I think you miss the point, or I take it too far. RPG is supposed to mean role playing game, coming from table top adventures. RPG systems should penalize you for using items / weapons you're not skilled in. In the interest of "streamlining" what RPG used to mean and what it means now are two very different things. More so that many people prefer combat over dialogue.

I have argued in the past that some Adventure games (such as life is strange) are more like an RPG than games with the RPG label. Sure it lacks character stats but you now have more interaction with the world, can change (ish) the story and approach tasks differently.

So the question becomes, what the hell do all these labels actually mean? We apply them based on individual likings and dislikings but not a true common definition and end up with something as meaningless as saying "game is good" or "game is bad".

Of course, we have even more fun labels such as "rogue-like" but no one actually talks specifically about what features are "like rogue". At the end, the labels become meaningless and it's more about finding someone who has similar tastes to you.

It's the furthest thing away possible.

Despite all the verticality, you cannot kick/throw people/enemies off ledges in this game.

I believe that is enough to answer your question.

So what you are saying is that DND isn't an RPG anymore because they don't penalize you anymore from using weapons you are not specialized in and neither is Pathfinder. It's not that specific.

People can have anal arguments over what little details constitute a label and then think if every single little detail isn't met it's not that. You do what you like but it's not that specific. What is important is how useful it is.

When you are familiar with a genre and gaming culture in general you will intuitively learn to recognize these labels and what people generally mean by them and you will find that if you are able to understand the context they are used it you can use them to find something you like.

As long as they can be useful, they are not meaningless.

One time I was really in a mood for some metroidvanias. So I searched and asked for metroidvanias and got a bunch of suggestion that were accurate to what I personally think is a metroidvania. There were a few that I didn't really think fits the genre description, but I'm able to make that judgement for myself.

What is meaningless is pointless argument about minute details in genres. What is meaningful is the concrete use these labels have in picturing and understanding different directions in game design on a more generalized level.

Immersive simulator is not about being realistic. It is about implementing a set of systems and game rules to make a player feel like not a special snowflake character in a playable artificial world, but like an entity embedded in to the world that exists by itself and follows a variety of rules defining the sensible interaction between world entities.

Simple example - rain and NPCs. If NPCs react to rain and try to find a shelter, or use umbrellas to cover themselves, it is immersive simulation. If NPCs don't react to rain - there is no immersive simulation in this case.

Another example - interactions between NPCs. Let's say, two gangs have a firefight. If civilians run away from the fight, and police gets in - it is immersive simulation. Or if wolf spots the sheep and attacks it - immersive as well.

Another example - how NPCs react to a player and other NPCs with weapon drawn and ready. If NPCs get nervous and hostile unless player holsters a weapon immediately - it is immersive simulation. If NPC greets player like well-known buddy starts to tell something about arrows in the knee - it is amusement park to make player feel special boy.

More rules implemented - more immersive the game is. Of course they may be different opinion of particular things, but the general rule is in implementing various interactions between in-game events, phenomena, and entities, and treating a player's character more like one of other entities of similar class.

Okay, you convinced me, D&D is not an RPG, nor are D&D Derivatives. I mean, if you have the same THC no matter how you're speced and there's no penalties giving the mage an axe and saying to go hack away at the enemy (Skyrim style) then it cannot be an RPG.

You're intentionally ignoring the point that what defines an RPG differes between persons and instead insisting everyone has a shared idea of what an RPG is despite me CLEARLY disagreeing with you. You're saying labels are useful, but you mean they're useful TO YOU.

The label is USELESS because the details MATTER. If you like cow milk but not goat milk nor almond milk but someone says "This is milk, you like milk right?" what use is the label? NONE. The details of what people consider it to be milk is what matters. There are people who hate skim milk but will drink any other kind of milk. Just insisting over and over "but it's all milk" doesn't change that details matter.

You have a point in that some labels are useless, some are also not. "RPG" can be a useless label since people argue that Zelda in an RPG and many others will say "No way."

Details do matter and they qualify or disqualify games from being labeled in a specific manner. Unless someone is just trying to be a contrarian, "But actually..." but those people are of no use. You may equate RPG to milk, of which there is different kinds and we could argue that almond or soy milk isn't really milk, even. This wouldn't make you a contrarian.

If, however, you find that you couldn't recognize or acknowledge details that qualify a game as say, a jRPG, a survival horror or a flight simulator then you would lose all credibility.

"Immersive Sims" is a pretty specific label with a special meaning that only those who are acquainted with recognize. it is a useful label signalig specific details (which do absolutely matter) and can either qualify or disqualify a game from the sub-genre. As I said in the original post, nothing against those who are unfamiliar with this label and the details it represents, but the discussion and feedback I'm looking for can only be exclusively provided by those that are.

That's not true at all. There are definitely immersive sim elements. Most story is told through you finding data pads, reading emails and texts gives you info on objectives and characters. Hacking let's you influence the enemy to do what you want. Options to approach situations with stealth or aggression. Multiple points of entry in most scenarios. "Furthest away" What is Doom Eternal then? What is Devil May Cry? This by comparison is System Shock to those games. Put down the hyperbole.

Oh great. You finally get it. That is exactly it. I and many others find these labels to be practically useful even if they are somewhat debatable.

Practical usability is the only thing that matters. You can argue conceptually whatever you like. But as long as there are people who find these labels useful you cannot argue that they are entirely useless. If they were entirely useless absolutely no one would be able to use them.


Just because video game genres aren't an exact science doesn't mean no one finds any value in them.