>trolling
nope
nope
Quote from grndino:
>trolling
nope
nope
An RPG isn't made by just adding a story as you suggested, so you're definitely not adding anything to the discussion.
SDA Forum
anything which attempts to marry a story or other contextualization to a set of mechanics ought to be judged by how well it succeeds. the only games that are judged in this way are the ones that have been let into the rpg club - which you can get into by including the words 'level up' somewhere in the game.
I think the problem is that while the term "RPG" actually applies to many many games, the ones identified by the term "RPG" are the ones that don't fit in any other category. "Well, it's not a platformer, racing game, puzzle game, sports game, action adventure, shmup, RTS, FPS, or rhythm game. I guess the only label that's left is RPG." I mean, Oblivion and Final Fantasy play nothing alike. But they're both RPGs. But I think that's mostly because a lot of the other labels and genres don't really fit those games.
Waiting hurts my soul...
Quote from grndino:
most every genre is a subcategory of rpg
you also seem to be implying that things can't be more than one style.
you also seem to be implying that things can't be more than one style.
So, GTA, inFAMOUS, Prototype, Bully are sandbox adventures right? They aren't much like Oblivion though.
I don't have a problem with more than one style or combining styles. Genre mixing is usually a bad idea, but games seem to get away with it more than films or books. A romance novel that has some mystery is clearly put into the romance genre, while a mystery with a love scene is still just a mystery novel.
The increased complexity probably comes from the many ways you can interact with a game, it's not as set as reading and watching.
RPG is more of a grand scope sort of thing, like Animal/Mineral/Vegetable.
That's why most games are classified as WRPG, JPRG, SRPG, CRPG, P&P RPG, MMORPG, etc...
Very rarely will you hear something referred to as purely RPG save when speaking in grandiose terms or using that terrible term, "RPG elements."
That's why most games are classified as WRPG, JPRG, SRPG, CRPG, P&P RPG, MMORPG, etc...
Very rarely will you hear something referred to as purely RPG save when speaking in grandiose terms or using that terrible term, "RPG elements."
You know who has something valuable to contribute to this discussion? Jean-Paul Sartre.
http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/sartre/works/exist/sartre.htm
http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/sartre/works/exist/sartre.htm
I think to determine what an RPG is and whats not u got to find the core of RPG, something every RPG has.
1) A Story
Every RPG needs a story, wheter it's set or selfconstructing. The only thing is that it needs to begin somewhere and end somewhere. Playing after the ending is sometimes possible and no violation of this law.
2) You are always playing one defined character
This character may change due to some circumstances as story or gameplay, but you're always just one person. It is possible that you are controlling other chars through commands.
3) At least some of your actions have consequences in the later gameplay.
May it be Grinding, collecting of items, story developing decission and so on...
Every Game that fulfills these conditions can be labeled as an RPG. But as many, many games meet these conditions its more convenient to use subcategories to determine what a game is like. Only if no subcategory is met its called RPG in the genre.
There are many games I don't want accept of being RPGs but that are only personel feelings. Probably its the same for allof you but that's how it is.
1) A Story
Every RPG needs a story, wheter it's set or selfconstructing. The only thing is that it needs to begin somewhere and end somewhere. Playing after the ending is sometimes possible and no violation of this law.
2) You are always playing one defined character
This character may change due to some circumstances as story or gameplay, but you're always just one person. It is possible that you are controlling other chars through commands.
3) At least some of your actions have consequences in the later gameplay.
May it be Grinding, collecting of items, story developing decission and so on...
Every Game that fulfills these conditions can be labeled as an RPG. But as many, many games meet these conditions its more convenient to use subcategories to determine what a game is like. Only if no subcategory is met its called RPG in the genre.
There are many games I don't want accept of being RPGs but that are only personel feelings. Probably its the same for allof you but that's how it is.
