|
"That's not an RPG!"
How many times have you heard that one discussing one series or another? I don't know about you, but for me it's pretty frequent. And that's gotten me to wondering. Exactly what is an RPG? And more importantly, what's not? There's a line between what does and doesn't contstitue an RPG, sure enough. But like your favorite GBA title hooked up to a Jumbotron, that pixelated line's looking a little fuzzy .
First off, let's look at the definition of an RPG. These three letters, of course, stand for "Role-playing game." They, in essence, spring from the paper-and-pencil D&D days, and to a lesser extent text adventures like Zork! in bygone days. I think the word "game" speaks for itself, but let's take a deeper look at the role-playing portion. Simply, this means to play a role. That you as the player portray a character in an ongoing story. You're an actor, playing out this character's part in a grand story. Of course, the problem with this is that technically that might make just about every game but Tetris an RPG. Almost every genre of game features one or more continuous characters, and most have some form of plotline this character participates in. Somehow though, I don't see Street Fighter II as an RPG.
So, let's take another shot at this. What game would one consider a quintessential RPG? Five will get you ten almost anyone you ask will use the words "Final" and "Fantasy" in their reply. Thank you Square, for coloring our perception of what the role-playing game truly is. But by that account, very little would be considered an RPG. Taken as a whole, the FF series favors turnbased combat over real-time, and has certain conventions such as HP and MP bars, in almost every title. Games using a different structure certainly wouldn't count by that standard. Yet, I think it's safe to assume a game like Magna Carta would be an RPG. Or the Tales series. Or Grandia, or a hundred others I could name off the top of my head.
What about Kingdom Hearts, or .Hack? Critics of the "action" RPG genre dismiss games such as this as "not real" RPGs, due to their fast-paced combat and emphasis on things like jumping across platforms and such. Because they don't hold true to the turn-based, somewhat sluggish form of battle in things like Dungeons & Dragons of old, they must obviously be platformer games in lieu of Mario or Sonic the Hedgehog, some would say. Is this so? FFX-2 had a nearly real-time battle system, and FFXII and FFXIII are both very action oriented. I can think of a great deal of "true" RPGs that contained mobile action elements: FFVII's famous motorctcle chase and Chocobo riding, for instance.
One could stretch the limits on what an RPG is, or reduce them to the narrowest margin. In the end, I think it's all a matter of perception. To me, an RPG is a game whose story drives it. Where the action and battle are nothing more then ways to make an epic story interactive. To put you in control of a character whose destiny may shape the fate of his/her world. Nothing more, nothing less. To you it may be something competely different, and a third or fourth party might reply with a third or fourth answer. In the end, who is right? What do you think?
|
RSS feed
iTunes