RPG Codex - GOTY 2017 Results

I see the Codex liked Demons Age even more than folks do here.

Prey which is RPG my arse at #2 and no spot for Grimoire.

Okay, who hacked Codex?!

Originally Posted by joxer
Prey which is RPG my arse at #2 and no spot for Grimoire.

Okay, who hacked Codex?!

Codex hacked Codex

I'll bet the threads over there are a mess.

Originally Posted by GabrielMP_19
The RPGCodex loved Prey? LOL

Of course,skyrim and fallout 3 too, it's an extremely popular rpg sub genre .Most codexers on steam have 80+ hours on it, 150+ is not rare, those who dont torrented it. It was not acceptable to say so, they even canceled that rpg of year thing back then cause the winner was too obvious. The staff had some grudge with Bethesda, either a ban from their forums and/or not receiving add money and free keys.

Originally Posted by Mortmal
Of course,skyrim and fallout 3 too, it's an extremely popular rpg sub genre .Most codexers on steam have 80+ hours on it, 150+ is not rare, those who dont torrented it. It was not acceptable to say so, they even canceled that rpg of year thing back then cause the winner was too obvious. The staff had some grudge with Bethesda, either a ban from their forums and/or not receiving add money and free keys.

Are you really comparing Prey to Skyrim and Fallout 3?

NieR Automata got a pretty high rank.

Prey looks like more of an RPG than XCom - though we were desperate to vote for anything that year.

Originally Posted by Gloomseeker
You're talking about objectivity when I'm afraid it's all very subjective and personal.

No, I'm specifically pointing out that it's subjective as opposed to objective, meaning it makes no sense to claim Prey shouldn't be an RPG. If people understand it's subjective, then I find it a strange criticism.

It's like saying someone shouldn't consider burgers food because he happens to think it's not food.

As if he never met another human being in his life and wanted to suppress differing opinions in general.

Basically a true RPG shouldn't rely on the physical skill of the player. That's one thing that most people overlook. If you're roleplaying then only the physical prowess of your character should be taken into account to determine success or failure and that disqualifies any games that rely on the player's ability to aim his mouse or stick for success. That's a big objection because in a real RPG you can be disabled or just had at aiming or have poor reflexes and still be able to play the role of a skilled character whereas in what most agree to call an action RPG your skill as a player is what matters, i,.e. you're not playing a role but you're playing a game.

So, you don't consider games like Witcher 3, Gothic, Daggerfall and so on RPGs?

The people who're not disabled and who actually enjoy these things shouldn't be considered - and they shouldn't be entertained?

You honestly think the tiny minority who're physically unable to apply personal skill in this way should dictate an entire genre?

Computer games are pretty much comparable to choose your own adventure game books in the sense that the experience is limited to what has been written and anticipated by the devs whereas pen and paper RPG is all about adapting and improvising. A fun pen and paper session is a collaborative effort between a number of people whereas a computer game is about providing a predetermined template with only some limited input on the player's part.

People are going on about VR when actual roleplaying is the ultimate VR experience simply because it relies on the power of imagination and is not limited by budget and technical issues.

That being said computer games are easy to use and convenient requiring very little effort which surely explains why they are so popular. It's fine really but let's not lose sight of the fact that they are still incredibly limited compared to the real thing (maybe one day we'll have real AIs in charge of NPCs which will be able to react and adapt to any action and learn from previous sessions but right now it's certainly not the case).

Thank you for your answer. A very interesting and exceedingly limited point of view on the genre.

Our top 3 is different. Which is good, as it gives people something different to talk about

P.S. If all goes well, the article about it will see the light of day this week.

Originally Posted by NewDArt
I've yet to play Expeditions. I really should try it.

I can't get past the art style with little heads in Battle Brothers - so I'm steering clear of that one.

Now who's being closed minded? I didn't pay attention to Battle Brothers until it was released because of the art style. Now it's one of my favorite games of all time. If you like tactical strategy/rpg's I would not skip BB.

People who wouldn't play Knights of the Chalice because of the graphics missed one of the best rpg's of the last decade.

Originally Posted by Hastar
Now who's being closed minded? I didn't pay attention to Battle Brothers until it was released because of the art style. Now it's one of my favorite games of all time. If you like tactical strategy/rpg's I would not skip BB.