Your list is very vague, but I agree with the last thing you said. When you say story do you mean any game that isn't like a sports, racing or puzzle game or are you talking about something deeper than what you'd find in say a standard platformer like mario or banjo?
Pretty much every Rpg has leveling or stats that change during the progression of the game and can be controlled by the player to an extent. That said there are a few games with this that I still wouldn't consider an rpg due to there core mechanic like Castle Crashers for example. I narrowed it down a bit more, but it's still vague enough for other games I wouldn't consider rpgs though.
Also does half-minute hero have a story?
Pretty much every Rpg has leveling or stats that change during the progression of the game and can be controlled by the player to an extent. That said there are a few games with this that I still wouldn't consider an rpg due to there core mechanic like Castle Crashers for example. I narrowed it down a bit more, but it's still vague enough for other games I wouldn't consider rpgs though.
Also does half-minute hero have a story?
Quote from Eishi:
Your list is very vague, but I agree with the last thing you said. When you say story do you mean any game that isn't like a sports, racing or puzzle game or are you talking about something deeper than what you'd find in say a standard platformer like mario or banjo?
My problem is that i wnated to be very vague, but u're right in some points. Maybe we have to think about making a difference between Story and Goal of the game. Mario 64 for example has an absolute never changing goal to save peach. A story needs a development or at least the game revealing something, that you didn't know before(like things about he past, how this situation developed or about the chars you want to fight/save). I hope this is vague enough for some pretty thin plot RPGs yet.
Quote:
Pretty much every Rpg has leveling or stats that change during the progression of the game and can be controlled by the player to an extent. That said there are a few games with this that I still wouldn't consider an rpg due to there core mechanic like Castle Crashers for example.
That's part of the third thing i mentioned above. What the problem with castle crashers is, that it doesn't have any room of freedom. Normal RPGs give u the chance to move back and forward as much as u like. In CC you can only battle on a screen of set enemies getting a set ammount of XP and leveling up(Not sure about the 'set' If all is set, then it can't be a RPG as you don't make any differences in later gameplay.)
Quote:
I narrowed it down a bit more, but it's still vague enough for other games I wouldn't consider rpgs though. Also does half-minute hero have a story?
Never played it, but sure doesn't sound like it.
Waiting hurts my soul...
There are goals in Half-Minute Hero, not sure how much development there is. Is Double Dungeons' story enough to call it an RPG?
Shenmue is definitely not an RPG. It borrows from so many kinds of games though, people seem confused on what to call it and default to RPG like Elren (and others) said. Closest thing I'd see calling it is an adventure game that's very light on puzzle/item use. It has very light simulation and fighting, and a few mini-games as well. The more I think about it, the more it reminds me of Heavy Rain, so maybe it's just an interactive movie.
Fragile Dreams isn't something I'd call an RPG either, but you can grind for levels (better HP and damage), collect weapons and items (items developer story elements not directly related to the main story), it has a story, and you're playing one defined character.
Reasons I wouldn't call these two games RPGs:
The limited freedom in choice on how to develop the story. (Of course, that's true of many games, so it doesn't seem enough on its own.)
Exploration and events are limited by invisible walls. (Again true of most games, but really irritating when the game claims to have open ended exploration with tag lines like, "Go anywhere, do anything.")
Both have events that jar my immersion, and I can't suspend disbelief anymore.
I hear both endings kind of suck.
Maybe I'm rating console RPGs closer to P&P RPGs than I originally thought, and whether or not I want to call something an RPG is based on how many points of similarity it has in common. Kind of like a check list. Since no game will ever have a completely open story we're left with comparing the other aspects of P&P RPGs (world immersion, statistics, combat, character management (abilities, skills, inventory, style, dress, i.e. anything that can be changed about the character), character decision control, and anything else I've forgotten).
