I am indeed the article writer.  I apologize for the confusion but since gamrConnect and gamrReview are now separate entities it doesn't make a ton of sense for my forum nick to make an appearance on gamrReview.

You're right that the end result is the same whether you are getting increased stats or better equipment, and it's largely an arbitrary distinction, but I make it because it helps to define the genre in a way I find acceptable and doesn't include highly variant and off the wall games such as God of War.

To me player choice is secondary because it gets used in so many other genres.  Adventure games often have a large amount of player choice throughout so it would be difficult to make a distinction between something like Heavy Rain where your choices dictate which characters remain alive throughout the story and skyrim or Fallout since both have a lot of player choice in their gameplay mechanics.

It doesn't make a massive effect, no.  But that means you have to define between areas of grey like "which of these games has an acceptable amount of character development through the game to be an RPG, which is a situation I did my best to avoid.

Yes I'd call Pandora's Tower an RPG even though you don't have any choices throughout the leveling process.  I'd suggest that since you can craft and change your equipment that it fits your definition as well.  I realize that my definition for RPG doesn't work for the table top iterations but I'm only trying to define the term as it pertains to video games.  

I actually think a good argument can be made for San Andreas in that it can be played as an RPG. Weapons leveled via player actions but also muscle, fat and general fitness. I suppose the main difference is that you could constantly change these attributes (both increase and decreasing) throughout the game. Weapons not so much. And wouldn't the base stat be zero in this case?

This thread has been done, redone, reshaped and remade countless times and never ends with a "proper" conclusion as to what actually defines a RPG.

Personally, a RPG is defined by the narrative and characterization of the game's protagonists and story. If you have a game which revolves around a varied set of characters taking specific roles (be it pre-determined ones or that you can shape and mold) that's pivotal to the story's events and whose evolution is made via a set of stats/parameters that you can manipulate.

That being said, the RPG genre itself is pretty expansive and in it's current nowadays molds doesn't resemble it's D&D origins that much since most of it's elements are diluted and mixed with other genres. Which leads us to the sub-genre characterization, which is probably the most correct one to assume.

Yes, you get my point. If the character-development is dependent on the game-progress and the player has no choices, than I wouldn't count it as RPG.

Difficult part. I agree that at a table with a Pen&Paper the players influence the story strongly. Hell, they could decide that the princess shouldn't be rescued and help the dragon instead. But that is difficult on the computer. The computer/console is no human, it cannot come up with a new story to react to decision the player(s) make. Every story-path has to be programmed in advance. And no developer really wants to create 10 stories to put in one game, if in every playthrough you experience only one (hmm, such a game would be great, if I think about it). Yes, Bioware did that to some degree in Baldur's Gate and Dragon Age. You could influence some aspects of the story, although the main storyline was kept regardless of your actions.

Does this look RPG-ish enough for you?

I mentioned Metroid because many people believe that Super Metroid and 2D Castlevania after SotN belong to the same genre. And because it was funny that I could replace Zelda with Metroid and everything was still true xD

The base stats thing rule out plenty of Action RPGs like Light Crusader, The Story of Thor and Shining Wisdom.

In the GTA case, what Scoobes said. Max health and running can also increase with food and exercise. Do games need a character screen with numbers to be considered RPGs? Or starting values for stats have to be different than zero?

That is actually directly contrary to what RPGs are about. The Gamemaster never hands out characters to the players and determines how they develop it. The players play a role, yes. But in difference to acting they invent that character and script the character themself. Try play a Pen&Paper, you will see what I talk about. And the videogame-RPGs are descending from Pen&Paper. Mostly did descend from D&D, the influences are very good to see, with levels, classes and whatnot.

With JRPGs you probably mean FF and not Pokemon. That has other roots. The companies Square, Enix and Nihon Falcom started with Visual Novels, that are game that tell a story, with no or near to no interaction at all. Modern games are more about cinematics, so they could be called interactive movies.

