racketboy.com

Jmustang1968 wrote:

o.pwuaioc wrote:

CFFJR wrote:
I can't get over how many people are still arguing about the issue one way or the other.

I know, right? Those others should just accept it's not an RPG and move on with their lives, so no one has to argue anymore.

It makes me wonder if the fantasy setting is a big factor in people wanting to consider it an rpg.

Back in the days of 2D gaming I recall many people using the term "RPG" to refer to anything with a top-down view and and expansive world (as opposed to levels). It didn't matter whether it was Final Fantasy, Zelda, StarTropics, whatever. Seems like most everything else was called an "action game".

Could be regional differences too. Do the Japanese consider Zelda games RPGs? I think I recall the Japanese Ocarina of Time box having an RPG label on it...

How many "RPG-elements" must a game have before it is classified as "part-RPG?"

pakopako wrote:How many "RPG-elements" must a game have before it is classified as "part-RPG?"

Just one particular one: a statistical leveling system. If you can level up from the accumulation of points (as opposed to items, like in Zelda), then it's an RPG.

I know I'm an *extreme* minority in this, but I feel that the defining aspect of an RPG is a game where combat and wandering are distinctly separated. This means that Zelda and Mass Effect are not RPGs, but Mega Man Battle Network is. Hate me.

GameMasterGuy wrote:I know I'm an *extreme* minority in this, but I feel that the defining aspect of an RPG is a game where combat and wandering are distinctly separated. This means that Zelda and Mass Effect are not RPGs, but Mega Man Battle Network is. Hate me.

Doesn't that basically imply that Action RPG's don't exist? Or rather, that they're not RPG's?

Yes, by those terms, games like Soul Blazer and Secret of Mana are not RPGs.

Or in non-video game terms, he's the one that said pen and paper D&D is an RPG, but LARPing isn't.

Yes to all above posts between my previous one and this one. Once again, extreme minority here, so don't go taking my definition as the word of God.

o.pwuaioc wrote:

pakopako wrote:How many "RPG-elements" must a game have before it is classified as "part-RPG?"

Just one particular one: a statistical leveling system. If you can level up from the accumulation of points (as opposed to items, like in Zelda), then it's an RPG.

So a lot of sports games are rpgs. Great, glad you cleared that up. I was even playing a shmup the other day that you leveled up from the accumulation of points so I guess I need to put it with my rpgs now. Same for some of the beat-em-ups I own.

So my recommendation for a first rpg would be Knights of the Round.

pepharytheworm wrote:

o.pwuaioc wrote:

pakopako wrote:How many "RPG-elements" must a game have before it is classified as "part-RPG?"

Just one particular one: a statistical leveling system. If you can level up from the accumulation of points (as opposed to items, like in Zelda), then it's an RPG.

So a lot of sports games are rpgs. Great, glad you cleared that up. I was even playing a shmup the other day that you leveled up from the accumulation of points so I guess I need to put it with my rpgs now. Same for some of the beat-em-ups I own.

So my recommendation for a first rpg would be Knights of the Round.

I think it needs to be a story driven game that has an experience and/or leveling system. The leveling system also intricately ties into the progression and game difficulty.