Question of the Day, Feb. 21, 2010

[Green Ninja]

I heard people say the classic Zeldas are more RPG-like because they shared elements with the classic 16-bit Final Fantasys and other RPGs from that time.

For me, RPGs are defined by several things:

1. Stats. That my be old and boring but it's true. That's were it came from, so it should be in there.

2. Be a member of a party of Adventures with whom you converse frequently.

3. Decide on how you interact with the world. Are you a hero or a villian?

Zelda, as much as I love the series, has none of the above.

 

[God's Clown]

I consider it a RPG, but to be honest I consider basically every game involving third person aspect an RPG. I am excluding TPS from that, by and large because I hate TPS games, and no, I do not count Mass Effect as a TPS.

 

[10BIT]

I was talking about the new "Bioware" RPG definition that so popular these days.

Still not a correct definition but I understand what you mean: Zelda doesn't fall under any of the definitions used to describe a role-playing game. [small]not including the 'you play the role' definition of course since you do that in (almost) every game[/small]

 

[fletch_talon]

The reason for the confusion is that it shares some features similar to RPGs. Basically the fact that to progress through the game you obtain abilities (items/weapons) which enable you to overcome what was previously a major obstacle.

Examples in Zelda:
You may need a hook/clawshot before you can get to place a or through temple b.
Zelda's lullaby is required to pass some obstacles in OoT.

In JRPGs:
Pokemon has HM moves like surf, waterfall and strength which you must obtain (along with the corresponding gym badge) before you can get to certain towns.
Golden sun requires specific synergies or sometimes items to proceed through the world. Some you learn naturally, others you have to seek out.

The problem with this line of thinking is that this feature is not a "defining feature" of RPGs. RPGs can be defined by one or both of the following:

Stats or character customisation and progression
and/or
Freedom of choice through your character's actions/decisions

Also note that these have to be the defining feature of the game. Modern Warfare has stats, but they play second fiddle to the main gameplay which is shooting in first person view, hence making it a FPS with RPG features.

Zelda has a degree of customisation and progression in your increasing health bar and choice of weapons/armour, but they are not the main features. The main feature is the progression through the gameworld and story and the fighting of enemies. Hence its Action and Adventure.

 

[Mstrswrd]

They're RPGish, have RPG elements, but I wouldn't really say that they're RPG's... except for Zelda II, which was an RPG.

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

I was talking about the new "Bioware" RPG definition that so popular these days.

Still not a correct definition but I understand what you mean: Zelda doesn't fall under any of the definitions used to describe a role-playing game. [small]not including the 'you play the role' definition of course since you do that in (almost) every game[/small]

The most base defense of JRPGs as RPGs. When the real defense of JRPGs is the stats, leveling, and focus on character development of party members.

 

[JEBWrench]

They're RPGish, have RPG elements, but I wouldn't really say that they're RPG's... except for Zelda II, which was an RPG.

Zelda II was definitely Action-RPG. What with the levelling, and the progression choices, and the lousy dialog.

 

[sky14kemea]

I think they're RPG-ish enough to be called RPG's, or action RPG's >_>

I mean, there are loads of RPG's where you don't create your own character, but those usually still count.
(I may be thinking JRPG's though...)

 

[Arkhangelsk]

I'd say it's more adventure...

 

[Aulleas123]

For the record, I hate it when adventure games come out that sell themselves as RPGs. It's blasphemy, plain and simple.

Even a good adventure game series (Zelda) should not call itself an RPG. If the game creates the role in which you play, then the game is not an RPG. If the game lets you choose a role and create a character to fit that role (like DnD) then it is an RPG.

 

[Spirultima]

Anyone who said "Its not an RPG" is curling themselves into a ball, rocking themselves slowly while constantly but quietly chanting "Its not an RPG, its not an RPG, its not an RPG" then tries to get away from the question by playing Modern Warfare 2.

 

[Rednog]

Anyone who said "Its not an RPG" is curling themselves into a ball, rocking themselves slowly while constantly but quietly chanting "Its not an RPG, its not an RPG, its not an RPG" then tries to get away from the question by playing Modern Warfare 2.

...What?
So because someone says Zelda isn't an rpg (with ample proof provided above) they are somehow blasphemous nut jobs who obsess over the fact and they play Modern Warefare 2 like it is some kind of crime?
I'm sorry but grow up, people are entitled to their opinions and tastes.
If I walk up to someone and ask them a question and give them one choice or another and they actually give a reason as to why they picked one choice over the other, sure I might think they are wrong, but I'm not going to bash them for it.

I for one do not think Zelda is an rpg. And after posting this I will honestly put no more thought into Zelda because I could honestly care less.

 

[Abedeus]

Anyone who said "Its not an RPG" is curling themselves into a ball, rocking themselves slowly while constantly but quietly chanting "Its not an RPG, its not an RPG, its not an RPG" then tries to get away from the question by playing Modern Warfare 2.

So, I guess games like Beyond Good and Evil are roleplaying games, because you collect items and roleplay Jade, and Rayman games are roleplaying games too since you collect powers, shiny balls of light and you roleplay Rayman himself.

...Are you insane?

 

[pantallica95]

No because I like RPG's..and I don't like Zelda games.

Kidding. I like most RPG's, and haven't found a Zelda game I actually liked--besides the Wind Waker demo--but I don't think Zelda games are role-playing. There are no experience points or leveling up, and I always thought that was step one in any RPG.

 

[The Great JT]

I gotta go with Adventure as Zelda's genre. Action/Adventure, if pressed.

 

[HeartlessHero]

I've been wondering this for a long time and I think Zelda is not a RPG because it doesn't have the RPG formula. Stats, level ups, and no creator creation, it's more of a action game.

 

[ProtoChimp]

Holy shit that's a one sided vote.

 

[NeutralDrow]

Other than Zelda II, no. Other than some instances of upgrading equipment (which is the least unique aspect of the genre), there really are no RPG elements in the other games.

 

[Jared]

Adventure, they always have and always will be. Certainly not RPG, at all.

They dont have any halmarks of an RPG. Well, maybe not none, but very loose interpretations

 

[IckleMissMayhem]

No stats or leveling for the one RPG definition.

No choices and "role playing" for the other RPG definition.

Zelda = Not an RPG

I always think of them as Action/Adventure games, more than RPGs. Still think Link's Awakening and OoT were bloody ace though!