What I personally like is different from trying to make what I personally like into something others should also personally like.

I don't like the art style, which is subjective and about personal preferences. Rarely is it a choice.

Not being able to understand that is the kind of thing that makes YOU closed minded

But enough about this. I find all this bigotry nauseating and not worth my time.

Yeah your bigotry about art direction I'm not trying to get others to like what I like. I said if you like tactical strategy/rpg's. If you don't then I would not play BB.

You also like to tell people what they understand and what they don't. I'm glad you were able to explain that to me because I don't understand. Just having a little fun

Originally Posted by Hastar
Yeah your bigotry about art direction I'm not trying to get others to like what I like. I said if you like tactical strategy/rpg's. If you don't then I would not play BB.

Again, bigotry is not about shedding every personal preference you have in life. It's about not accepting that people are different and that there should be room for all kinds of personal preferences.

That means you're a bigot if you can't accept my personal preferences, that I'm absolutely not trying to pass off as some kind of objective standard.

That's not in my DNA.

But, since I'm open-minded - I have no problem believing that the gameplay in BB is great. It might very well be.

Sadly, I don't play games that turn me off with their art style. I wish I could get past such things.

I feel the same way about Dominions, for instance. I think that game could be just my thing - if it didn't look like utter shit.

I'm cursed with being human.

Originally Posted by NewDArt
bigotry…
But, since I'm open-minded…

Riiiight.

Originally Posted by NewDArt
No, I'm specifically pointing out that it's subjective as opposed to objective, meaning it makes no sense to claim Prey shouldn't be an RPG. If people understand it's subjective, then I find it a strange criticism.

It's like saying someone shouldn't consider burgers food because he happens to think it's not food.

As if he never met another human being in his life and wanted to suppress differing opinions in general.



So, you don't consider games like Witcher 3, Gothic, Daggerfall and so on RPGs?

The people who're not disabled and who actually enjoy these things shouldn't be considered - and they shouldn't be entertained?

You honestly think the tiny minority who're physically unable to apply personal skill in this way should dictate an entire genre?



Thank you for your answer. A very interesting and exceedingly limited point of view on the genre.

You're welcome.

Of course my definition may seem narrow to you but the alternative is to embrace a broad definition and then a serious case could be make for any game featuring RPG elements to actually be considered an RPG and that's just another can of worms.

I disagree with you on your insistence that what you're saying is objective when it's just your opinion (which is totally fine by the way), what I've been doing is explaining MY opinion and that's pretty much it. I never claimed that it was superior but I will stand by my assertion that to me a game like Prey is certainly not an RPG (plus Chris Avellone seems to be surprised that Prey made the RPG Codex list so I'm not too bothered about having to justify myself regarding that particular game).

If I consider burgers to be junk food that's my prerogative and it's not up for discussion (although my opinion regarding some homemade burger would be radically different) so I'm not sure that's the best analogy.

So if what we're discussing is a matter of taste then we will have to agree to disagree -which is perfectly fine.

Me saying that I disagree with you doesn't make you wrong nor does it make you right either, it's just pointing at the fact that we have different perspectives and that your criteria are a lot less specific than mine when it comes to CRPGs.

For the record I do consider that The Witcher is not an RPG and has never been an RPG. You may look at it and see an RPG but to me that's completely inaccurate. At best I would agree to call it an Action RPG or preferably an Action Adventure game. It's pretty much like a gamebook and that's the closest it gets to being an RPG. It's based on the player's skill and not the character's, it's also about playing the part of Geralt and following a given script (despite the choices you have to make, akin to the choices you could make in a choose your own adventure game book) and that's not exactly the same thing as roleplaying. I could elaborate but that would be a bit pointless as I'm not trying to convince you that I'm right (because in the end that's just my opinion).

What I'm NOT saying is that the Witcher is not a good game (although I do believe it does have a number of flaws especially when it comes to combat and levelling). I may be saying that the game is not an RPG it doesn't mean that I'm saying it's a bad game, I personally play many games that are not RPGs or that I don't consider to be RPGs and that never prevented me from enjoying them for what they are and that includes the Witcher series.

