Um, because they fit the technical definition of a cRPG, and are labelled as such?

And what would that "technical definition" be exactly? I've asked lots of people how they defined what an RPG was and i almost never got the same answer twice.

As for those games labeling themselves as RPG, that doesn't mean anything. I can label myself as whatever I want, that won't make it true.
And considering the fact that a lot of games tend to get the RPG label these days (like, say, Bioshock) it's more a case of people trying to include as many genres as they can in a game description in the hopes that it somehow widens the potential market.

The RPG's world is always going to be much simpler and more straightforward than real life, so unless you introduce more unpredictable elements specifically try to discourage min-maxing people are probably going to min-max their characters given the chance.
In real-life there are usually a lot of unpredictable and chaotic elements that will punish overspecialization. RPGs usually don't have as much of this.

And on the other hand, an RPG can be more than your narrow definition of one.

So you keep saying, but you've yet to give a definition of what an RPG is to you.
Empty words aren't worth much...

And narrow definitions based on one's preferendes/beliefs aren't worth much beyond opinion.

IMO a class system/levelling & skill system/inventory and equipment/etc make it an RPG, among a few other things.

So your definition is based exclusively on gameplay presentation.
I fail to see how it's less narrow than mine, which is based mostly on content.
Sure, mine excludes some games that you consider RPGs but it also includes games you don't.

Still, you're as entitled to your opinion as I am to mine, and considering how different they are I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree, no matter how unsatisfying that may be.

I said those were SOME of the things I counted in my definition....not all.

Of course I consider an rpg one even without combat, as well as other things.

So I'm left with the question of why you can't give me a complete definition when I asked you for one.
Is it that hard to type a few extra lines? I mean, I gave you mine (and it was a complete, exhaustive version) quite a few posts ago.

You give the impression that you don't actually have a definition of what a RPG is and just go with your gut instincts (if it feels like an RPG it is). Not that there's anything wrong with that, but then you should just say so.

No, not gut instincts...if it contains some of my criteria then it is.

I min/max in all computer RPGs I play. Unfortunately, they're usually designed in such a way that there are 'dump stats', which are useless (or nearly so) in the game. And my compulsive nature leads me to make sure I don't waste ability/skill/feat/perk points.

So, does it 'interfere' with my enjoyment? Yes, with respect tot he fact that when I later find out I've 'wasted' points, it bothers me.

In PnP, I never min/max because a good DM makes sure you don't need - or want - to.

Quoted For Fucking Truth.
When someone says that a Diablo-like game is a RPG, I reply that then Half-Life 2 is a puzzle game instead of FPS (because of the few puzzles in there, just like Diablo-like games have a few RPG-ish elements).


Then Terraria should be a RPG for you, because it has inventory and equipment progression (and that equipment has some stats, etc.), right?

There is a reason I spent half my 2010 PAX playing PnP RPGs, they are so darned fun. If you have an excellent group you can play all sorts of neat stuff. When releasing content for a large audience you have to balance it to the levels at which you expect them to play (i.e. if most of the audience will min-max you need to build a difficulty in for said situation).

Diablo was called an ARPG and I think it's fair to classify it as a specific sub-genre. It basically focuses way more on combat than other roleplaying aspects.

To everyone else:
Well, to be clear, I don't have an issue with min-maxing per se, I have an issue with it when it impacts my enjoyment of the game, for example by making me feel like I hurt myself by not coming up with a complete character build with information off a wiki somewhere or by making me feel like instead of progressing the storyline I need to be out hunting skills (even though I'm more than capable of taking on the next storyline step by then).

This.....
Yup....although it's a sub genre or RPGs rather than a full fledged RPG.

A little late to the party, I know...

Regarding min-maxing, I think its almost necessary if you're going for a specific build. Fallout has snipers, thieves, and melee brutes for instance, while a generally average build that doesn't excel in one aspect or another just makes it harder.

Even in tabletop games like D&D and ShadowRun (my 2 most recent gaming groups), it was a matter of "We need the following...tank, healer, damager, and someone who can effect multiple foes at once."

It seems like modern gaming has evolved to a point of just expecting different classes to excel greatly in one aspect or another (taking damage, dealing damage, healing damage, and dishing out special effects).