Video games...what ya playing? And what are you looking forward to? (3 Viewers)

[NCCommish]

Well I guess I am spoiled by the big games. I wouldn't spend premium money for a 20 hour game. On another note BioShock infinite is free with gold on Xbox.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Well I guess I am spoiled by the big games. I wouldn't spend premium money for a 20 hour game. On another note BioShock infinite is free with gold on Xbox.

Barely worth it at that price. I thought I was just disappointed after the first play through. After the 2nd I realized that I just hated that game.

 

[Chaka]

Moved on some in Wolfenstein. I've broken the resistence out of prison - that was a pretty awesome mission and story line. The chick in charge of the prison is nucking futs. Now I'm doing the mission with the baby sub trying to find I guess a German U-boat. Having a hard time with controlling this mini sub.

Overall, the story within the game is fairly entertaining. The graphics are solid.

Local Best Buy has a used copy sitting there for $20. Going to have to pick this one up. Gamestop guy said this game has nearly 18 hours of gameplay. That's huge.

That's it? That isn't a ton of gameplay for a $50 game.

For a single player? It sure is. Most games are in about the 12 hour range.

Depends on the game. Skyrim is single player and I probably have 120 hours in. Still haven't done everything.

Well sure - open world vs linear isn't really a fair comparison.

Yea. Skyrim is very optional for the things you do. If you don't do anything in a game like Wolfenstein or Tomb Raider nothing happens.

Maybe 18 hours for a straight main story line playthrough but most high quality games have additional quests and objectives that greatly increase play time. Mass Effect (1, 2 & 3), The Witcher (1, 2 & presumably 3), Borderlands (1, 2 & the Pre-sequel) even Tomb Raider had a ton of stuff to do outside of the main quest.

Are there zero side quests/objectives in Wolfenstein?

ETA: I think I put in a minimum of 40 hours into each ME, Witcher & Borderlands game on my first playthrough. Then again I am closer to a completionist than a linear gamer.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Maybe 18 hours for a straight main story line playthrough but most high quality games have additional quests and objectives that greatly increase play time. Mass Effect (1, 2 & 3), The Witcher (1, 2 & presumably 3), Borderlands (1, 2 & the Pre-sequel) even Tomb Raider had a ton of stuff to do outside of the main quest.

Are there zero side quests/objectives in Wolfenstein?

If you do all the DLC and side missions then maybe Mass Effect 3 is 18 hours. But I doubt it took me that long.

Tomb Raider isn't even close, IMO.

 

[Chaka]

Maybe 18 hours for a straight main story line playthrough but most high quality games have additional quests and objectives that greatly increase play time. Mass Effect (1, 2 & 3), The Witcher (1, 2 & presumably 3), Borderlands (1, 2 & the Pre-sequel) even Tomb Raider had a ton of stuff to do outside of the main quest.

Are there zero side quests/objectives in Wolfenstein?

If you do all the DLC and side missions then maybe Mass Effect 3 is 18 hours. But I doubt it took me that long.

Tomb Raider isn't even close, IMO.

GTFO

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Maybe 18 hours for a straight main story line playthrough but most high quality games have additional quests and objectives that greatly increase play time. Mass Effect (1, 2 & 3), The Witcher (1, 2 & presumably 3), Borderlands (1, 2 & the Pre-sequel) even Tomb Raider had a ton of stuff to do outside of the main quest.

Are there zero side quests/objectives in Wolfenstein?

If you do all the DLC and side missions then maybe Mass Effect 3 is 18 hours. But I doubt it took me that long.

Tomb Raider isn't even close, IMO.

GTFO

I guess I'm really good at Mass Effect.

 

[Chaka]

www.howlongtobeat.com

howlongtobeat - mass effect 3

You must be doing speedruns Andy.

 

[thecatch]

Maybe 18 hours for a straight main story line playthrough but most high quality games have additional quests and objectives that greatly increase play time. Mass Effect (1, 2 & 3), The Witcher (1, 2 & presumably 3), Borderlands (1, 2 & the Pre-sequel) even Tomb Raider had a ton of stuff to do outside of the main quest.

Are there zero side quests/objectives in Wolfenstein?