These two games have fallen so short of having an interactive world to explore, immersion is broken, no character decision control, hardly any statistics, and laughable combat. The only way to manage the characters is through inventory, which is what an adventure game is. So we're left with games that fail to meet expectations (of being an RPG, and their own claims of a world to explore). I wonder who's calling the games RPGs, those who've played RPGs or those that are trying to appeal to players of the genre. Determining how close each game comes to aspects of P&P RPGs in order to call it an RPG has been too subjective, and people will start calling a game an RPG just because you 'level up'. Can we determine an objective means?
Shenmue is definitely not an RPG. It borrows from so many kinds of games though, people seem confused on what to call it and default to RPG like Elren (and others) said. Closest thing I'd see calling it is an adventure game that's very light on puzzle/item use. It has very light simulation and fighting, and a few mini-games as well. The more I think about it, the more it reminds me of Heavy Rain, so maybe it's just an interactive movie.
Fragile Dreams isn't something I'd call an RPG either, but you can grind for levels (better HP and damage), collect weapons and items (items developer story elements not directly related to the main story), it has a story, and you're playing one defined character.
Reasons I wouldn't call these two games RPGs:
The limited freedom in choice on how to develop the story. (Of course, that's true of many games, so it doesn't seem enough on its own.)
Exploration and events are limited by invisible walls. (Again true of most games, but really irritating when the game claims to have open ended exploration with tag lines like, "Go anywhere, do anything.")
Both have events that jar my immersion, and I can't suspend disbelief anymore.
I hear both endings kind of suck.
Maybe I'm rating console RPGs closer to P&P RPGs than I originally thought, and whether or not I want to call something an RPG is based on how many points of similarity it has in common. Kind of like a check list. Since no game will ever have a completely open story we're left with comparing the other aspects of P&P RPGs (world immersion, statistics, combat, character management (abilities, skills, inventory, style, dress, i.e. anything that can be changed about the character), character decision control, and anything else I've forgotten).
These two games have fallen so short of having an interactive world to explore, immersion is broken, no character decision control, hardly any statistics, and laughable combat. The only way to manage the characters is through inventory, which is what an adventure game is. So we're left with games that fail to meet expectations (of being an RPG, and their own claims of a world to explore). I wonder who's calling the games RPGs, those who've played RPGs or those that are trying to appeal to players of the genre. Determining how close each game comes to aspects of P&P RPGs in order to call it an RPG has been too subjective, and people will start calling a game an RPG just because you 'level up'. Can we determine an objective means?
Shenmue's genre is FREE(Full Reactive Eyes Entertainment) according to Yu Suzuki.
Some RPGs you don't make much difference in later gameplay from leveling since enemies level with you. I think the leveling argument usually works since it brings into account of character stats being altered progressively, which I think is true of all rpgs. I think it's more about stats then ability unlocks or equipment too since those can be found in plenty of games I wouldn't consider rpgs. So in a way it really does fall back on p&p rpgs because of all the numbers involved.
Some RPGs you don't make much difference in later gameplay from leveling since enemies level with you. I think the leveling argument usually works since it brings into account of character stats being altered progressively, which I think is true of all rpgs. I think it's more about stats then ability unlocks or equipment too since those can be found in plenty of games I wouldn't consider rpgs. So in a way it really does fall back on p&p rpgs because of all the numbers involved.
Waiting hurts my soul...
It's nice that Yu Suzuki decided not to call it an RPG, but others have called it that. rpgamer.com and mobygames.com have been the two sources I've relied on to put my list together. Even wikipedia.org says RPG. Honestly there's no reason to create a new genre for this game.
I don't know of many games where the enemies level with you (Oblivion and FF VIII are the only ones that come to mind). If you can't manage anything about your character, then it becomes less of an RPG because you don't have any control of how you'd like to play. I've added only because it adds to the feel of playing the character you want. Skill and ability unlocks can also be decided by selecting a class, which is part of character creation/management.
Is there any one of those aspects that can be lost and still call it an RPG? Are there any more that should be considered key to RPGs?
