RPGWatch Forums - View Single Post - Diablo 3 - Not an Action RPG @ GameSpy
View Single Post


July 1st, 2012, 13:03
Originally Posted by MasterKromm View Post
Says who? Who has the authority to determine what qualifies as a "RPG" if there is no one true definition of what constitutes a "RPG"? To me, without a clear concise definition of RPG, any discussion is an exercise in futility. You may reject someone else's reality and impose your own, but it is not any more valid when objectivity is lacking(in this case a universally accepted definition)
That's precisely my point, and you're missing that I'm not imposing my own definition (I don't have one, even) on others. I'm suggesting they stop pretending that their views are objective or universal. They're not - just as mine are not.

At the very least, they should argue their case logically - because that IS the only thing approaching the universal.

It doesn't do any good going in circles about roleplaying demanding a certain amount of depth in a certain way, when that amount is totally vague and equally subjective - and will shift according to personal preference when a game qualifies suddenly. It's ridiculous.

One reason humans classify things is to facilitate efficient communication of thoughts and ideas. Any classification that lacks specificity is irrelevant/useless. Like referring to every mammal as simply a mammal, their are numerous distinctions that warrant further specific classifications.
That's another part of my point. There can never be efficient communication if you stick to a subjective definition and expect people to accept it as universal.

That's why the genre called "RPG" by itself will never amount to efficient communication. It's almost totally useless, except as additional information about a game - and you have to dig deeper, adding more words and concepts.

Because if I call a game an RPG - then everyone in the room will react according to their own subjective concept of what an RPG is, and you will actually not have communicated what the game actually is - because it's not universally defined.

So why bother making an argument if everyone is both right and wrong depending on from whose perspective you view the debate? Can you honestly separate "how the game is" from "what it is" while remaining true to your pursuit of objectivity?
I'm "bothering" to make an argument, because people are trying to make their subjective notions objective - or universally applicable. That means they're kidding themselves - and I'm trying to make that case logically.

As for whether I can separate HOW a game is from WHAT it is, I think I can. But even if I can't, it's still not important WHAT it is. At least, it's much less important.




Posts: n/a
Mentioned: Post(s)