If you do all the DLC and side missions then maybe Mass Effect 3 is 18 hours. But I doubt it took me that long. Tomb Raider isn't even close, IMO.

GTFO

I guess I'm really good at Mass Effect.

I'm pretty sure even my third play through of ME3 took well over 20 hours.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

www.howlongtobeat.com

howlongtobeat - mass effect 3

You must be doing speedruns Andy.

All joking aside, I'm calling BS on those hours.

Edit: Maybe my memory is hazy. Too bad our XBOX360 is dying or I'd play it again.

EDIT2: Anyway, to the discussion at hand, I don't think that Wolfenstein is an RPG but rather is a FPS. To get 18 hours out of the latter type game is still pretty good. Anything more than that would be annoying I think.

 

[SlaX]

Maybe 18 hours for a straight main story line playthrough but most high quality games have additional quests and objectives that greatly increase play time. Mass Effect (1, 2 & 3), The Witcher (1, 2 & presumably 3), Borderlands (1, 2 & the Pre-sequel) even Tomb Raider had a ton of stuff to do outside of the main quest.

Are there zero side quests/objectives in Wolfenstein?

ETA: I think I put in a minimum of 40 hours into each ME, Witcher & Borderlands game on my first playthrough. Then again I am closer to a completionist than a linear gamer.

I don't know if I'd lump Tomb Raider in there. It's a great game, but I 100% completed it in around 15 hours the week it released. All items and achievements. You can check my Xbox Live profile if you don't believe me. Borderlands can be completed quickly if you rush it, but playing solo is the wrong way to go with a game like that, IMO. Playing with friends in Borderlands brings the replayability, even if you've completed it already. And that's not taking into account playing as different classes too.

 

[Sand]

Moved on some in Wolfenstein. I've broken the resistence out of prison - that was a pretty awesome mission and story line. The chick in charge of the prison is nucking futs. Now I'm doing the mission with the baby sub trying to find I guess a German U-boat. Having a hard time with controlling this mini sub.

Overall, the story within the game is fairly entertaining. The graphics are solid.

Local Best Buy has a used copy sitting there for $20. Going to have to pick this one up. Gamestop guy said this game has nearly 18 hours of gameplay. That's huge.

That's it? That isn't a ton of gameplay for a $50 game.

For a single player? It sure is. Most games are in about the 12 hour range.

Depends on the game. Skyrim is single player and I probably have 120 hours in. Still haven't done everything.

Yeah, triple that.

 

[NCCommish]

Finally got through the ending. Why did Alistair have to be such a ####? I had the marriage arranged and he walks away. Oh well Anora seems to have done well and I am glad I supported Harrowmont other dude wants it too much. Dalish seem to have come through OK. All in all think I did good.

 

[NCCommish]

Maybe 18 hours for a straight main story line playthrough but most high quality games have additional quests and objectives that greatly increase play time. Mass Effect (1, 2 & 3), The Witcher (1, 2 & presumably 3), Borderlands (1, 2 & the Pre-sequel) even Tomb Raider had a ton of stuff to do outside of the main quest.

Are there zero side quests/objectives in Wolfenstein?

ETA: I think I put in a minimum of 40 hours into each ME, Witcher & Borderlands game on my first playthrough. Then again I am closer to a completionist than a linear gamer.

I don't know if I'd lump Tomb Raider in there. It's a great game, but I 100% completed it in around 15 hours the week it released. All items and achievements. You can check my Xbox Live profile if you don't believe me. Borderlands can be completed quickly if you rush it, but playing solo is the wrong way to go with a game like that, IMO. Playing with friends in Borderlands brings the replayability, even if you've completed it already. And that's not taking into account playing as different classes too.

TR took me a bit over 20 hours with 70% completion.

 

[jwb]

www.howlongtobeat.com

howlongtobeat - mass effect 3

You must be doing speedruns Andy.

All joking aside, I'm calling BS on those hours.

Edit: Maybe my memory is hazy. Too bad our XBOX360 is dying or I'd play it again.

EDIT2: Anyway, to the discussion at hand, I don't think that Wolfenstein is an RPG but rather is a FPS. To get 18 hours out of the latter type game is still pretty good. Anything more than that would be annoying I think.

