By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

What about strategy-RPGs?
Many such basically take the combat from RPGs and make that a strategy game. But is there a genuine "strategy-RPG", game that is both a strategy game and an RPG, or just strategy games with RPG elements or reversely RPGs with strategic battle system?



Around the Network
Kaunisto said:

What about strategy-RPGs?
Many such basically take the combat from RPGs and make that a strategy game. But is there a genuine "strategy-RPG", game that is both a strategy game and an RPG, or just strategy games with RPG elements or reversely RPGs with strategic battle system?

I think what you mean by that is more the Tactical RPG genre in itself no ? Cuz I can argue that any type of RPG's demand a modicum of strategic process to the way you approach any of it's RPG-esque elements, same for the combat.



Switch Friend Code : 3905-6122-2909 

Kaunisto said:

What about strategy-RPGs?
Many such basically take the combat from RPGs and make that a strategy game. But is there a genuine "strategy-RPG", game that is both a strategy game and an RPG, or just strategy games with RPG elements or reversely RPGs with strategic battle system?

Not sure about what kind of strategy exactly you're asking, but if you think something like grand strategy games, then King of the Dragon Pass (1999) comes to mind, as well as Crusader Kings. HoM&M might fall into category of RPG-strategy.

If you're thinking SRPGs, I always felt it's misnomer, since VG RPGs are coming from D&D, which is inherently tactical coming from actual wargaming and played with minis on battlemaps (I do understand why there is distinction in Japan about those, however).



What is an RPG?

   A role playing game.

How does a RPG differ from a JRPG?

  A JRPG was made in Japan.



That is an interesting question. Because I sum it up with Mass effect-any game where you can level up your character and pause the game at times.



BiON!@ 

Around the Network
Shtinamin_ said:
haxxiy said:

I'd argue for an originalist interpretation that any game whose main mechanics ultimately derive from Dungeons & Dragons is an RPG, and those who don't aren't. Simple.

Of course, these days, a lot of games mix and match genres, so... not as simple.

So Dungeons & Dragons is the original RPG. What are the core mechanics of that game?

Personally, I think the main core mechanics that are the foundation to D&D the following:

  • Exploration
  • Social Interaction
  • Combat

Am I missing anything?

What have RPG's done to expand on these mechanics and anything outside these?

A levelling system, and that's one of the defining systems of the genre, if not THE most defining system. Otherwise games like The Legend of Zelda would also also be RPGs, but they're actually Action-Adventures.

Also, not all RPGs have social interaction. Roguelikes in particular often don't have any real interaction other than combat, especially older ones.

Technically, you could do an RPG without combat, instead levelling other tasks outside of combat. if you would remove the combat from Rune Factory 5 for instance but still keep the progression system in place, it would be an RPG despite not having any combat.

Edit: If you want to know more about what constitutes an RPG and the history of CRPGs, head right over to the CRPG Addict, who tries to play through every RPG in a more or less chronological order. He's currently (after over 500 games!) in 1993 apart from some odd missed older entries. But those odd entries keep piling up, he's been in 1993 for almost 8 years now...

Last edited by Bofferbrauer2 - on 19 February 2024

Bofferbrauer2 said:

A levelling system, and that's one of the defining systems of the genre, if not THE most defining system. Otherwise games like The Legend of Zelda would also also be RPGs, but they're actually Action-Adventures.

Also, not all RPGs have social interaction. Roguelikes in particular often don't have any real interaction other than combat, especially older ones.

Technically, you could do an RPG without combat, instead levelling other tasks outside of combat. if you would remove the combat from Rune Factory 5 for instance but still keep the progression system in place, it would be an RPG despite not having any combat.

Edit: If you want to know more about what constitutes an RPG and the history of CRPGs, head right over to the CRPG Addict, who tries to play through every RPG in a more or less chronological order. He's currently (after over 500 games!) in 1993 apart from some odd missed older entries. But those odd entries keep piling up, he's been in 1993 for almost 8 years now...

Well, Zelda II has actual experience and 3 stats (Attack, Magic, Life), and it could be argued that BotW/TotK have 2 stats (Health/Stamina), though they are gained by orbs and not XP, so those (especially Zelda II) might be considered action-RPGs, though yeah, for the most of its existence Zelda was action-adventure.

RPGs without combat are fairly common in its tabletop variety, especially if you take into account that pretty much any system that has unified resolution (that is, treats combat just as any other skill check) can just ignore combat all together if that's what a particular campaign is not about. In VG space, Disco Elysium is a good example of that.

I wonder if CRPG Addict will ever get to even the end of 90s, given there are some really long games from 1994 onward.



I personally think the honest answer is genres don't really exist anymore. Most games are a blend of multiple games. Spider 2 is open world adventure layout, action battle system with rpg elements like leveling up .... what is spider man 2? A blend (and a damn amazing game).



i7-13700k

Vengeance 32 gb

RTX 4090 Ventus 3x E OC

What is it that makes a RPG and RPG, What are the basic foundations that determine what is a RPG?
I personally define RPG as a game were you build a character throughout the game (role playing game). The start of the game the character is weak or underdeveloped in skills, but by the end of the game your character is powerful and rich in skills.

