358
Seeing a lot of people kinda write off this genre in the wake of E33 sweeping the game awards. Sayin...
3 weeks, 3 days ago
—
3 weeks, 5 days ago20 of 20
Tip Reveddit Real-Time can notify you when your content is removed.
your account history
Tip Check if your account has any removed comments.
view my removed comments you are viewing a single comment's thread.
view all comments
The thing is that how is expedition better than kcd 2 as an RPG? Like for example I prefer Zelda over dmc but as an “action” dmc is much better because in here we are looking more at the combat aspect and as a combat experience dmc has far more depth.
Now I’m just curious how are “RPGs” even measured in here, it’s one thing to say that expedition is better than kcd 2 as a game but it’s something very different to say that it’s better as an rpg like by what metrics? I know all i will get is downvotes instead of responses since this subreddit worships expedition but I’m still waiting for that response.
It's pretty obvious The Game Awards goes by "best game that qualifies for the category," not "game that best embodies this category."
They're also not going to make a unified RPG category then follow a definition that basically blocks JRPGs from ever winning it.
I’m not saying open-ended design is the only real RPG. Im saying that player agency and systemic problem solving are core RPG strengths, and KCD2 leans harder into those than Expedition 33.
Sure, but see my first point.
And where did I say that expedition is not rpg and shouldn’t qualify?
I didn't say that.
Your argument was: "KCD2 leans harder into the role-playing aspects, and should have won RPG of the year."
My counter-argument: "TGAs award the best overall game that happens to qualify for the category, not the one that 'best fits' the category."
But this award is not regarding the best overall this is like saying that Zelda deserves to win over dmc as the best action game because it “overall” is the better game, what kind of logic is that?
If it was just "action games", you'd have a point. But I can't help but notice: the category isn't "action game", at least not at the game awards. It's "action/adventure". Which Zelda embodies perfectly.
If, somehow, a standard Zelda game were to win an "action game" award because that was the label assigned to the game, I'd argue the issue is more with the categorization - there should have been a category that better represent what kind of game Zelda is.
As for Clair Obscur, until you decide to create a JRPG and a WRPG categories (and honestly, I don't think that'd be a good ida), then it being in the RPG category seems kind of obvious.
I can agree with that actually, because judging E33 as a JRPG the customization and build variety is good but not especially strong compared to others in the genre.
Well im not saying one is a better RPG than the other. I'm saying that both are RPG's.
This post isn't about what is better, it's about people saying that the JRPG style of game isn't an RPG.
But I haven't played KCD2 to tell you what is better in E33 or not. I know that E33 does character builds very well, levelling, questing, party composition and progression.
Well let me give you a hostage situation in a side quest in kcd 2.
You have a criminal who is holding a woman hostage(it’s a long quest with many choices and detective work and skill checks) you have options when you get to the hostage situation
Option 1: Negotiate with the criminal and with your speech level(this includes charisma which is impacted by what you wear) you can convince the criminal to let go of the hostage and let him go free.
Option 2: accidentally shoot the hostage (it will have its own consequences) or just fail to convince him and have him kill the hostage.
Option 3: if your aiming level is high enough you can head shot the criminal with a bow without even talking to him saving the hostage.
Ofcourse the quest is long and even after that it puts you in places where you have to make tough decisions and have the best outcome of your skill levels are high enough.
Other one shows that even a fetch quest is well designed like it will have a guy asking you to bring him a relic sword.
Option 1: you can find the sword and give it to him.
Option 2: you can find it and if your speech level is high enough you can lie to him and tell him you didn’t find it.
Option 3: you can see a drawing that shows the relic sword and if your smithing level is high enough you can create a replica and give to the quest giver.
These are just two quests and the game is full of these types of quests, this is what an rpg is, you “roleplay” the character you want. Ofcourse many people prefer linear gameplay like expedition and that’s fine but as an rpg it’s very clear which one gives you the more “rpg” experience.
I think 'roleplaying' a set character is just as valid. That's the whole point of the post. You might think one is more RPG than the other.
But they are both RPGs.
The problem is that you are arguing against me as if I’m saying that expedition is not an rpg IT IS AN RPG my main argument is that I can’t see how it is a better rpg than kcd2 I have yet to see a compelling argument.
Its an rpg and a better game so it's a better rpg
Hope you got it
It isn’t.
E33 is not a better RPG than KCD2. In fact it isn’t even close
you know there's no objective measure for an RPG, right?
Since it won, it clearly very much is.
Oh. You’re an authoritarian? Lmao.
I didn’t know winning award from an award show meant something was truly the best.
In this case, it won game of the year and best rpg. Clearly a lot of people thought so.
You usually have to be the best to win those.
You don't know what authoritarian means in this case. Smaller words would suit you.
Right, right. Anyways.