Computers beat up my role player

[Umbran]

That's an oft-used strawman.

And accusations of "strawman" are an oft-used technique for being dismissive. I suggest you not use that technique with me

In this case, it isn't a strawman - it's reductio ad absurdum, which has solid uses...

You see, RC, if the argument is often used, perhaps you should stop dismissing it out of hand. Rather than assume that we're all nasty little liars out to win a point, consider the possibility that we're using it because it is very close to some of our experiences - that what I'm suggesting isn't nearly as absurd as you contend - indicating that your definition doesn't fit common enough real-world situations.

Maybe you never went through the phase, but I'll bet for a lot of folks here many older TSR modules were rather like this - there was often enough no dialog to be had except with other PCs (the module being composed of monsters and traps). The monsters are beaten by combat, and the traps through methods strictly defined in the text. The thing can be played as a tactical wargame...

And that's not surprising. RPGs branched off of wargaming roots. Somewhere, there's a dividing line between them. But I suggest the dividing line is broad and vague, and has far more to do with what is going on inside a player's head than with exactly how much adaptive flex the environment theoretically has.

Adaptive environment is usually a wonderful aid to roleplaying. However, I think you mistake "wonderful aid" for "necessary condition".

 

[Raven Crowking]

The difference is that in a CRPG, the choices all have to be made beforehand -- how much dialogue to give a given character, whether to make someone romanceable, how many options to give the players.

Exactly so. The choices all have to be made beforehand, by the designer of the game.

Again, certainly, I will grant that there are computer programs that can aid the DM as a form of communication, and some computer "games" might at times fill this niche....insofar as the technical proficiency of the DM allows the "game" to be a help and not a hinderance to actual play.

 

[Raven Crowking]

And accusations of "strawman" are an oft-used technique for being dismissive. I suggest you not use that technique with me

Is that mod talking, or person who disagrees talking? Because I assume the second, and will respond accordingly.

In this case, it isn't a strawman - it's reductio ad absurdum, which has solid uses...

I disagree.

Not only is it a strawman, but rather than simply dismiss your argument, as you claim, I pointed out why it was a strawman through reductio ad absurdum. Also, as I am sure you know, because an argument is often used, that is no evidence that it is a good argument, or that it should not be dismissed out of hand, especially once it has been often answered.

I would be curious to know how you draw the conclusion that I "assume that we're all nasty little liars out to win a point" though. How does my statement that your point doesn't convince turn you into a "nasty little liar"? This is the "wrongbadfun" gambit using different terminology, and again isn't a valid argument.

Because I disagree with your conclusions, it doesn't mean that I think you are lying about the experiences from which you draw those conclusions. Merely that I think that the conclusions you have drawn from those experiences are, in this case, wrong. I have certainly drawn enough wrong conclusions from actual events to be able to state, without feat of begin wrong, that such a thing is possible.

Nor is the "my experience is that we played rpgs more like wargames" a valid argument about either the possibility of what you could do, or even (to be fair) the comparitive possibilities of your earlier rpg experiences vs. computer games.....unless, as said before, you suggest that a group of people sitting down with D&D rulebooks and a published module that like to run the combat rules strictly as written are unable to adapt to unforseen ideas and plans during the course of the game. Or, conversely, that group sits down and allows no option for action outside the RAW, allows no non-preordained dialogue to affect the action, and allows no solution to problems that was not already written into the module....in other words, if the DM runs the game as a computer game.

If that is what you are saying, please say so clearly.

Finally, the reason I have repeatedly brought up Madden Football vs. real football, and Monopoly as a role-playing game is because I believe that the best chance to successfully convey my view (if not convince the reader) is to cause that reader to first determine what limitations to the term "RPG" exist for him, and then compare and contrast them to the topic at hand.

Where a given compare & contrast contains a statement that seems to me equivilent to "In the case of Madden Football, it is not football because X =/= Y, but in the case of computer games, they are RPGs although X =/= Y" I am bound to point out the inconsistency in that position.

YMMV, of course.


RC

 

[WayneLigon]

I don't believe that's necessarily true. There's stories all over the place about railroading GMs - they have a fixed scenario outside of which the players cannot step, predetermined solutions to challenges the players must use. Are these guys running an RPG?

More and more, I'm coming to think that the answer to this is 'No'. They're playing a somewhat more complex boardgame.

I also strongly suspect that many games of D&D are run this way, and badly, because there's no-one to teach or show these people any differently. Eventually the players, bored because their actions have no real effect on the game, leave. Again, I strongly suspect that this is the reason we see so many D&D players adbicate the game totally in favor of CRPGs because their gameplay experience is not really any different, and it's more convenient. Very, very sad.

 

[takyris]

Exactly so. The choices all have to be made beforehand, by the designer of the game.

That said, I don't believe that "degree of choice available to the player" is what determines whether something is an RPG or not, since I've played NWN modules that offered me more open freedom than some tabletop games I've played in.

 

[Raven Crowking]

See WayneLigon's post, directly above yours.

 

[ThirdWizard]

Yes. Language is about communicating. So if you want to discuss the games called CRPGs, you don't bother taking issue with the term. That doesn't mean that everyone feels the term is appropriate.

You'll note that I said two things:

1) People will not disagree if you call Final Fantasy an RPG.
2) Peoplw will disagree if you call God of War an RPG.

That should tell you something about what terms are acceptable. People aren't facilitating communication through non-confrentation. They're accepting definitions.

And, StarCraft is an RTS, no matter how little strategy your friend thinks it involves.

 

[Raven Crowking]

People will not disagree if you call Final Fantasy an RPG.

Here's a poll to see how EN Worlders use the term: http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=202761 I tried to not write a skewed poll, but the last choice might skew it a bit, because I think some people (myself included) use the term cRPG without believing that cRPGs are RPGs. Now I get to see if I'm all alone in thinking so.


RC

EDIT: While we have no conclusive data yet, I would say that the acceptance of cRPGs as RPGs is not nearly as widespread as you think.

 

[takyris]

See WayneLigon's post, directly above yours.

In which case you and Wayne are using "RPG played he way I like it" as the definition of an RPG. I agree to disagree.

Disguise it as you will, your attempt to control the definition implicitly and inherently places a value judgment upon the term, and as someone who spends his day trying to make games that offer complex and interesting choices in a world that reacts to those choices, I'm insulted that I'm apparently not doing enough to make a real RPG by your standards.

 

[Slife]

Grass and tomatoes are both 'plants' just like CRPGS and RPGs are 'Games' or 'Entertainments'.

Tomatoes are a fruit, by nature of it's structure. But they are not sweet like most fruits, and are not made into pies or desserts. Every grocery store I know groups the tomatoes in the produce section with the vegetables. There is even a popular vegetable juice drink that is mostly made from tomatoes. I would be willing to bet that if you asked any ten people in the US to name five vegetables, tomato would be one.

Most people consider tomatoes to be vegetables and treat their actual classification as a fruit as an interesting bit of trivia.

This still does not prevent them from being dead wrong.

This is more an artifact of scientific definitions being different from the ones in common usage than of people being incorrect.

Is a whale a fish? It used to be, but the scientific definition of fish changed it.