Exactly - the "gameplay hours" in an RPG are almost always far longer than a FPS or even a third-person action game (like Tomb Raider, etc). I would get annoyed at, say, Halo if the campaign were longer than the 8-12 hours it is.

Totally different gaming experiences, and each have their merit.

 

[Insein]

Maybe 18 hours for a straight main story line playthrough but most high quality games have additional quests and objectives that greatly increase play time. Mass Effect (1, 2 & 3), The Witcher (1, 2 & presumably 3), Borderlands (1, 2 & the Pre-sequel) even Tomb Raider had a ton of stuff to do outside of the main quest.

Are there zero side quests/objectives in Wolfenstein?

If you do all the DLC and side missions then maybe Mass Effect 3 is 18 hours. But I doubt it took me that long. Tomb Raider isn't even close, IMO.

If you do all the DLC and side quests then Mass Effect 3 is 45 hours at least. I just got done again a month ago and that was my total with all the DLC.

 

[Chaka]

www.howlongtobeat.com

howlongtobeat - mass effect 3

You must be doing speedruns Andy.

All joking aside, I'm calling BS on those hours.

Edit: Maybe my memory is hazy. Too bad our XBOX360 is dying or I'd play it again.

EDIT2: Anyway, to the discussion at hand, I don't think that Wolfenstein is an RPG but rather is a FPS. To get 18 hours out of the latter type game is still pretty good. Anything more than that would be annoying I think.

Those are crowd sourced numbers and it shows the ranges too including average, median, rushed and leisure (I am probably closest to the latter and I am a loot whore).

I was off on Tomb Raider it takes about 20 hours for a completionist run.

 

[Insein]

www.howlongtobeat.com

howlongtobeat - mass effect 3

You must be doing speedruns Andy.

All joking aside, I'm calling BS on those hours.Edit: Maybe my memory is hazy. Too bad our XBOX360 is dying or I'd play it again.

EDIT2: Anyway, to the discussion at hand, I don't think that Wolfenstein is an RPG but rather is a FPS. To get 18 hours out of the latter type game is still pretty good. Anything more than that would be annoying I think.

Those are crowd sourced numbers and it shows the ranges too including average, median, rushed and leisure (I am probably closest to the latter and I am a loot whore).I was off on Tomb Raider it takes about 20 hours for a completionist run.

Yea I tried to clean up the little GPS tags and stuff after I was done and decided that I didn't care. I finished 85% on my run through. Did all the hidden tombs. I'm fine with missing a couple of GPS tags and random tasks.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

If you do all the DLC and side quests then Mass Effect 3 is 45 hours at least. I just got done again a month ago and that was my total with all the DLC.

I'm sorry. There's no way it took me 45 hours to do all the DLC, side quests, and main mission. There's just not.

 

[Chaka]

We had a discussion about this a few years ago but I am not going to try and find it in here.

I guess I find the difference between a FPS and an RPG to be a bit fuzzy at times. Is Dishonored a FPS? Deus Ex: Human Revolution? Call of Duty: Black Ops? Or is the FPS designation exclusively reserved for the Battlefields and other games primarily designed for online multiplayer gaming?

It seems like a lot of games offer FPS perspective with RPG stories (Dishonored, Deus Ex etc) so I just don't see much of a distinction. Are there any exclusively Third Person Shooters or are those just RPGs (ME, Witcher etc)?

 

[hagmania]

I think I'd classify both of those as action-adventure. Dishonored is a stealth game, Deus Ex has a little of everything.

 

[Insein]

If you do all the DLC and side quests then Mass Effect 3 is 45 hours at least. I just got done again a month ago and that was my total with all the DLC.

I'm sorry. There's no way it took me 45 hours to do all the DLC, side quests, and main mission. There's just not.

Well if you skip every cutscene and play on a lower difficulty, you could probably blow through in 20-25 hours.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

If you do all the DLC and side quests then Mass Effect 3 is 45 hours at least. I just got done again a month ago and that was my total with all the DLC.

I'm sorry. There's no way it took me 45 hours to do all the DLC, side quests, and main mission. There's just not.

Well if you skip every cutscene and play on a lower difficulty, you could probably blow through in 20-25 hours.

I finished it on Insanity.

