OMG! so when I play worms and R-type, I'm actually playing an RPG? don't think so.. Anyways, any screens yet? really really intrigued bout this game!
My guess is something like Diablo...but in 3D! At least I hope that . I'm not sure a Zelda type game could be done well on the iphone, at least a 3d one, could be wrong though. And a turn based Final Fantasy game...I dunno, it doesn't seem like Gameloft's style.
See that part in bold? You've just defeated your own argument. I mean...honestly now..."genres aren't defined by specific criteria"? That's what genres are: categories built around specific criteria.
There are no statistical based upgrades in LoZ. At all. RPGs are based, as that poster clearly stated, on statistical based upgrades. Item upgrades in LoZ games are not based on stats. That's the key issue as to why LoZ isn't an RPG. Going on quests and collecting items is a hallmark of adventure games primarily, no RPGs specifically. Quests and item collection (items that are not stat based, btw) are a primary focus of adventure games, not RPGs. RPGs do have those things, but the primary focus remains character customization. The key method used is statistical based upgrades, whether user assigned, randomly assigned, or tied to item usage in which the differing statistical properties are clearly shown to the player. None of that occurs in LoZ. What is the primary focus in LoZ? Exploration, logic and/or environmental puzzle solving, etc. Those are tropes of the adventure game genre. Games like Myst, Snatcher, Zork, etc. all have those elements. What sets LoZ apart from those pure adventure games is the mixture of action gaming alongside the adventure component. Hence, action/adventure.
okay i guess spiff is a little slow today so ill explain it to him. my argument is that you shouldnt tell someone they are wrong just becuase their idea of what qualifies as an rpg does not agree with what you think is an rpg. so how did i contradict myself?
You stated that genres aren't defined by specific criteria when that's exactly what defines genres. A specific set of criteria that establishes similarities among a group of things and that set them apart from others. From dictionary.com: Saying that no one can say what does or does not fall into a specific genre because genres are not defined by certain criteria is just wrong at best. And simply because their idea of what qualifies as an RPG differs from mine isn't my point, but rather that their idea as to what is an RPG in the video game medium differs from the actual defining criteria of what makes up an RPG. I didn't make up the genres, they've been there for decades now. I didn't make up the criteria of the genres, as they've been established for some time now. Some people pay more attention to them than others is all.
no genres are not so rigidly defined by specific criteria but instead they are established by common conventions that are not formally defined.
And I have apparently derailed another topic. I assure you this wasn't my intent. Let's all get back to the topic at hand. Dungeon Hunter looks pretty damned cool. Any chance of a video showing the game in action?
How are genres categorized? By grouping together similar works and establishing the common conventions of those works and therefore a specific criteria of works that will fall within said genre. What are the specific criteria? The very common conventions existing between works that establish their place within a genre. What establishes a game as an RPG? A primary focus on character creation or customization through the use of accumulation and assignment of stats/lvls/etc. usually enveloped within the tropes of a quest. Zelda may have the latter, but it does not have the former, and the latter still also takes place in other genres such as action games as well as adventure games. Your Tony Hawk example falls on its face because the THPS series is established as a game within the sports game genre, albeit one that in single player mode has elements of RPG gameplay. This does not make it an RPG, as the primary focus of gameplay is not truly on character creation/customization through the use of stats but rather presenting a virtual experience of a sport (in this case, pro skateboarding).
i think its an rpg and there is no established authority that tells me other wise unless you are that authority then i would like to see your credentials. many people might disagree with me but until they form sort of governing body to that states what exactly an rpg is then i im just as right as you in what i think an rpg is
Back on topic guys pls. Let's talk about this game. I reckon, if this is going to be like diablo and they do it right, it'll definitely kick @$$!
Fanboy denial? imo (and more than likely the entire gaming world's), his description of Zelda is exactly spot on.
I'm hardly a fanboy. Just stating the obvious. For example, Zelda 2 on the NES is clearly an Action/RPG. It was based on statistical upgrades, you did level up. Yes, in recent years they have started to move away from the RPG elements, but the series as a whole is still as much as an RPG as it is an Action game.
kinda funny, i started a debate about this (what defines an "RPG") a few days ago on a different site, the escapist my buddy ThePizzaGuy556 summed it up best...
I have alluded to this in other topics where I've ranted about this. Zelda II is recognized as the "black sheep" of the series. The first game did not have stat based gameplay. The games after Zelda II did not have it either. Only Zelda II, which you are correct, is the game in the series that can be rightly called an action/RPG. The rest, however, are action/adventure, and the series is an action/adventure series excepting II. BTW, that difference in gameplay is what caused EAD to return the series back to an action/adventure with Link to the Past and the subsequent sequels. LoZ fans at the time did not dig II that much. Again, Zelda II was the only one that could be called an action/RPG. The original game cannot be, however, and the marked difference between the two games on NES, the original and the sequel, and the uproar it caused at the time, is what caused Nintendo to bring it back to the original action/adventure roots with LttP and every game onwards (OoT right through TP). Miyamoto strayed from the formula with II. The problem with your bud's statement is that it actually fits the adventure game genre moreso than the RPG genre. Also, game genres are pretty much defined by their primary focus of gameplay, not story, characters, etc. Gameplay is the key component of the medium, after all.
