This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Role-playing game article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find video game sources: "Role-playing game" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 |
I've been (mildly) bold and implemented the split of content to role-playing game (pen and paper) and the change in scope of this article to a summary article of all types of role-playing games, as agreed to in the mediation. The problem with everyone editing a draft and then moving the content to the live article is that some attribution of content to editors in the history would be lost, which would violate Wikipedia's licensing requirements (see WP:SPLIT). Wikipedia is always a work in progress, so let's get on with the changes in mainspace. Material from the draft can be copied across now - I suggest editors copy their own edits across, to maintain attribution. Ryan Paddy ( talk) 19:41, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Part of a series on |
Role-playing video games |
---|
![]() |
Subgenres |
Topics |
Lists |
I think about half the content in the "Part of a Series on RPG Video Games portal (to the right) should get folded into the new article and the rest should be available as part of the structure of articles that support the main one. Specifically, a lot of the content in:
Should be summarized and added, IMO. ɳoɍɑfʈ Talk! 20:34, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
The use of Role-Playing Game assumes the person playing the game is taking on a role. There is no role taken playing a video game other than that of the person operating the game. The application of RPG to video games was referring to the genre of the story environment, ie. that of a person adventuring, gaining experience, and developing the stats of a character. There are no video games that cause the user to take on a role to move gameplay along. A better classification Adventure Game, like the First Person Shooter, Real-time strategy, Simulation video game, etc. I recommend changing this whole section to Adventure Games with a link to Adventure Games. I'll make the change if no reasonable arguments have been made against. -- Telavir May 13, 2021
Would it be possible to update the lede to explain what the phrase "role-playing in the term's original sense" means? I don't think it explains much to a reader unfamilliar with the topic of RPGs. Copier, for instance, uses the phrase "the construction of game/play space and identities" which is a little too high-level, but gives an idea of the distinction being drawn.- Trystan ( talk) 16:10, 4 January 2010 (UTC),
If we're talking about the original sense of "role-playing game", we need citations per WP:V. It's a controversial subject. I recall hearing that Gygax spoke out against players getting really into role-playing their characters - I think he really was more focussed on the game aspect. Given that D&D was not so far removed from its wargame roots, I think it's better to talk about what the various forms of RPGs have in common today, which is something we have sources for. Ryan Paddy ( talk) 18:51, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
I agree that we need more cites in this lead. The reading I've done on it seems to indicate that computer RPGs and tabletop RPGs were both first recognized in 1974, and as Ryan Paddy mentioned, neither involved or promoted an actor style of character play. It is difficult to justify one particular modern notion of role-playing as being the original. -- The Yar ( talk) 11:51, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
I also have some problems with statements that allude to a lack of collaborative storytelling in video game RPGs. It is my sense that certain video games are called RPGs precisely because instead of playing out a single pre-defined narrative, the player devises and plays their own role or roles within the game, resulting in a collaboration between player and designer to create a unique version of the story that is likely a significantly different narrative than what other players went through or perhaps even significantly different from anything the designer specifically envisioned. It is the player's significant, original actualization of a particular role (regardless of whether they dramatize speech and/or actions of a detailed character, or simply make decisions like a mage because their role is a mage), and not necessarily real-time dramatic collaboration with others, that is at the heart of role-playing. However you look at it, I don't see how a player and GM in D&D are doing any more collaborative storytelling than a game designer and player of a similar offline CRPG. Of course I don't intend to cite my own opinions in order to change the article. The cite as it stand seems to be a web page that looks like it was written based off of the previous version of this wiki article; does anyone know of a good source for other cites? On the previous talk page I cited a published book that defined CRPGs as RPGs with a game engine as the GM. I need to find that one again. -- The Yar ( talk) 18:06, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
I don't think the John Kim sources meet the definition of WP:reliable sources. They're all from a self-published website. I think we should be replacing these sources with reliable sources, which we now have quite a number of listed above. Ryan Paddy ( talk) 19:00, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Does anyone have a reliable source for the history of pen and paper RPGs? It would be good to sum it up in a couple of sentences. There's a whole article on the subject ( History of role-playing games) but it's not very well sourced. There's a multi-part history article on Places to Go, People to Be but I'd like to get beyond web sources like fanzines and self-published articles and rely more on better sources like journal articles and books from reputable publishers. Does anyone have the books Shared fantasy: Role playing games as social worlds or The fantasy role-playing game: A new performing art? Do they have history sections that we can quote? Ryan Paddy ( talk) 01:08, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
The Purpose section in this article is confusing and out-of-place. It is only talking about a very specific subset of RPGs (as the sources clearly indicate), but extrapolates these statements as if they were the purpose of the entire RPG article. Furthermore, the sources appear to be purposefully hand-picked from a collection of opinion pieces that collectively contradict one another and do not present any clear facts. Does this need a "Purpose" section? What purpose is being served here? At the least, it should be cleaned up with more reliable sources and more accurate and general summaries of the facts presented in those sources. -- The Yar ( talk) 12:58, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
I'm going to delete this line. "However, they are not considered true narratives like novels or films as there is no actual story within a role-playing game."