JRPGs like FF are not a good way to define RPGs. They are definitely late to the party, the genre already was created, first by pen&paper (1974 was the first D&D released). Then followed fast first 'western' RPGs for computers, 1975 and 1976 already started pedit5, Dungeon and Dnd. 1980 was Rogue released, a game that was so popular that it spawned it's own sub-genre: rogue-like. The first MUD (online RPG) started 1978 and also created a big subgrenre of hundreds of games. The very influental games Wizardry and Ultima were released 1981. The first Dragon Quest released 1986, the first Final Fantasy 1987. At this point existed already hundreds of RPGs.

Yes, if the game makes the decision for you, it is an action adventure for me. Pandora's Tower has experience points and levelups, stats that increase, but as you play every time the same guy you play the game, it is no RPG for me.

What about games with random stat increases when leveling up?

Edit - And games that allow you to choose between different party members? You can play the game differently even if each character is always the same.

I was only somewhat irritated for a moment, that someone claimed to have written the article. Yes, it makes sense, but if you don't know that this nick and this name are the same person, it can be confusing at first.

Hmm, Metroid was mentioned in the thread. Samus get's better items through the game. That doesn't fit your definition. If Metroid is not SF but Fantasy instead, Samus is a sorceress and instead of weapons to fire different shots and items like a grappling hook she has spells, that do the same. Anything else: gameplay, story and so on are unchanged. Would you call it a RPG then? Because the character develops (new spells) and in difference to weapons it is no equipment but part of the character. It seems in that case it would fit your definition. But it would basically be the same game.

Player choice for character development. I don't know Heavy Rain, but heard that it allows for slightly different stories based on your choices. (I really should try out that game sometime.) But as far as I know, your character doesn't develop. Skyrim and Fallout have character development and that is influenced by players choices.

And normal adventure games (Heavy Rain aside) usually don't have player choices. You usually have to find the trigger to let the story advance. But regardless what you do, the story will stay the same the second playthrough. So it is not really a player choice.

Yes, but there will be always grey areas, that is unavoidable.

Yes, I'm aware of the weapon crafting. But you have a very limited number of weapons, that you get based on the progress of the game. The increase in weapon stats has only one way: better. That is not really a choice. It will not be much different on your second playthrough. And the customization through weapons is not big compared with the development of the character-stats, and these developments are games-choice.

It is not entirely about stat growth; because a good number of games which are clearly not RPGs have experience and star growth - including many fighting and sports games (like MMA games).

The term RPG was popularized in Japan long before it was popularized in the west - games like "dungeons and dragons" were called "RPGs" almost exclusively in Japan, but were popularly referred to as "pen and paper games" in the west. Role playing games in the west referered largely to psychological exercises in the west. Videogames that resembled pen and paper games would be which we commonly referred to as quest or adventure games in the west; RPG is not used in our magazines for these games. In Japan they were called "RPGs". That eventually spread over here too once games like Final Fantasy titles became popular. Terms like "JRPG" and "WRPG" were only created in the last decade or so, as they didn't appear anywhere until after the launch of Starwars Knights of the Old Republic. Common usage of the term "RPG" in the west was largely limited to describe turn-based RPGs like Final Fantasy, until people decided they wanted to call action games with similar traits RPGs too; and some even wanted to call Ocarina of Time an RPG.

Anyway, for an RPG - you can make an argument for almost every game to be an RPG nowadays - so there are some boundaries that should be noted: the gameplay emphasis should largely be based on the stats and not action elements; a turn based game which uses RPG element is is always an RPG; because the RPG elements fully determine the outcome. An action based game which uses RPG elements might not necessarily be one; For example, an MMA title with experience and stat progression still has the emphasis of success on action based skill - and not on the stat progression - is not an RPG. A game like secret of Mana where action is part of it, but your stats are more important to the outcome would make Secret of Mana an RPG...

On the other hand, this would exclude Terranigma which is clearly much more based in skill - and I am fine with that because Terranigma has much more in common with the game it is a sequel of (Illusion of Time) which is clearly an action adventure with a story. Although, despite having no experience points, and less of an inventory system than Legend of Zelda Link to the Past and higher, Illusion of Time is often called an RPG - but in reality, Illusion of Time and Terranigma are action adventures.