Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General I always knew they listened to us really :)

Because role-playing games were being made and consumed by people who played D&D and probably people who made a few ttrpg systems of their own, adapting them for computer games. I bet people didn't start saying 'tt'rpg until cRPGs had become the dominant driver in the culture.

Its a shame that when Larian was "cleaning the house" last(or was it previous?) patch ...
They decided to delete Patch 1 ...

Would be nice if we could simply click and check what actualy changed, wouldnt it?

I know we can still simply watch some old video ... but that isnt quite the same.

before today, iv only ever heard of J-rpgs for japanese rpgs, I assume the C means computer rpgs
tt table top? , pprpg pen and paper?

pnp usually, but you've got it.

Stadia is dead and with Musk in charge it looks like twitter is on its death throws, the Discord server wants your mobile number before it will let you in and this forum needs most people to contact support to unlock their profile because their server is so out of date it gets flagged as supect

Yes Larian is clearly going out of their way to keep us in the loop

It really doesn’t, not in case of terms - “c” stands for computer, because that’s when the term was used. The historical origin if “c” is relevant to genres creation, and therefore it’s identity. It’s like claiming that “j” in jRPG don’t stand for “Japanese” because they are western jRPG. Terms are just that - a word people come up with to name something that is not named. And that term was coined in 90s. You could argue that no modern games are true cRPGs as they are made in different era, so maybe they are all neo-cRPGs (Like films Noir made in 40-50, and neo-noir starting with Chinatown). That said I don’t think there is enough difference to justify the distinction, unlike noir where abandonment of production code change the nature of films.


You presented a thesis, but not an argument. I don’t want to get into an argument what should be called what, as I think it is up to gaming academia to decide, but you are not really presenting anything of substance here beside “no”.


May I ask, what do you think the difference is? Why is it the way it is?

I am asking because I don’t see BG3 doing anything that I would consider as against cRPG design. I agree with you, but I think it is more of the result of BG3 low narrative priority, then design itself. Gameplay wise, what is it about BG3 which makes it less of a cRPG? PC having limited, flat and arbitrary dialogue options doesn’t in my opinion make BG3 less of a cRPG - just not a very good one. Origin doesn’t make BG3 less of a cRPG - it’s just jack of all trades design choice that provides weaker content in place where cRPGs (or RPGs in case of DA :-P) tended to excel at. And stronger content in case of coop (let’s give credit where credit is due).

There's just a few more like A-RPG (Action RPG), T-RPG (Tactical RPG) and the well known MMORPG (Massively Multiplayer Online RPG).


The biggest thing that makes BG3 very different than the cRPG I love the most is the lack of life in and the coherence of the world.

The lack of time / day / night / real time meteo effects / "random" or unexpected encounter, dangers and events that are not only triggered by the players actions / ennemies that may re-appear or new ennemies after some time...
What I like the most in cRPG is having the feeling that I'm part of an epic journey in a "real" / living /coherent world. In Larian's game I usually more have the feeling that I'm roaming on a playground than on a world. The map design is probably a bit guilty too.

Then there is all the inconsistencies or elements that do not make sense in relation to the universe (physics but also many systems / animations / VFX )
Their games does not miss a lot of things to be the best cRPG of all time in my opinion but immersion/coherence of the whole is not really what they foccus on yet.

I personnaly think that when they will, their games will become legendaries cRPG as much as The Witcher 3 is a legendary A-RPG.

I think it's not that I feel BG3 isn't a crpg, I'd say that it is, I just think it's lackluster one, as you've sort of said. My feeling is that if BG3 counts as a crpg with flaws and different priorities, then I don't see what's so radically different about DA:O that moves it into a different category. I'm very hesitant to start stating what is and isn't a crpg because I'm pretty inexperienced I feel. I've never played the original baldur's gate games (I bought the enhanced editions on sale and will probably play them when I'm done with BG3) Neverwinter nights and Icewind dale, with their apparent multiplayer focus put me off very much, I've never played planescape or any of the truly classic crpgs, so I'm aware that I lack a lot of context for this discussion.

Bg1 and 2 are a completly different feel to nwn

I recently smashed threw bg1 and 2 again on my switch, was actually an amazing experience controls are great only problem is you cant mod it.

But i love old games.

I recently played threw the first final fantasy on steam
Id never played it, but i love ff 7 9 and 10 and wanted to see the original, finshing the game i actually felt really emotional, experiencing for the first time the origin of something so massive even today.

For that reason alone id recommend smashing the baldur's gate games, im jealous you get to experience them for the first time

Thinking about candlekeep makes me want to visit again.

Ah, I hope then that you will enjoy Infinity Engine games once you get around to them. Personally I think they aged rather decently, but there is certianly some nostalgia googles there.

Icewind Dales, BTW, aren't multiplayer focus but both titles are more of a comabat dungeon crawlers with smaller and more set in stone story. If you happen to enjoy combat side of Baldur's Gate 1&2 they are worth checking out if you crave for more.

For a while, I was wondering how I would define what a cRPG is for myself. Admittedly, the criteria I settled on was rather loose in the end, revolving around the concept that nowadays the C stands for Choice-based RPG, rather than the traditional Computer RPG. So for me, a cRPG has to have a major emphasis on choices affecting the flow of the narrative and how you interact with the world, whether it be the story and/or the overall character development of your companions and maybe even adversaries. Many achieve this based on providing different choices that are tailored to the various attributes of the character(s) you've built, usually those that let you create a character, though this part isn't a requirement as long as there are enough choices to make that impact the overall flow of the game (such as in Disco Elysium).