And how has the original RPG evolved into nowadays RPG?
In the past RPGs were very numerical. It was very hard to find an RPG were you don't level up your character with a linear number system (number-based RPG). But now the formula has been experimented with in a range of ways that it can blur the line on whether a game is considered an RPG or not, from turn based, real time, action, strategy, collecting monsters, etc.
Hybrid genres can be non-RPG based yet still have RPG elements within it.
Final Fantasy has experimented with a range of mechanics over the years, from Group battles, turn-based, real time, action, etc.
Fire Emblem is a turn-based strategy RPG. A good example of a hybrid.
Zelda is an action-adventure, but it's also a pragmatic RPG because instead of increasing the numbers to build Link, the player used practical means to build the character like collecting items and abilities. He starts off weak and lost, but in the end he is a strong hero that can navigate to anywhere in the terrain. I also define Metroid (and other Metroidvania games) as pragmatic RPGs (including the main Resident Evil games) for the same reason.
Pokémon is a game were you collect creatures and train them up. This is like a subgenre of it's own.
Modern AAA RPGs tend to be action-based such as the Witcher 3. This has worked out well for many modern games.
Online multiplayer has added a dynamic that never existed before. MMORPGs like World of Warcraft stood out from single-player RPGs that came before it.
It's not just about new mechanics (but it mainly has been); themes have also evolved the genre over the years. Fallout is a western RPG that is themed in a post-nuclear environment, this is different from the stereotypical theme of a Medieval setting that western RPGs have done to death and beyond.

How does a RPG differ from a JRPG?
RPGs are typically western and have realistic western characters & western themes. Medieval themes tend to be the main setting such as Elder Scrolls, Might and Magic & World of Warcraft.
Whereas JRPGs tend to have an anime aesthetic and made in Japan with character being the main driver of storytelling rather than the lore. There is an emphasis on adventure & drama themes too. There are a lot of unusual creature designs in RPGs such as Final Fantasy enemies, dragon Quest, Pokémon, Monster Hunter etc.

Even though RPGs and JRPS are distinctively different, the lines can blur at times though such as Elden Ring.

What can be done to elevate the RPG (or JRPG) experience?
Nuance of game mechanics.
New themes.
Hybrid of genres (& themes).
VR :D
True A.I. (something that has never been done to the complex degree that I am thinking of (ChatGPT style).

What has been done to make the RPG (or JRPG) experience worse?
Linearity such as FF13.
Being too samey as other RPGs.


Dear OP, I hope my answers were helpful. Sounds like your making/design a game or writing an essay in game design :)



I have (or have/had in the household): ZX Spectrum, Commodore 64, Amiga, NES, Sega Master System, Super Nintendo, Sega Megadrive, Gameboy, Playstation, Nintendo 64, Windows 95, Gameboy Colour, Windows 98, Sega Dreamcast, Gameboy Advance, PS2, Gamecube, Xbox, Windows XP, Nintendo DS, Xbox 360, Wii, PS3, Windows Vista, iPhone, Windows 7, 3DS, Wii U, PS4, Windows 10, PSVR, Switch, PS5 & PSVR2. :D

and I Don't have: Magnovox Odyssey, Any Atari's, Any Macintosh computers, Sega Gamegear, Virtual Boy, Sega Saturn, N-gage, Xbox One, Xbox Series X/S, PSP, PSVita & Andoid Phone. Plus any non-main-stream consoles/platforms I haven't mentioned.

HoloDust said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

A levelling system, and that's one of the defining systems of the genre, if not THE most defining system. Otherwise games like The Legend of Zelda would also also be RPGs, but they're actually Action-Adventures.

Also, not all RPGs have social interaction. Roguelikes in particular often don't have any real interaction other than combat, especially older ones.

Technically, you could do an RPG without combat, instead levelling other tasks outside of combat. if you would remove the combat from Rune Factory 5 for instance but still keep the progression system in place, it would be an RPG despite not having any combat.

Edit: If you want to know more about what constitutes an RPG and the history of CRPGs, head right over to the CRPG Addict, who tries to play through every RPG in a more or less chronological order. He's currently (after over 500 games!) in 1993 apart from some odd missed older entries. But those odd entries keep piling up, he's been in 1993 for almost 8 years now...

Well, Zelda II has actual experience and 3 stats (Attack, Magic, Life), and it could be argued that BotW/TotK have 2 stats (Health/Stamina), though they are gained by orbs and not XP, so those (especially Zelda II) might be considered action-RPGs, though yeah, for the most of its existence Zelda was action-adventure.

RPGs without combat are fairly common in its tabletop variety, especially if you take into account that pretty much any system that has unified resolution (that is, treats combat just as any other skill check) can just ignore combat all together if that's what a particular campaign is not about. In VG space, Disco Elysium is a good example of that.

I wonder if CRPG Addict will ever get to even the end of 90s, given there are some really long games from 1994 onward.

Yeah, Zelda II is the most RPG of the Zelda titles, and Botw/TotK are arguably also RPGs due to their progression.

And yes, several RPGs allow for pacifist runs, but most of them do have combat as a mechanic. Like you said, Disco Elysium is a good example of this. Age of Decadence is one where you can do this too if you know what you're doing. Graveyard Keeper also could be considered as an RPG without combat, though quantifying Graveyard Keeper as just one genre is pretty difficult...