing the setting and storyline, as well as the way he interacts with them.

I won't say Final Fantasy isn't an RPG because it lacks manual attribute point distribution, freedom, and choices, however. It's still an RPG. Or, by the modern definition: A JRPG. Still an RPG, though. And it has its depth, especially in the battles.

But by that definition, a game lacking combat element would not be an RPG.
Altough the popularized simplified view of role-playing aims to identify it with an experience system and character statistics, that definition is wrong. Both elements are undisputably common in the genre, but by no means define it.

You could take Fallout, throw out the combat and still have a role-playing game. You could do the same with the experience system and even the stats, and the game would still remain an RPG.

You could take Diablo, throw out the combat... and have what, exactly?
Going around, talking to people using pre-determined dialogue lines and bringing them items they asked for?
That, my friend, would not be role-playing but an adventure game.
Truth is that Diablo is defined by combat - to exclusion of everything else - and lack of the player's interaction with the storyline.

[Simoneer]

In reply to The Fifth Horseman:

Even if you don't affect the storyline you do play the role of a character, don't you? And with the online capabilities of Diablo 2, you can do ACTUAL role-playing in the chat. But then again, the same could be done with Counter-freakin'-Strike. So I suppose that doesn't count... at all.


And yeah, I guess I do stand corrected on some points here. But I think I'll turn to Acethor; It's an action RPG. Hence, it IS partly an RPG. Don't say it doesn't have RPG elements. Srsly guiz.

[onenpiepah]

Originally Posted by The Fifth Horseman

Let's approach the matter from a different angle, then: what makes Diablo an RPG?
Apart from the sticker on the box.

I don't really know what more I can add here. Diablo has everything classic CRPGs have, minus turn-based combat. That was the major controversy upon Diablo's release -- that was the initial, "Is this really an RPG?" debate -- the combat. Action/RPGs like Oblivion, Mass Effect and Fallout 3 weren't the norm, so any amount of action was held suspect.

The fact that you couldn't greatly affect the outcome of Diablo's storyline didn't bother people as much as the simplified classes and fast paced combat, because the memory of classic RPG series like Wizardry and Might & Magic were still fresh in people's minds. And like I've said before, the original CRPGs had little in the way of choices & consequences. All that came later, after some people began to retroactively hail Fallout as the "first" RPG.

So, again, if you care to define RPG as "Games made by Troika," more power to you. But a lack of choices and consequences doesn't disquality Diablo as an Action/RPG, it just gives it that much more in common with the original Wizardry, Ultima and Might & Magic games.