 

[Insein]

If you do all the DLC and side quests then Mass Effect 3 is 45 hours at least. I just got done again a month ago and that was my total with all the DLC.

I'm sorry. There's no way it took me 45 hours to do all the DLC, side quests, and main mission. There's just not.

Well if you skip every cutscene and play on a lower difficulty, you could probably blow through in 20-25 hours.

I finished it on Insanity.

No way you did it with all the DLC then. Omega, Citadel and Leviathan alone take about 11 hours if you do everything with the party and people.

 

[belljr]

SP FPS - are any games in First Person that are usually linear and don't have character abilities to select (or very limited). COD, Battlefield, Rainbow 6, Halo etc

RPG - could be linear but you mainly are always upgrading abilities, purchasing stuff, selling stuff, creating stuff

3rd person shooter.

GOW, Ghost Recon

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Perhaps I'm mis-remembering.

 

[Chaka]

SP FPS - are any games in First Person that are usually linear and don't have character abilities to select (or very limited). COD, Battlefield, Rainbow 6, Halo etc

RPG - could be linear but you mainly are always upgrading abilities, purchasing stuff, selling stuff, creating stuff

3rd person shooter.

GOW, Ghost Recon

So in your opinion it's the ability to upgrade your character that distinguishes between RPG and FPS?

 

[Sand]

Perhaps I'm mis-remembering.

As much as this may hurt I think Tim is finally rubbing off on you.

 

[belljr]

SP FPS - are any games in First Person that are usually linear and don't have character abilities to select (or very limited). COD, Battlefield, Rainbow 6, Halo etc

RPG - could be linear but you mainly are always upgrading abilities, purchasing stuff, selling stuff, creating stuff

3rd person shooter.

GOW, Ghost Recon

So in your opinion it's the ability to upgrade your character that distinguishes between RPG and FPS?

In basics yes but I know there are games that are combinations of the 2. But a FPS to me is basically Point A to Point B - shooting as much crap as possible.

Where RPG have more character development (build strength, dexterity etc and anything that involves magic).

 

[Drifter]

SP FPS - are any games in First Person that are usually linear and don't have character abilities to select (or very limited). COD, Battlefield, Rainbow 6, Halo etc

RPG - could be linear but you mainly are always upgrading abilities, purchasing stuff, selling stuff, creating stuff

3rd person shooter.

GOW, Ghost Recon

So in your opinion it's the ability to upgrade your character that distinguishes between RPG and FPS?

In basics yes but I know there are games that are combinations of the 2. But a FPS to me is basically Point A to Point B - shooting as much crap as possible.

Where RPG have more character development (build strength, dexterity etc and anything that involves magic).

I would say complex character development - not choose "reload faster" or "jump higher"

 

[hagmania]

SP FPS - are any games in First Person that are usually linear and don't have character abilities to select (or very limited). COD, Battlefield, Rainbow 6, Halo etc

RPG - could be linear but you mainly are always upgrading abilities, purchasing stuff, selling stuff, creating stuff

3rd person shooter.

GOW, Ghost Recon

So in your opinion it's the ability to upgrade your character that distinguishes between RPG and FPS?

In basics yes but I know there are games that are combinations of the 2. But a FPS to me is basically Point A to Point B - shooting as much crap as possible.

Where RPG have more character development (build strength, dexterity etc and anything that involves magic).

Point A to Point B is a rail shooter, which is your "streamlined" FPS that you mention.

To me RPG is about actually playing a role and not just playing a character.

 

[belljr]

SP FPS - are any games in First Person that are usually linear and don't have character abilities to select (or very limited). COD, Battlefield, Rainbow 6, Halo etc

RPG - could be linear but you mainly are always upgrading abilities, purchasing stuff, selling stuff, creating stuff

3rd person shooter.

GOW, Ghost Recon

So in your opinion it's the ability to upgrade your character that distinguishes between RPG and FPS?

In basics yes but I know there are games that are combinations of the 2. But a FPS to me is basically Point A to Point B - shooting as much crap as possible.

Where RPG have more character development (build strength, dexterity etc and anything that involves magic).

