5punk

Roman Totale wrote:I have never, ever played a Zelda game. I live under a large gaming rock I think.

In fact the only Nintendo game I can remember playing after the SNES is Super Monkey Ball. Unless you count my Gameboy...

Woo Elephant Yeah wrote:Am I the only person that thinks every single Zelda game so far is boring run around pick up stuff, and talk to people drivel?

Am I the only one who just hasn't played a Zelda game?

deject wrote:Am I the only one who just hasn't played a Zelda game?

Umm.

Dog Pants wrote:

Roman Totale wrote:I have never, ever played a Zelda game. I live under a large gaming rock I think.

In fact the only Nintendo game I can remember playing after the SNES is Super Monkey Ball. Unless you count my Gameboy...

Woo Elephant Yeah wrote: The only game I have ever played in RPG and not turned off after 5 minutes has been Final Fantasy (don't know what number, but the big one that made the franchise huge) on the PlayStation.

This is kind of going off on a tangent, but RPG games are definitely a Marmite thing.

I am a major RPG fan, but I find both Final Fantasy and the Zelda games a fucking dull. Eastern MMO's are a decidedly different kettle of fish to western RPG's though.

[quote="Dr. kitteny berk"][/quote]

I refuse to read the whole thread, silly fucking brit.

Joose wrote:I am a major RPG fan, but I find both Final Fantasy and the Zelda games a fucking dull. Eastern MMO's are a decidedly different kettle of fish to western RPG's though.

I think we're mixing up genres a bit here, eastern and western definitions of "RPG" have never had much in common in my view, other than fantasy elements in the storyline.

As it goes, there are examples of action-type run-and-jump sword-swinging games as well as [psuedo]-turn-based RTS-like strategy games all being labelled as RPGs on both sides of the globe.

It seems "RPG" these days is more a label to indicate a fantasy-type setting than any actual description of the gameplay type, and if I was to narrow it down to the actual battles that take place in the games, I'd classify the games previously mentioned like this:

Zelda games - Action Game - all controls are real-time, having more in common with recent 3D incarnations of popular platform games than click-to-move dungeon crawls.
Final Fantasy games - Turn-based Strategy Game - until very recently every battle action was selected in turn from menu options, and not performed until a given character's slot came up.

Neither are particularly what people call an RPG, but the actions you take in-between battles - searching for stuff, talking to people, etc is what gives them the "RPG" title. I'm guessing what teh Joose is talking about is what are often called "western" or "traditional" RPGs, but defining those is even more of a minefield.

Final Fantasy - another game I have never played.

FatherJack wrote:action-type run-and-jump sword-swinging [psuedo]-turn-based RTS-like strategy

FatherJack wrote:Neither are particularly what people call an RPG, but the actions you take in-between battles - searching for stuff, talking to people, etc is what gives them the "RPG" title. I'm guessing what teh Joose is talking about is what are often called "western" or "traditional" RPGs, but defining those is even more of a minefield.

^this. Basically, what I really meant is that I like the games that are based around the d20 system or similar. To me, that is an RPG. I dont really know what I would catagorise the FF games as. I guess some kind of stratagy game is probably closest, but then it lumps it in with stuff like C&C and Total War, which it clearly is not.

Actually, no. I do know what I would catagorise the FF games as. But saying it will anger the FF fans.

The d20 thing is perhaps more licensing than anything else, I'm pretty sure the ideas and stats behind it are used in most every similar game, official or not - so it's a difficult distinction to stand behind.

First doesn't neccesarily mean "definitive", but for info:
First Zelda game: 1986
First Final Fantasy game: 1987
First official D&D computer game - Pool of Radiance (I actually have it): 1988

FatherJack wrote:The d20 thing is perhaps more licensing than anything else, I'm pretty sure the ideas and stats behind it are used in most every similar game, official or not - so it's a difficult distinction to stand behind.

First doesn't neccesarily mean "definitive", but for info:
First Zelda game: 1986
First Final Fantasy game: 1987
First official D&D computer game - Pool of Radiance (I actually have it): 1988

First D&D game (not on a computer): 1974

but really, I didnt mean the d20 system per-se, just the style of the d20 system games. Theres plenty of obviously similar games out there that *dont* use the d20 system, that I would still consider 'proper' RPG's. Arcanum is one, Oblivion is (despite the unusual interface and more actiony feel) another.

I was thinking about this when I walked into town earlier, and it struck me what the deciding factor is in what I think of as a RPG. Character creation. If you are playing a game where someone else has made the character for you (and there is no option to make your own), then its not, in my opinion, an RPG. If you do make your own character, then it probably is.

Joose wrote:
I was thinking about this when I walked into town earlier, and it struck me what the deciding factor is in what I think of as a RPG. Character creation. If you are playing a game where someone else has made the character for you (and there is no option to make your own), then its not, in my opinion, an RPG. If you do make your own character, then it probably is.

...Even the sims?

An RPG game to me suggests something where you pretend to be another person, and live out their life (actually i guess this does make the sims an RPG). Kind of like cops n robbers. This may be taking the meaning of RPG too literally though i dunno.

But personally for ease of use i will refer to them all under one category: GAMES

cashy wrote:
...Even the sims?

An RPG game to me suggests something where you pretend to be another person, and live out their life (actually i guess this does make the sims an RPG). Kind of like cops n robbers. This may be taking the meaning of RPG too literally though i dunno.

But personally for ease of use i will refer to them all under one category: GAMES

If every game where you played as something else then every game bar 'Bad RAF IT Techie' (Gremlin, 1989) would be an RPG by definition. Who needs pidgeonholes anyway, most games have elements of other genres in them nowdays so can't really be accurately categorised.

cashy wrote: ...Even the sims?

*points at the word 'probably'*

I meant more that if it doesnt have it, its not an rpg. If it does have it, that doesnt make it an rpg.

To use (vaguely) correct logical notation:

(A=>B)!=(B=>A)

Who needs pidgeonholes anyway, most games have elements of other genres in them nowdays so can't really be accurately categorised.

We need genres because they make describing things easier. I did a whole essay thing on it when I was doing my a levels, but to summarise:

Genres mean you can describe things to people quickly. This makes them usefull. You just have to accept that they are almost never 100% accurate.

This thread needs some thing ...



that's better

spoodie wrote:This thread needs some thing ...



that's better

thank god for faaabulous ninja's

Stoat wrote: This would be Zelda, currently placed at numbers one and five in the list of the best review scores ever?
That Zelda?
Is that the Zelda I should pity?

there doing something right, 5 of the 10 best games on that site are Nintendo

http://www.5punk.co.uk/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=2334 anyone?