This is too strongly stated. An RPG system doesn't include a story, but game sessions do unless they're randomized or improvised. D&D modules or video game RPGs almost always include a story, for instance. And just two sentences later the article itself says: "Whereas a viewer of a television show is a passive observer, a player at a role-playing game makes choices that affect the story."
I weakened this to "... the game need not have a strongly-defined storyline"
-- Mujokan ( talk) 17:36, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Do we need a link to Polish role-playing games next to Japanese role-playing games ? I don't see first one's relevance. 88.23.210.217 ( talk) 10:48, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
There's an article about defining role-playing games in the second edition of the International Journal of Role-Playing Games, which has just been released. Accessable here: http://www.journalofroleplaying.org/ - there is some good material and sources in this which may be useful for this article. In particular, I think it would be helpful to summarise various common aspects of RPGs such as Game Word and Characters in this article, as we currently do with Gamemaster. Ryan Paddy ( talk) 19:54, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
I believe there was brief talk was on RPVG if i remember before someone realized that the article was not about video game rpgs. 陣 内 Jinnai 22:38, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
This is a fairly obscure doc, but it documents numerous aspects of dnd and rpg culture. I think it needs to be mentioned, either in the "see also" or elsewhere. It doesnt have much online to support it being given a paragraph, though. (ps its really moving, pps im not the director)(mercurywoodrose) 76.245.45.179 ( talk) 06:02, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
I've proposed to move Role-playing game (pen and paper) to Tabletop role-playing game. Please comment on the talk page with your support or opposition and reasons. Ryan Paddy ( talk) 20:19, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
I feel there's a gap needing to be filled between MUDs and MMORPGs in terms of the online multiplayer RPGs that cannot be labelled massive. Even if it only consists in the Neverwinter Nights series of games (as I'm aware), I feel it deserves mentioning and linked to, considering the major success and impact the games had (and to an extend still have). If there exists other significant non-massive MORPGs, those could be mentioned too.
I'm suggesting something along the lines of:
...
"In addition to the MMORPGs, there exists a few games that rely on smaller multiplayer roleplay setups, such as Neverwinter Nights (2002) and Neverwinter Nights 2 (2006). Significant to these games is that they for allow select players to act as Gamemaster. Combined with the smaller amount of players, this provides for a more traditional roleplay experience bearing resemblance to the classic tabletop variant."
...