I don't know of many games where the enemies level with you (Oblivion and FF VIII are the only ones that come to mind). If you can't manage anything about your character, then it becomes less of an RPG because you don't have any control of how you'd like to play. I've added only because it adds to the feel of playing the character you want. Skill and ability unlocks can also be decided by selecting a class, which is part of character creation/management.
Is there any one of those aspects that can be lost and still call it an RPG? Are there any more that should be considered key to RPGs?
I played more than one RPG where you had no control about your character. Everything was set, the char, class levels, stats increase, skills gains and all other things, but it was an RPG afterall. Can't you remember having played Something like that?
I mean having the possibility of changing your character in every way is not bad, but that's not what an RPG is.
RPG in real life just means a game where you play a role of a fictionate character, doesn't it? Wether the Character is someone you invented yourself, or some japanese created him doesn't matter at all.
Thats the RL but in gaming you can't say every game where u play a fictionate character is a RPG. You can't even compare P&P RPG with Console or computer games, cause the RL and Digital world are different, with different possibilities and limits.
In P&P RPGs the limits are your thoughts and creativity that are near inexhaustible. The gaming itself has hardware limits software and creativity limits, so we should stop comparing them with real life.
I don't even think that we can fully describe what an RPG is, cause its ever changing. Who knows what possibilities there will be in 5 or 10 years to make it more realistic, maybe u don't even have skills at some point or you yourself play as the character in the game.
Nearly every game Genre started of as an RPG, but everyone saw that there were differences, so they made a new category for this kind of games. Every game seperrated in another category doesn't even have to be considered as an RPG anymore, as its grown into its own genre. That makes thinking of RPG as default category and not as own genre possible, but all 'RPG' players want it to be one seperate genre.
The greatest difference between RPGs and other genres is the focus. RPGs focus on the characters and/or story, as other genres focus on the gameplay. An Action game is Action cause you're fightingreal time against multiple enemies, making it fast. Adventures are exploring a giant world, learning your techniks and finding secrets while trying to reach a goal. Ego shooters... well i guess u got what i wanna say.
Other differences should be found, but i think thats whats making an rpg.(If not smthg better is comming to my mind)
I mean having the possibility of changing your character in every way is not bad, but that's not what an RPG is.
RPG in real life just means a game where you play a role of a fictionate character, doesn't it? Wether the Character is someone you invented yourself, or some japanese created him doesn't matter at all.
Thats the RL but in gaming you can't say every game where u play a fictionate character is a RPG. You can't even compare P&P RPG with Console or computer games, cause the RL and Digital world are different, with different possibilities and limits.
In P&P RPGs the limits are your thoughts and creativity that are near inexhaustible. The gaming itself has hardware limits software and creativity limits, so we should stop comparing them with real life.
I don't even think that we can fully describe what an RPG is, cause its ever changing. Who knows what possibilities there will be in 5 or 10 years to make it more realistic, maybe u don't even have skills at some point or you yourself play as the character in the game.
Nearly every game Genre started of as an RPG, but everyone saw that there were differences, so they made a new category for this kind of games. Every game seperrated in another category doesn't even have to be considered as an RPG anymore, as its grown into its own genre. That makes thinking of RPG as default category and not as own genre possible, but all 'RPG' players want it to be one seperate genre.
The greatest difference between RPGs and other genres is the focus. RPGs focus on the characters and/or story, as other genres focus on the gameplay. An Action game is Action cause you're fightingreal time against multiple enemies, making it fast. Adventures are exploring a giant world, learning your techniks and finding secrets while trying to reach a goal. Ego shooters... well i guess u got what i wanna say.
Other differences should be found, but i think thats whats making an rpg.(If not smthg better is comming to my mind)
Waiting hurts my soul...
Quote from Elren:
I played more than one RPG where you had no control about your character. Everything was set, the char, class levels, stats increase, skills gains and all other things, but it was an RPG afterall. Can't you remember having played Something like that?
