Well, technically, there's no such thing as RPG elements to the same extent that everything you could possibly imagine can be classed as an RPG element. Just stating "RPG elements are fun" is so vague and generalised a statement as to be entirely worthless as a comeback of discussion point until you list what you class as RPG elements, to which your list:
Why would I need to be technical? All we need is a common understanding of what's traditionally part of RPGs - specifically those we're talking about.
This isn't about elements that all RPGs and only RPGs have. It's about common RPG elements.
It's not rocket science.
Character progression - Too vague. Do you mean stat progression or just story progression (like how people describe character progression in movies)?
I mean character progression. As in power and arsenal progression.
NPC interaction - Too vague. Adventure games and FPSs and other game formats have NPC interaction
It's not vague to people who're not being deliberately obtuse.
It doesn't seem like logic is a strong point with you, but let me demonstrate why your point is flawed:
RPGs more or less always have NPC interaction, which is why it's a common RPG element.
If NPC interaction was a staple in FPSs, it would also be a FPS element. It's not that, however.
As for adventure games, it kinda depends on the kind of adventure game. Games like MYST don't have much in the way of NPC interaction - but I'd concede that NPC interaction is a common adventure game element.
Conclusively, NPC interaction can actually be both an RPG element and an adventure game element.
Incidentally, both genres share a lot of elements.
Clear?
stealth/thievery - Games which have a heavy emphasis on this are normally referred to as Stealth games rather than general RPGs. One would expect a general RPG to have elements of this, but only by proportion to percentage of classes available. You have a particular bias for this mechanic and have over-expectations for general RPGs.
I didn't mention heavy emphasis, so what's your point here?
I mentioned it as an RPG element, as it's common in RPGs - and stealth games tend to have many elements that are common in RPGs as well.
inventory managment - Yes, I would agree here, getting IM right is very important. What that exact right actually is is much harder to define than a check-list use of the word.
Why would I need to define it? For you? I'd have to believe you were interested in understanding and productive exchange.
Clearly, you're into this as some kind of competition.
Maybe if I had a frail ego and I felt challenged by you, I'd engage in such a thing.
That's not the case, though.
crafting - Crafting has never been considered a primary selling point of RPGs and even in some high profile examples is often an unnecessary additional luxury for those that like that kind of thing.
I don't know what primary selling point has to do with anything. I'm talking about a common RPG element.
loot progression - It's not the progression of the loot that makes loot fun, except for a small niche of 24/7 aRPG grind fanatics. Simply progressing from a +2 sword to a plus 3 sword or a 10% extra damage to a 12% extra damage sword is not fun, per se, as just providing this can cause hamster wheel boredom in the majority. It's like the final step before someone requests the end to loot progression. What makes an item "fun" is if it's better than your present items and/or different to your present items (the highlighted part being the most important feature for the concept of "fun").
Loot progression is one aspect of power progression. It's fun if you enjoy power - which people universally do. End of story.
Your big example is dialogue methods between Witcher 3 and Balder's Gate 2 when dialogue methods have never been considered huge RPG elements aside from the fact that people prefer the ability to give variances for replies. It's the desire for variance that is more the RPG element, not the method of delivery.
Dialogue is a pretty big part of most RPGs, which is why I mentioned two ways of handling it that were relevant to my point.
Further, that's just one loose comparison, and one that's a massive minority of interest compared to the general concept of micromanagement versus simulation. Perhaps you didn't feel like comparing the character creation aspects of both games because you realised the Witcher would indeed emerge from that angle as being extremely weak on the RPG elements debate angle and you have a specific bias to push…?
Perhaps you enjoy fantasizing about how people think based on feeling inferior for irrational reasons?
All kinds of things are possible.
Am I just pushing a bias? Not intentionally. I'd gladly write a post on how Witcher is better than Balder's Gate. I just wouldn't be coming from the angle of RPG elements. Less can never be more, however you can fudge that topic by use of words like "more funner" and "better game" - but less is still less…
Less can very much be more. I guess if you had a point about why not, you should be making it with some measure of rational support.
I'm not really seeing any of that.
You seem to miss all my points on a quest to prove me wrong no matter what.
That won't work, believe me.
The first step to refute any of my points is to understand them. The first step to understanding them is to want to understand them. Then comes the ability to read. Then comes the ability to focus on what's written without assumption and conjecture.
If you demonstrate the capacity for such things, I'll gladly give this a real shot.