This could be added to the Multi-player section between "Massively multi-player online role-playing games" and "Computer-assisted gaming"- Z217 ( talk) 14:01, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia isn't a good place to try to settle outstanding disagreements over terminology and the hyphen in "role-playing" is a hotly contested item. As a result, I've added a blurb with references at the start of the article, but here are a few additional examples from titles of books and games:
Also "tabletop roleplaying" from Patterns in Game Design by Staffan Björk and Jussi Holopainen among many other works. - Miskaton ( talk) 00:39, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
I can find no section on history of role-playing games. What was the first RPG? Then I found History of role-playing games. Why doesn't this page link to that page? Oskar Liljeblad ( talk) 20:16, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
I'm wondering if the whole See also section should be reorganized to make it a tad less cluttered. I'm thinking something like this:
Just a quick and dirty revision. Ideas? Wyatt Riot ( talk) 20:51, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
Good afternoon, all. I've been wanting to add a wikipedia page for a roleplaying game that's relatively new on the market and funded via Kickstarter, which I believe makes it at least somewhat deserving of notoriety. I've only got very minimal experience editing and modifying wikis though. I'd raised a talk page asking if people with more experience or practice would be able to assist me with this, as the biggest contribution I've been able to make to wikipedia thus far was helping restructure the Wraith the Oblivion page. As pages for games are bound to sound at very least vaguely like advertising simply because they are a product for consumers, I was hoping we could get a few additional people willing to help a newcomer like me to assist in structuring the page to wiki standards. But I'm saddened that user Deb instead decided to delete the page outright, so evidently my work was either not up to standards at all or she was too hasty, I suspect the former. Sadly I also don't know how to undo this deletion, so I'm afraid that I'm rather left at this juncture with no practical idea or understanding as to how I can create a wiki page on any new product at all :( If anyone has a free few moments, could they maybe help me get this page up and running to appropriate wiki standards? It'd be for the game Shadows of Esteran, which I'd argue is notable as it has some decent praise on RPG.net and has at least one product available. Really, any help at all here would be very much appreciated, I'm simply rather disheartened and at a loss as to how I can start getting some good contributions through to this site :( Anyway, thanks in advance! Justin.Parallax ( talk) 10:33, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
— Preceding unsigned comment added by God's Godzilla ( talk • contribs) 21:23, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
Should this article say that there are no winners or losers in role-playing games, unlike ordinary board games? Vorbee ( talk) 16:58, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect The Gamer's Connection. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Fram ( talk) 09:12, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Role-playing game article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find video game sources: "Role-playing game" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I've been (mildly) bold and implemented the split of content to role-playing game (pen and paper) and the change in scope of this article to a summary article of all types of role-playing games, as agreed to in the mediation. The problem with everyone editing a draft and then moving the content to the live article is that some attribution of content to editors in the history would be lost, which would violate Wikipedia's licensing requirements (see WP:SPLIT). Wikipedia is always a work in progress, so let's get on with the changes in mainspace. Material from the draft can be copied across now - I suggest editors copy their own edits across, to maintain attribution. Ryan Paddy ( talk) 19:41, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Part of a series on |
Role-playing video games |
---|
![]() |
Subgenres |
Topics |
Lists |
I think about half the content in the "Part of a Series on RPG Video Games portal (to the right) should get folded into the new article and the rest should be available as part of the structure of articles that support the main one. Specifically, a lot of the content in:
Should be summarized and added, IMO. ɳoɍɑfʈ Talk! 20:34, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
The use of Role-Playing Game assumes the person playing the game is taking on a role. There is no role taken playing a video game other than that of the person operating the game. The application of RPG to video games was referring to the genre of the story environment, ie. that of a person adventuring, gaining experience, and developing the stats of a character. There are no video games that cause the user to take on a role to move gameplay along. A better classification Adventure Game, like the First Person Shooter, Real-time strategy, Simulation video game, etc. I recommend changing this whole section to Adventure Games with a link to Adventure Games. I'll make the change if no reasonable arguments have been made against. -- Telavir May 13, 2021