As such, games like BG3 and Dragon Age Origins are clearly cRPGs. I consider games like Tower of Time and Solasta to be cRPGs too, but barely - what keeps them in the genre is that the choices you make and the way you build your characters can still significantly alter the way you experience those games, even if the overall narrative is still linear (excluding the more open-ended Lost Valley campaign for Solasta). At the same time, I consider the combat style to be irrelevant when it comes to defining what a cRPG is.

As an aside, many JRPGs let you create a character, but I don't consider those to be cRPGs because the writing and gameplay flow of most games in that genre tends to be extremely rigid and linear. I think the closest I've ever seen a JRPG blur the lines between the two genres is Tactics Ogre. (I am REALLY enjoying the remake that was released last week by the way. It's my first time playing the game, it has clearly aged like fine wine, and I've quickly come to understand why people in Japan considered it to be their version of Planescape Torment back in the day. Matsuno and the FFXIV crew that followed in his footsteps are really the only top-tier writers that exist on the JRPG side. And the team behind the Yakuza games too I guess, though the Yakuza games are more like really good soap operas rather than RPGs.)

Originally Posted by Maximuuus

[quote=Xzoviac]
before today, iv only ever heard of J-rpgs for japanese rpgs, I assume the C means computer rpgs
tt table top? , pprpg pen and paper?

There's just a few more like A-RPG (Action RPG), T-RPG (Tactical RPG) and the well known MMORPG (Massively Multiplayer Online RPG).


The biggest thing that makes BG3 very different than the cRPG I love the most is the lack of life in and the coherence of the world.

The lack of time / day / night / real time meteo effects / "random" or unexpected encounter, dangers and events that are not only triggered by the players actions / ennemies that may re-appear or new ennemies after some time...
What I like the most in cRPG is having the feeling that I'm part of an epic journey in a "real" / living /coherent world. In Larian's game I usually more have the feeling that I'm roaming on a playground than on a world. The map design is probably a bit guilty too.

I always assumed it stood for Classic as in set in a Northwestern Europeanish, medievalish, world as opposed to say a JRPG which is definitely strongly influenced by Japanese fantasy tropes. I'm quoting Maximuuus here because I agree with the members concern about a non-living world that we are meant to push through to the end goal with not much imperative to explore deeply or return to older areas to see what's changed or maybe fight a battle or two. That led me to think of the idea that the C in CRPG could in this case stand for Corridor... I don't think Larian wants to give us a linear game and hope they do indeed flesh the world out a bit more.

Apologies, I appear to have messed your quote up somehow.....

Okay so then we're all going to have our own personal definition of what the "c" in cRPG stands for, including that it just means "computer" which makes the terms "cRPG" and "RPG" synonymous in a video game forum such as this one. That also then means we cannot really have a conversation because some of us talking about apples while others are talking about legos. Oh well. But for the record, it means "classic" (or "old-school") whenever I use it anywhere in this forum.

And since "c" can mean anything we want, there is no objective way to say BG3 should be compared to only certain RPGs and not others. We cannot even say "BG3 is a cRPG and I'm going to compare BG3 to these other cRPGs," because exactly whose "cRPG" definition are we using? "cRPG" can literally mean anything, and one person's definition is not better or more accurate than another's.

Relativism is a sneaky trap. You could apply it to everything and be technically right in every arguments. That is why people form consensus. There are some widely recognized places to find it, in this case an encyclopedia such as Wikipedia or Steam tags are most likely the most influential here since they have a wide user base and everyone can participate in creating the definition of a CRPG.

https://store.steampowered.com/tags/en/CRPG/

Judging by this list, BG3 can indeed be compared to quite a lot of games.
I know that sounds like an ad populum argument, but there is a world between this and semantic terrorism. You have the right to call a cat "a dog" but people will have the right to laugh at your face. We live in a society.

I think the very issue we have that there is NO widely recognized place to determine what the term should mean. Neither Steam or Wikipedia are useful as anyone can write or tag anything in them. Even if most people use a term to describe something (like people using tune or song to describe any peace of music) it doesn't make it correct - it just means people are undereducated in the subject and misuse a term. I think @Kanisatha is correct that cRPG use for now is pretty pointless.

I find that video game genres are in general pretty bad at explaining what they are. If you think about it, shooters or third person shooters or first person shooters only really tell you that the game contains a specific game mechanic/approach. The terms 'roguelike', 'soulslike' and 'metroidvania' all refer back to specific other games by name, and rpg is potentially the least useful term of all. Technically you play a role in the Mario and sonic games.

Well no, I disagree.

Roleplaying is gameplay. If roleplaying your character or collaborative storytelling - deciding his actions, viewpoints, what kind of character he is isnt' a central mechanic then it is not an RPG. Controlling is not the same as roleplaying. Being immersed isn't the same as roleplaying. And while commondly used using RPG for a game with vertical progression or minor customisation is just misusing the term IMO - or rather a shortcut. Those are games with some individual elements commonly found in an RPG.

Again I disagree - they tell you about the primary gameplay loop. Once enough games come out with common characteristics then sub-genre are created - Modern Military Shooters, Boomer Shooters, Hero Shooters, Looter Shooters etc.

On the other hand games like Dishonored or Deus Ex aren't first person shooters, as they are not a primary gameplay loop.

There are some games that will be blurring the lines, but overall genre name works. As to genres refering to specific names - they will change once the genre evolves being just taking inspirations.

Thank you.

I think the Supreme Court defined what a cRPG is best; "I know it when I see it."