Quote from Elren:
I mean having the possibility of changing your character in every way is not bad, but that's not what an RPG is.
RPG in real life just means a game where you play a role of a fictionate character, doesn't it? Wether the Character is someone you invented yourself, or some japanese created him doesn't matter at all.
Thats the RL but in gaming you can't say every game where u play a fictionate character is a RPG. You can't even compare P&P RPG with Console or computer games, cause the RL and Digital world are different, with different possibilities and limits.
In P&P RPGs the limits are your thoughts and creativity that are near inexhaustible. The gaming itself has hardware limits software and creativity limits, so we should stop comparing them with real life.
RPG in real life just means a game where you play a role of a fictionate character, doesn't it? Wether the Character is someone you invented yourself, or some japanese created him doesn't matter at all.
Thats the RL but in gaming you can't say every game where u play a fictionate character is a RPG. You can't even compare P&P RPG with Console or computer games, cause the RL and Digital world are different, with different possibilities and limits.
In P&P RPGs the limits are your thoughts and creativity that are near inexhaustible. The gaming itself has hardware limits software and creativity limits, so we should stop comparing them with real life.
If you remove the inexhaustible story development and decision making from consideration, then you're left with something more comparable to a console RPG. It's obvious there currently isn't any way to define all possibilities in a computer game.
Quote from Elren:
I don't even think that we can fully describe what an RPG is, cause its ever changing. Who knows what possibilities there will be in 5 or 10 years to make it more realistic, maybe u don't even have skills at some point or you yourself play as the character in the game.
Nearly every game Genre started of as an RPG, but everyone saw that there were differences, so they made a new category for this kind of games. Every game seperrated in another category doesn't even have to be considered as an RPG anymore, as its grown into its own genre. That makes thinking of RPG as default category and not as own genre possible, but all 'RPG' players want it to be one seperate genre.
Nearly every game Genre started of as an RPG, but everyone saw that there were differences, so they made a new category for this kind of games. Every game seperrated in another category doesn't even have to be considered as an RPG anymore, as its grown into its own genre. That makes thinking of RPG as default category and not as own genre possible, but all 'RPG' players want it to be one seperate genre.
I don't think we need to worry about imaginary games when trying to define RPGs. Either those will be closer to original RPGs, or they will be different enough to avoid the term 'RPG'. I don't see how Pac-Man or Asteroids started out as RPGs.
Quote from Elren:
The greatest difference between RPGs and other genres is the focus. RPGs focus on the characters and/or story, as other genres focus on the gameplay. An Action game is Action cause you're fightingreal time against multiple enemies, making it fast. Adventures are exploring a giant world, learning your techniks and finding secrets while trying to reach a goal. Ego shooters... well i guess u got what i wanna say.
Other differences should be found, but i think thats whats making an rpg.(If not smthg better is comming to my mind)
Other differences should be found, but i think thats whats making an rpg.(If not smthg better is comming to my mind)
Adventure games focus on story more than a lot of RPGs, but those are adventure games and not RPGs. Dungeon crawlers are considered RPGs, and many of those don't have a story. Interactive fiction isn't an RPG.
It seems that games are created so often by developers that intend break current genre rules that marketing people become sloppy trying to peg them into current genre definitions. There's such a blurring that unless you're playing a game from a genre that describes how you play the game, you won't know what kind of game to expect. Video game genres are a mess, which is why I'm trying to sort out for myself what games are really RPGs so that I can play them, and the only way I can think to do that is to play through all the games that are considered to be RPGs. At the same time I'm hoping to come up with a good definition to weed out non-RPGs.
Quote from ZenicReverie:
It seems that games are created so often by developers that intend break current genre rules that marketing people become sloppy trying to peg them into current genre definitions. There's such a blurring that unless you're playing a game from a genre that describes how you play the game, you won't know what kind of game to expect. Video game genres are a mess, which is why I'm trying to sort out for myself what games are really RPGs so that I can play them, and the only way I can think to do that is to play through all the games that are considered to be RPGs. At the same time I'm hoping to come up with a good definition to weed out non-RPGs.
