Why do people like RPGs?

[myth]

The following is an excerpted and slightly edited version of my reply to a thread entitled "Why do people like RPGs?" on the Penny Arcade forums. I didn't get many responses (except for someone claiming that "the core mechanic [of an RPG] should be actual role-playing"), so I'm reposting it here. I'm interested to hear the thoughts of the (many)

Comments

[rinku]

What of RPGs which require little to no leveling? For instance, the later Final Fantasy games (anything past 4, really) require no time spent leveling before risking the next level, you just go and keep going, and you can finish the game without leveling at all. So I think to say that the core decision of RPG is whether you've leveled enough to risk the next level isn't true with regards to those games.

Also, there are non-linear RPGs that have no predetermined next level, games where the next level can vary depending on which direction you go: Baldur's Gate and Fallout are examples. So the central decision in those games is not *when* to risk the next level, but which next level to go to next.

[myth]

I haven't played Baldur's Gate or Fallout, so I'm not sure what to say about those. It's possible that the structure I'm talking about doesn't apply to PC RPGs at all. It certainly doesn't apply to tabletop RPGs which, I think, have a much less formal structure when it comes to game mechanics and what makes them fun

[jzig]

Wait, you're complaining about FF6 doing too much hand holding? Are you sure you're not talking about FF7-8, which are WAY more hand holdy? It's very easy to make a wrong choice in FF6, and it's pretty grindy (but totally worth it)

[myth]

Not that it's doing too much hand-holding. Just that it seems content to be a sort of tedious adventure game (go here, get that, give it to this other guy) rather than... um, a role-playing game. The combat has literally not presented a single challenge so far--no strategic challenge, no tactical challenge.

I kind of wish it would start doing *more* hand-holding, actually. As an adventure game, it's very poorly designed: vaguely stated goals, no clear direction in how to achieve those goals, and then the solutions seem completely arbitrary once they arrive. The fact that boring battle sequences occasionally flare up does nothing to help the game.

At this point, I'm just hoping that it's like any other contemporary(?) JRPG in that it takes 5-10 hours to get into the swing of things battle-wise.

(I haven't played FF7 or FF8, though I've heard that they're also story-centric at the cost of fun in the battle department.)

[jzig]

Oh, you're still that early? Yeah, FF6 starts REALLY linear, but ends up probably being the least linear of all of the FFs in the second half of the game.

[myth]

I am really happy to hear that. I'm under such intense peer pressure to love this game. :)