Would it be possible to update the lede to explain what the phrase "role-playing in the term's original sense" means? I don't think it explains much to a reader unfamilliar with the topic of RPGs. Copier, for instance, uses the phrase "the construction of game/play space and identities" which is a little too high-level, but gives an idea of the distinction being drawn.- Trystan ( talk) 16:10, 4 January 2010 (UTC),
If we're talking about the original sense of "role-playing game", we need citations per WP:V. It's a controversial subject. I recall hearing that Gygax spoke out against players getting really into role-playing their characters - I think he really was more focussed on the game aspect. Given that D&D was not so far removed from its wargame roots, I think it's better to talk about what the various forms of RPGs have in common today, which is something we have sources for. Ryan Paddy ( talk) 18:51, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
I agree that we need more cites in this lead. The reading I've done on it seems to indicate that computer RPGs and tabletop RPGs were both first recognized in 1974, and as Ryan Paddy mentioned, neither involved or promoted an actor style of character play. It is difficult to justify one particular modern notion of role-playing as being the original. -- The Yar ( talk) 11:51, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
I also have some problems with statements that allude to a lack of collaborative storytelling in video game RPGs. It is my sense that certain video games are called RPGs precisely because instead of playing out a single pre-defined narrative, the player devises and plays their own role or roles within the game, resulting in a collaboration between player and designer to create a unique version of the story that is likely a significantly different narrative than what other players went through or perhaps even significantly different from anything the designer specifically envisioned. It is the player's significant, original actualization of a particular role (regardless of whether they dramatize speech and/or actions of a detailed character, or simply make decisions like a mage because their role is a mage), and not necessarily real-time dramatic collaboration with others, that is at the heart of role-playing. However you look at it, I don't see how a player and GM in D&D are doing any more collaborative storytelling than a game designer and player of a similar offline CRPG. Of course I don't intend to cite my own opinions in order to change the article. The cite as it stand seems to be a web page that looks like it was written based off of the previous version of this wiki article; does anyone know of a good source for other cites? On the previous talk page I cited a published book that defined CRPGs as RPGs with a game engine as the GM. I need to find that one again. -- The Yar ( talk) 18:06, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
I don't think the John Kim sources meet the definition of WP:reliable sources. They're all from a self-published website. I think we should be replacing these sources with reliable sources, which we now have quite a number of listed above. Ryan Paddy ( talk) 19:00, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Does anyone have a reliable source for the history of pen and paper RPGs? It would be good to sum it up in a couple of sentences. There's a whole article on the subject ( History of role-playing games) but it's not very well sourced. There's a multi-part history article on Places to Go, People to Be but I'd like to get beyond web sources like fanzines and self-published articles and rely more on better sources like journal articles and books from reputable publishers. Does anyone have the books Shared fantasy: Role playing games as social worlds or The fantasy role-playing game: A new performing art? Do they have history sections that we can quote? Ryan Paddy ( talk) 01:08, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
The Purpose section in this article is confusing and out-of-place. It is only talking about a very specific subset of RPGs (as the sources clearly indicate), but extrapolates these statements as if they were the purpose of the entire RPG article. Furthermore, the sources appear to be purposefully hand-picked from a collection of opinion pieces that collectively contradict one another and do not present any clear facts. Does this need a "Purpose" section? What purpose is being served here? At the least, it should be cleaned up with more reliable sources and more accurate and general summaries of the facts presented in those sources. -- The Yar ( talk) 12:58, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
I'm going to delete this line. "However, they are not considered true narratives like novels or films as there is no actual story within a role-playing game."
This is too strongly stated. An RPG system doesn't include a story, but game sessions do unless they're randomized or improvised. D&D modules or video game RPGs almost always include a story, for instance. And just two sentences later the article itself says: "Whereas a viewer of a television show is a passive observer, a player at a role-playing game makes choices that affect the story."