Thats certainly true. My heads getting blurry...
But if we use your strategy together we can state with examples what an RPG should/could have. If theres an example of a RPG that doesn't have this criteria, then its not necessary. If we don't find a counter example then this criteria is necessary for an RPG. Basically I'm saying that we should compare all RPGs we know and then come down with a definition of what we learned from that.
I hope someone besides me understood what I'm blabbering. :p
First of a RPG without Character/s and a story is unthinkable, so we mustn't discuss about this.
Is a fighting system important for an RPG? Are there any examples against that?
What freedom in mobility does a RPG need? Should u be able to walk over an enourmes world(like Gothik, Oblivion, [Sacred(more hack and slay as RPG)],Dragon Quest), is a Map enough when you cannot go back to the prior map?(), or is even one screen at a time enough?
Freedom in character development. Do you have to be able to raise all stats yourself and design your own charakter while deciding the skills on your own(Phantasy star online, Icewind dale, Most D&D based games), or is a set level up but changebel equipment and learnable skills enough(Final Fantasy 9, Kingdom Hearts), or is stat raise through actual usage and never learning skills enough?(Threads of Fate)
Is it possible to have an RPG without an Antagonist?
Are skills necessary?
Are Classes/Jobs/Races necessary? (In JRPGs is the difference between characters meant)
Thats all I can come up with now. sry
sorry for letting you guys get out of hand, i'll just rebut as i read:
See, in something as flexible as games, the word 'story' takes on a more flexible meaning. It has to include everything that could happen, and things that happen 'randomly' instead of just the script. So Mario 64 becomes more than a save-the-princess game since a lot more happens before and after you save the princess. In fact, the princess isn't involved at all while you're playing. Better to call it a confound-the-Bowser game, but then you can do a lot of unnecessary tourism which forms its own story.
So, any game that has context will have a story. The 'only story games are RPGs' becomes bunk.
But it's not necessarily part of an RPG just because it's a common game feature. What if a DnD campaign was on a ship you weren't in control of?
Of course Shenmue is an RPG. It's really creative, which tends to throw people off. You play the role of Ryo.
Immersion is subjective. Some people get immersed with nothing more than paper in front of them.
Also, it's not entirely wise to compare to simply defer to Dungeons and Dragons et al to determine a game RPGness. There were formalized RPGs decades before DnD, with a very different approach.
Progressive stats is not true of all RPGs, of course. Why would it be?
Not sure where Elren thinks he's going trying to split between real life RPGs and game RPGs. That doesn't make sense.
Agree here, that's why it's good to know when you have to describe things very broadly. The term role playing game is best defined using just those three words.
Pacman is of course not much more than a puzzle game, but Asteroids and its precursor Spacewar! (1962) are timely art. The setting is space. The condition is war. The end result is the player's death. These descriptors add up to a role playing game, and describe how people thought of or feared this thing called space that they'd inherit.
Ok, so this is incorrect. Adventure games often spend less time on exposition than other kinds of games, and are a type of RPG. Dungeon crawlers have a bit of story, in that they tell the story of a dungeon crawler. And interactive fiction or visual novels put you in the role of a definite main character. Maybe it's because the discussion was allowed to restart without responding to my claim that most modern games are RPGs. You guys haven't successfully argued against this. I'm not saying I'm infallible, but I made a good point.
The only things necessary for an RPG is a role and a world for it to exist in. A definite conflict is nice but not necessary. Killing things is fun but not necessary. The mode of transportation or even moving around itself isn't necessary. You could have a paraplegic RPG. Character development comes from what the character does in comparison to what he could possibly do and what happens to him - the scripted parts help out too. Antagonists aren't necessary but it might be boring without a conflict. But really, anything is possible.