I would say complex character development - not choose "reload faster" or "jump higher"

Yes

 

[Chaka]

SP FPS - are any games in First Person that are usually linear and don't have character abilities to select (or very limited). COD, Battlefield, Rainbow 6, Halo etc

RPG - could be linear but you mainly are always upgrading abilities, purchasing stuff, selling stuff, creating stuff

3rd person shooter.

GOW, Ghost Recon

So in your opinion it's the ability to upgrade your character that distinguishes between RPG and FPS?

In basics yes but I know there are games that are combinations of the 2. But a FPS to me is basically Point A to Point B - shooting as much crap as possible.

Where RPG have more character development (build strength, dexterity etc and anything that involves magic).

I would say complex character development - not choose "reload faster" or "jump higher"

True, which is why I kind of think CoD: Black Ops (and Black Ops II) are RPGs as well, but I like beljir's logic too. Skill trees allow the player a more immersive role play experience. It lets you create a character that is unique to you.

 

[Drifter]

SP FPS - are any games in First Person that are usually linear and don't have character abilities to select (or very limited). COD, Battlefield, Rainbow 6, Halo etc

RPG - could be linear but you mainly are always upgrading abilities, purchasing stuff, selling stuff, creating stuff

3rd person shooter.

GOW, Ghost Recon

So in your opinion it's the ability to upgrade your character that distinguishes between RPG and FPS?

In basics yes but I know there are games that are combinations of the 2. But a FPS to me is basically Point A to Point B - shooting as much crap as possible.

Where RPG have more character development (build strength, dexterity etc and anything that involves magic).

I would say complex character development - not choose "reload faster" or "jump higher"

True, which is why I kind of think CoD: Black Ops (and Black Ops II) are RPGs as well, but I like beljir's logic too. Skill trees allow the player a more immersive role play experience. It lets you create a character that is unique to you.

But it's not a true RPG character development. There is some customization that can be considered and RPG element but that doesn't make it a RPG

 

[Chaka]

SP FPS - are any games in First Person that are usually linear and don't have character abilities to select (or very limited). COD, Battlefield, Rainbow 6, Halo etc

RPG - could be linear but you mainly are always upgrading abilities, purchasing stuff, selling stuff, creating stuff

3rd person shooter.

GOW, Ghost Recon

So in your opinion it's the ability to upgrade your character that distinguishes between RPG and FPS?

In basics yes but I know there are games that are combinations of the 2. But a FPS to me is basically Point A to Point B - shooting as much crap as possible.

Where RPG have more character development (build strength, dexterity etc and anything that involves magic).

I would say complex character development - not choose "reload faster" or "jump higher"

True, which is why I kind of think CoD: Black Ops (and Black Ops II) are RPGs as well, but I like beljir's logic too. Skill trees allow the player a more immersive role play experience. It lets you create a character that is unique to you.

But it's not a true RPG character development. There is some customization that can be considered and RPG element but that doesn't make it a RPG

Are you talking about CoD: Black Ops or skill trees?

Again I am also struggling to think of games (non-roguelike or platformer) that don't have character development. Heck even platformers have character development now.

 

[Drifter]

SP FPS - are any games in First Person that are usually linear and don't have character abilities to select (or very limited). COD, Battlefield, Rainbow 6, Halo etc

RPG - could be linear but you mainly are always upgrading abilities, purchasing stuff, selling stuff, creating stuff

3rd person shooter.

GOW, Ghost Recon

So in your opinion it's the ability to upgrade your character that distinguishes between RPG and FPS?

In basics yes but I know there are games that are combinations of the 2. But a FPS to me is basically Point A to Point B - shooting as much crap as possible.

Where RPG have more character development (build strength, dexterity etc and anything that involves magic).

I would say complex character development - not choose "reload faster" or "jump higher"

True, which is why I kind of think CoD: Black Ops (and Black Ops II) are RPGs as well, but I like beljir's logic too. Skill trees allow the player a more immersive role play experience. It lets you create a character that is unique to you.

But it's not a true RPG character development. There is some customization that can be considered and RPG element but that doesn't make it a RPG

Are you talking about CoD: Black Ops or skill trees?

Again I am also struggling to think of games (non-roguelike or platformer) that don't have character development. Heck even platformers have character development now.