I weakened this to "... the game need not have a strongly-defined storyline"
-- Mujokan ( talk) 17:36, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Do we need a link to Polish role-playing games next to Japanese role-playing games ? I don't see first one's relevance. 88.23.210.217 ( talk) 10:48, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
There's an article about defining role-playing games in the second edition of the International Journal of Role-Playing Games, which has just been released. Accessable here: http://www.journalofroleplaying.org/ - there is some good material and sources in this which may be useful for this article. In particular, I think it would be helpful to summarise various common aspects of RPGs such as Game Word and Characters in this article, as we currently do with Gamemaster. Ryan Paddy ( talk) 19:54, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
I believe there was brief talk was on RPVG if i remember before someone realized that the article was not about video game rpgs. 陣 内 Jinnai 22:38, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
This is a fairly obscure doc, but it documents numerous aspects of dnd and rpg culture. I think it needs to be mentioned, either in the "see also" or elsewhere. It doesnt have much online to support it being given a paragraph, though. (ps its really moving, pps im not the director)(mercurywoodrose) 76.245.45.179 ( talk) 06:02, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
I've proposed to move Role-playing game (pen and paper) to Tabletop role-playing game. Please comment on the talk page with your support or opposition and reasons. Ryan Paddy ( talk) 20:19, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
I feel there's a gap needing to be filled between MUDs and MMORPGs in terms of the online multiplayer RPGs that cannot be labelled massive. Even if it only consists in the Neverwinter Nights series of games (as I'm aware), I feel it deserves mentioning and linked to, considering the major success and impact the games had (and to an extend still have). If there exists other significant non-massive MORPGs, those could be mentioned too.
I'm suggesting something along the lines of:
...
"In addition to the MMORPGs, there exists a few games that rely on smaller multiplayer roleplay setups, such as Neverwinter Nights (2002) and Neverwinter Nights 2 (2006). Significant to these games is that they for allow select players to act as Gamemaster. Combined with the smaller amount of players, this provides for a more traditional roleplay experience bearing resemblance to the classic tabletop variant."
...
This could be added to the Multi-player section between "Massively multi-player online role-playing games" and "Computer-assisted gaming"- Z217 ( talk) 14:01, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia isn't a good place to try to settle outstanding disagreements over terminology and the hyphen in "role-playing" is a hotly contested item. As a result, I've added a blurb with references at the start of the article, but here are a few additional examples from titles of books and games:
Also "tabletop roleplaying" from Patterns in Game Design by Staffan Björk and Jussi Holopainen among many other works. - Miskaton ( talk) 00:39, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
I can find no section on history of role-playing games. What was the first RPG? Then I found History of role-playing games. Why doesn't this page link to that page? Oskar Liljeblad ( talk) 20:16, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
I'm wondering if the whole See also section should be reorganized to make it a tad less cluttered. I'm thinking something like this:
Just a quick and dirty revision. Ideas? Wyatt Riot ( talk) 20:51, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
Good afternoon, all. I've been wanting to add a wikipedia page for a roleplaying game that's relatively new on the market and funded via Kickstarter, which I believe makes it at least somewhat deserving of notoriety. I've only got very minimal experience editing and modifying wikis though. I'd raised a talk page asking if people with more experience or practice would be able to assist me with this, as the biggest contribution I've been able to make to wikipedia thus far was helping restructure the Wraith the Oblivion page. As pages for games are bound to sound at very least vaguely like advertising simply because they are a product for consumers, I was hoping we could get a few additional people willing to help a newcomer like me to assist in structuring the page to wiki standards. But I'm saddened that user Deb instead decided to delete the page outright, so evidently my work was either not up to standards at all or she was too hasty, I suspect the former. Sadly I also don't know how to undo this deletion, so I'm afraid that I'm rather left at this juncture with no practical idea or understanding as to how I can create a wiki page on any new product at all :( If anyone has a free few moments, could they maybe help me get this page up and running to appropriate wiki standards? It'd be for the game Shadows of Esteran, which I'd argue is notable as it has some decent praise on RPG.net and has at least one product available. Really, any help at all here would be very much appreciated, I'm simply rather disheartened and at a loss as to how I can start getting some good contributions through to this site :( Anyway, thanks in advance! Justin.Parallax ( talk) 10:33, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
— Preceding unsigned comment added by God's Godzilla ( talk • contribs) 21:23, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
Should this article say that there are no winners or losers in role-playing games, unlike ordinary board games? Vorbee ( talk) 16:58, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect The Gamer's Connection. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Fram ( talk) 09:12, 20 April 2020 (UTC)