Skill are needed because chicks dig guys with skills.
See, in something as flexible as games, the word 'story' takes on a more flexible meaning. It has to include everything that could happen, and things that happen 'randomly' instead of just the script. So Mario 64 becomes more than a save-the-princess game since a lot more happens before and after you save the princess. In fact, the princess isn't involved at all while you're playing. Better to call it a confound-the-Bowser game, but then you can do a lot of unnecessary tourism which forms its own story.
So, any game that has context will have a story. The 'only story games are RPGs' becomes bunk.
Quote:
Normal RPGs give u the chance to move back and forward as much as u like.
But it's not necessarily part of an RPG just because it's a common game feature. What if a DnD campaign was on a ship you weren't in control of?
Of course Shenmue is an RPG. It's really creative, which tends to throw people off. You play the role of Ryo.
Immersion is subjective. Some people get immersed with nothing more than paper in front of them.
Also, it's not entirely wise to compare to simply defer to Dungeons and Dragons et al to determine a game RPGness. There were formalized RPGs decades before DnD, with a very different approach.
Progressive stats is not true of all RPGs, of course. Why would it be?
Not sure where Elren thinks he's going trying to split between real life RPGs and game RPGs. That doesn't make sense.
Quote:
I don't even think that we can fully describe what an RPG is, cause its ever changing.
Agree here, that's why it's good to know when you have to describe things very broadly. The term role playing game is best defined using just those three words.
Pacman is of course not much more than a puzzle game, but Asteroids and its precursor Spacewar! (1962) are timely art. The setting is space. The condition is war. The end result is the player's death. These descriptors add up to a role playing game, and describe how people thought of or feared this thing called space that they'd inherit.
Quote:
Adventure games focus on story more than a lot of RPGs, but those are adventure games and not RPGs. Dungeon crawlers are considered RPGs, and many of those don't have a story. Interactive fiction isn't an RPG.
Ok, so this is incorrect. Adventure games often spend less time on exposition than other kinds of games, and are a type of RPG. Dungeon crawlers have a bit of story, in that they tell the story of a dungeon crawler. And interactive fiction or visual novels put you in the role of a definite main character. Maybe it's because the discussion was allowed to restart without responding to my claim that most modern games are RPGs. You guys haven't successfully argued against this. I'm not saying I'm infallible, but I made a good point.
The only things necessary for an RPG is a role and a world for it to exist in. A definite conflict is nice but not necessary. Killing things is fun but not necessary. The mode of transportation or even moving around itself isn't necessary. You could have a paraplegic RPG. Character development comes from what the character does in comparison to what he could possibly do and what happens to him - the scripted parts help out too. Antagonists aren't necessary but it might be boring without a conflict. But really, anything is possible.
Skill are needed because chicks dig guys with skills.
I agree with most of what you say and I suppose if you think about it a little it becomes difficult to place Shenmue into a genre other than RPG unless Open World Adventure counts as a genre since I'd more likely compare Shenmue to GTA than pretty much any rpg off the top of my head. Going backwards to previous areas isn't always possible in rpgs either you used a boat as an example, but games like Lost Odyssey will actually make going back to previous locations impossible due to the disc swaps and some areas may also become changed in such a way that they actually become inaccessible or altered vastly which has been done in several Final Fantasy games. I stand by my opinion that the player's character must develop through some sort of stats in order to be an rpg and I've yet to see any game that I'd consider an rpg that doesn't have this, but I'm also not saying that every game that has that is an rpg.
Well, try to think of a game that doesn't involve stats of any kind, or in a broader stance, character descriptors that evolve over time. If you look at it that way, it's an important part of any game that wants to give an interesting set of expectations to the player during the course of the game. If nothing changed about the player's character from start to finish, whether it's knowledge of fire magic or knowledge of a murder mystery, then it must've been a boring game.