 

[NCCommish]

Well I usually believe any game is worth free. But I think I am skipping Infinite. BioShock didn't really hold my interest and I have heard so many people complain about Infinite I think I'll save the drive space. Onto Dragon Age 2. I decided not to buy Awakenings for now. They want way more than I paid for either game for it.

 

[NCCommish]

As to RPG versus FPS versus platform versus stealth, etc. It is getting really hard to distinguish. Only a few games are purely one thing or another and the line is subjective. I found TR to be both platform and shooter for instance.

 

[belljr]

Honestly one of the reasons I have trouble getting into some games is because they added too much rpg.

I mean madden for cripes sake has player progression and update your coach profile with xp.

I hate that crap

 

[hagmania]

As to RPG versus FPS versus platform versus stealth, etc. It is getting really hard to distinguish. Only a few games are purely one thing or another and the line is subjective. I found TR to be both platform and shooter for instance.

Agree about fluid definitions.

My personal definition places the majority of games into action-adventure, as opposed to Sport/Tabletop, FPS, or RPG. Don't really need more categories than that.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

I think I've spent 500 hours just chasing butterflies in Skyrim. Played it maybe half dozen times w different characters. Not finished once.

 

[Chaka]

SP FPS - are any games in First Person that are usually linear and don't have character abilities to select (or very limited). COD, Battlefield, Rainbow 6, Halo etc

RPG - could be linear but you mainly are always upgrading abilities, purchasing stuff, selling stuff, creating stuff

3rd person shooter.

GOW, Ghost Recon

So in your opinion it's the ability to upgrade your character that distinguishes between RPG and FPS?

In basics yes but I know there are games that are combinations of the 2. But a FPS to me is basically Point A to Point B - shooting as much crap as possible.

Where RPG have more character development (build strength, dexterity etc and anything that involves magic).

I would say complex character development - not choose "reload faster" or "jump higher"

True, which is why I kind of think CoD: Black Ops (and Black Ops II) are RPGs as well, but I like beljir's logic too. Skill trees allow the player a more immersive role play experience. It lets you create a character that is unique to you.

But it's not a true RPG character development. There is some customization that can be considered and RPG element but that doesn't make it a RPG

Are you talking about CoD: Black Ops or skill trees?

Again I am also struggling to think of games (non-roguelike or platformer) that don't have character development. Heck even platformers have character development now.

Okay (I think you meant "an" and not "and") but does that make Black Ops an RPG? There is tons of character development but aside from picking up the hidden intel packages it's about the most linear game you'll find.

I think an openish world, say one that allows for fast travel points, may be a big part of the difference between what people consider to be an FPS or RPG. You can't go back in games like Black Ops (unless you restart the mission entirely) whereas in games like Tomb Raider or Far Cry you can move back and forth on the map regardless of the mission. Perhaps they are not true open world experiences like Skyrim or Fallout but they are more open then a game like CoD.

Although, personally I just don't see them as being mutually exclusive genres. IMO most games I play are RPGs and FPS really only stands for the perspective to me.

 

[Chaka]

I think I've spent 500 hours just chasing butterflies in Skyrim. Played it maybe half dozen times w different characters. Not finished once.

How's your skull collection coming along?

 

[Maelstrom]

Anyone with EA Access played the new Battlefield yet? Limit is 10 hours.

Ill be checking it out tonight.

How is it?

I only played a little. It felt like Battlefield 4 exactly. Except with cop and criminal skins and different maps. Its fun. I'll give it more play tonight and may end up buying it when it comes out.

I played in the beta, and it did feel like Battlefield 4. So much so that this is the first BF game since 2 on the PC that I won't be getting on release. The cops/robbers thing doesn't do it for me, and if there are no real new tech in the game, just new skins and maps, I'll continue to play BF4 until it (and Premium) are really cheap.

 

[NCCommish]

So I fired up DA 2. I feel kind of cheated since loading your save did almost nothing. In my case probably only get a cameo by my not so proficient assassin friend. Nothing else. Oh well. But I like the story so far. The game play is still a little kluncky in spots but otherwise enjoyable.

 

[NCCommish]

I think I've spent 500 hours just chasing butterflies in Skyrim. Played it maybe half dozen times w different characters. Not finished once.