There is a reason why so many games come out with an RPG tag and that's the simple fact that calling a game an RPG will boost sales. It's not about being true to some exacting principles that hark back to some pen and paper roots shrouded in mystery, it's just about money plain and simple.

That's why I'm slightly annoyed (or amused depending on my mood) when I see yet another game being passed as an RPG when it does have pretty little in common with actual roleplaying.

Let's face it, RPG is now trendy and despite everything I've said that's a good thing. I'm old enough to remember a time when people had no idea what RPGs were and what it meant and now RPGs have become mainstream. But that doesn't mean most people actually know what a real pen and paper RPG session is all about. They may have seen actors pretending to be playing D&D in shows like Community or the Big Bang Theory unfortunately that doesn't mean that they're getting it.

Also I don't really like what you're saying about my point that a real RPG won't penalise someone for being disabled. You're twisting my words to make it sound like I'm saying RPGs should be discriminating against people who are not disabled which is just nonsense!

The simple fact is that pen and paper RPG (not talking about LARPG here) does NOT discriminate people on the basis of their physical abilities (or lack thereof) because it's the character's abilities that are put to the test and not the player's (you're supposed to be playing the character and not yourself).

Computer RPGs are supposed to originate from pen and paper RPGs and that's why I've brought up this point. Many computer games with the RPG tag focus on a player's ability to click and aim instead of considering the character's ability and it means that the player is playing the game instead of playing a character (which is what roleplaying should be about).

And for the record I'm not saying that such games can't be entertaining or that they shouldn't exist, I'm just saying that if like me you abide by a certain definition of the genre that is true to the pen and paper roots then these games can't qualify as RPGs.

If you dismiss the pen and paper origins of the roleplaying genre then you may as well embrace a broad definition and include a multitude of games as RPGs.

Of course taking such an extreme viewpoint will make the RPG tag meaningless and that's exactly what's been happening for quite some time now.

Do you consider the recent Tomb Raider games to be RPGs? Because they tick most of the boxes when it comes to RPG elements. Or Assassin's Creed since they've been putting levels everywhere lately? Batman? Mad Max? Super Mario? Call of Duty? The Adventures of Tintin?

I'm being sarcastic but that's the current state of affairs and something that the results of the RPG Codex poll illustrate rather eloquently.

Feel free to disagree, my point is that nowadays saying that a game comes with an RPG tag won't tell you anything about the game in question except that maybe it has a few "RPG elements" and even then you won't know for sure if that's just some marketing sugar coating or if there is anything remotely similar to actual roleplaying to be found anywhere in that game.

In a *true* RPG I agree it's all about the character's abilities and not yours. Your job is to decide what actions to take, but the result of those actions depend on the character's abilities. It's Bill the Rogue the one with 18 Dexterity, not me.
Having said that, other games can be considered RPGs (call them 'dirty' RPGs) if they have lots of RPG elements like stats, skills, inventory and equipment, etc. and they affect the result of the actions.

I think it's got to be an internet law by now that any forum thread discussing a CRPG GOTY list must devolve into an unanswerable "What is an RPG?" discussion.

Originally Posted by JDR13
Are you really comparing Prey to Skyrim and Fallout 3?

They are all 3D first person action RPG, of various quality but from the same subgenre.

Originally Posted by wolfing
In a *true* RPG I agree it's all about the character's abilities and not yours.

That's why we're usually talking about cRPGs and not true RPGs.
While combat delegated to a player is always used as an example, what about puzzles where a player solves them for a "hero" diagnosed with inteligencia subnormalis. Or mixing pots where a player just does clicky clicky although character's alchemy is nonexisting. Not to mention games allowing masters of everything including blacksmithing expertise just because.

Nitpicking however won't lead us anywhere.
Regardless, Prey is not RPG. It's not even close to RPG. If it's RPG, then FarCry3 is RPG too. And it is not.

I don't think of "Prey" as a rpg either, hope that doesn't land me on the dreaded "bigot" list. lmao

Sure, it has rpg elements, specifically in character progression, like many first person shooters these days, but it still is a first person shooter, in essence.

Anyway, just wanted to chime in with my two cents…and give the evil elitists, and bigoted, "Nazi rpg purists" some support…