Chambers <Ben### [at] gmailcom_no_underscores> wrote:
> Most video game players, when speaking of RPGs, are really speaking of 
> CRPGs.  Historically, computers have lacked the ability to allow 
> adequate RP, and instead focused on the systems used for running the 
> games (the numbers).

  What constitutes a RPG computer game is a very sliding scale.

  There are certainly games which get very close to the real thing. A good
example would be the Baldur's Gate series, which uses the AD&D ruleset
(with some minor practical shortcuts due to the medium) and thematics.
Of course the stories, settings and paths are rather fixed because it
would be quite impossible for a computer to generate the story as it goes,
but given this limitation it gets the job done quite well.

  (One nice thing about the Baldur's Gate series is that you don't need
to know *anything* about AD&D in order to play it, as all the logic and
math happens under the hood. However, if you are experienced in AD&D you
will probably see the rules being used.)

  Then some games start deviating a bit from the pure AD&D-style role
playing. For example the Elder Scrolls series uses its own rules and
playing logic, but is still quite a "hard" RPG (but not as hard as the
Baldur's Gate series).

  On the other end of the sliding scale of "RPG'ness" are the Japanese
style RPGs, which are quite "soft" RPG. They are usually characterized
by almost everything happening automatically (including leveling up and
learning of skills/spells), so the player is usually not given any options
on what to learn. They are also characterized by rather linear storylines
with only minor (and usually irrelevant) sidequests which serve little
more than for level-grinding and getting equipment.

  Then there are games which have some RPG-like features (such as getting
experience from fighting, leveling up and learning skills/spells), but
which cannot really be called RPGs.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message