I always get distracted and next thing I know I have spent all day on some side quest. But that is really part of the fun. Playing DA has been a reminder how open Skyrim is, no invisible fences. Or at least none I have found.

 

[Sand]

I think I've spent 500 hours just chasing butterflies in Skyrim. Played it maybe half dozen times w different characters. Not finished once.

I always get distracted and next thing I know I have spent all day on some side quest. But that is really part of the fun. Playing DA has been a reminder how open Skyrim is, no invisible fences. Or at least none I have found.

Enjoying DA, but finding doors that are just decoration and objects that can't be touched along with the invisible walls is (IMO) the biggest detractor here.

So waiting for Fallout 4 to scratch that open world itch.

 

[belljr]

SP FPS - are any games in First Person that are usually linear and don't have character abilities to select (or very limited). COD, Battlefield, Rainbow 6, Halo etc

RPG - could be linear but you mainly are always upgrading abilities, purchasing stuff, selling stuff, creating stuff

3rd person shooter.

GOW, Ghost Recon

So in your opinion it's the ability to upgrade your character that distinguishes between RPG and FPS?

In basics yes but I know there are games that are combinations of the 2. But a FPS to me is basically Point A to Point B - shooting as much crap as possible.

Where RPG have more character development (build strength, dexterity etc and anything that involves magic).

I would say complex character development - not choose "reload faster" or "jump higher"

True, which is why I kind of think CoD: Black Ops (and Black Ops II) are RPGs as well, but I like beljir's logic too. Skill trees allow the player a more immersive role play experience. It lets you create a character that is unique to you.

But it's not a true RPG character development. There is some customization that can be considered and RPG element but that doesn't make it a RPG

Are you talking about CoD: Black Ops or skill trees?

Again I am also struggling to think of games (non-roguelike or platformer) that don't have character development. Heck even platformers have character development now.

Okay (I think you meant "an" and not "and") but does that make Black Ops an RPG? There is tons of character development but aside from picking up the hidden intel packages it's about the most linear game you'll find.

I think an openish world, say one that allows for fast travel points, may be a big part of the difference between what people consider to be an FPS or RPG. You can't go back in games like Black Ops (unless you restart the mission entirely) whereas in games like Tomb Raider or Far Cry you can move back and forth on the map regardless of the mission. Perhaps they are not true open world experiences like Skyrim or Fallout but they are more open then a game like CoD.

Although, personally I just don't see them as being mutually exclusive genres. IMO most games I play are RPGs and FPS really only stands for the perspective to me.

I wouldn't consider Tomb Raider an RPG by my definition.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

None of these terms have super-precise definitions that leave no room for flexibility. But if COD, Tomb Raider, and Far Cry are RPGs, then everything is an RPG. You're just using that term as a synonym for "video game."

 

[Todem]

None of these terms have super-precise definitions that leave no room for flexibility. But if COD, Tomb Raider, and Far Cry are RPGs, then everything is an RPG. You're just using that term as a synonym for "video game."

Far Cry, Borderlands...FPS's with RPG elements.

Pure RPG to me is Skyrim, Dragon Age Fallout etc.

On another note if you have not picked up Dying Light your missing out on a truly amazing game. I have not had this much fun playing Co-Op since Borderlands and Battlefield 2 Bad Company and more recently Diablo 3. My brother In-Law and I play every weekend and are having an amazing time. Incredible game. Atmosphere, controls, music....all AAA+

 

[jwb]

I think a lot of the "what is an rpg/fps" debate has to do with how long you've been gaming.

There was a time (90's - early 2000's) when it was very clear as to what genre games filled. I remember when Deus Ex came out (talking the 2000 computer game), and it was such a big deal because there were multiple paths and ways through a level. You could shoot or sneak, and, iirc, upgrade your character differently to a degree. It was very different, and it's been evolving ever since.

Technically, all games put you in a "role" of some sort. That doesn't make them an RPG in the classic sense.

To me, these days, an "RPG" needs more than just stats and skill trees - to be an RPG (in my mind) it has to allow for completely different character builds that really change gameplay (wizard / warrior / tech specialist if it's a fallout type game, etc.) And maybe even parts of the game that are closed unless you are a specific build / guild member / etc. Not just a call of duty "medic" who still shoots everything in his path, but also has a heal pack, etc.