So for anyone that has played Soul Blazer, Illusion of Gaia, etc. ... are there any titles comparable to those on the Genesis? And really I'll take any RPG recommendations [I already know about Phantasy Star, kthnx].
Thank you
Thank you
Looking for suggestions ...
- Thread starter for your lungs only
- Start date
MasterAkumaMatata
Established Member
Yo, Crusader of Centy/Soleil are the same game. But for action RPGs Beyond Oasis and Landstalker are definitely the top two. Light Cruasader is pretty good, but gets tedious quickly. I happen to like a little game called Arcus Odyssey myself (Wolf Team w00t!), but it's not much of an RPG.
Shining Force 2 is the best game ever, but I also want to recommend some 'lesser-appreciated' Genesis RPGs.. namely, Might & Magic 2 (HUGE dungeon hack type game), D&D Warriors of the Eternal Sun, and Shadowrun.
Shining Force 2 is the best game ever, but I also want to recommend some 'lesser-appreciated' Genesis RPGs.. namely, Might & Magic 2 (HUGE dungeon hack type game), D&D Warriors of the Eternal Sun, and Shadowrun.
Gah, No one dares say Wonder Boy in Monster Land is an RPG! How on bloody earth does someone calculate this? The only thing that is remotely similar to RPG's is the fact that you can buy stuff. Christ! you can buy stuff in Zelda games but they are not RPG's. No.. they are not.
Golden Rules for deciding genre:
RPG's must have turn-based fighting!. There is no such RPG which doesn't have turn-based fighting. Examples: Lunar, Final Fantasy, Pokemon.
Strategy (non-real-time) games must have limited unit movement. (Yes, they end up having turnbased fighting because it's non-real-time, but that doesn't mean they are RPG's) Examples: Advance Wars, Shining Force, Dark Wizard
Golden Rules for deciding genre:
RPG's must have turn-based fighting!. There is no such RPG which doesn't have turn-based fighting. Examples: Lunar, Final Fantasy, Pokemon.
Strategy (non-real-time) games must have limited unit movement. (Yes, they end up having turnbased fighting because it's non-real-time, but that doesn't mean they are RPG's) Examples: Advance Wars, Shining Force, Dark Wizard
Yeah, I've played Terranigma Good stuff.
Good stuff.I haven't played them, but I'll promise you that I'll have a look at them in the next 24 hours and get back to you.
First I've ever heard of a non-turn based RPG... oh, and while I think of what you might be meaning - If it's like FFX (I choose this one cause it's the only one which I can remember clearly) and it goes into a battle screen where you take turns in fighting/ using spell or items, the enemy can still jump in an do another attack if you are too slow. Also big bosses, I recall do about 4 or 5 attacks in a row before you get to attack. Nevertheless, it's still turned-based, only unfairly Originally posted by CrazyGoon@Nov 27, 2003 @ 09:54 AM
oh, and while I think of what you might be meaning - If it's like FFX (I choose this one cause it's the only one which I can remember clearly) and it goes into a battle screen where you take turns in fighting/ using spell or items, the enemy can still jump in an do another attack if you are too slow. Also big bosses, I recall do about 4 or 5 attacks in a row before you get to attack. Nevertheless, it's still turned-based, only unfairly
I haven't played the games mentioned, but Neverwinter Nights is not turn based, and it is not like FFX like you described. It is fully real-time and there is no concept of turns whatsoever. Granted there is a limit to your attack speed, but that doesn't make it turn based. You can freely walk around and shoot arrows at your enemy if you want and try to stay out of his range. You'd have a hard time saying that isn't an RPG since it's so closely tied to the Dungeons and Dragons rules.
I have played both Baldur's Gate and Morrowind and they totally are RPGs. There is no way around it. Especially Morrowind. It's so much RPG that I don't have the patience to sit and play it. d'oh
Reaction to Crazygoon:
I definately think you define RPG's too tightly. For example, the older M&M series are definately RPG according to you, but how about the newer ones (part 6 and up)? They're both turnbased and realtime. And how about Sword of Vermillion? I'd definately define that as an RPG (although not a good one). And btw, who defines what an RPG is? I don't think you are the one to decide that, at least not for others. Personally, I define RPG's by their storyline (for me that is). For example, I do think of Snather (both MSX and Sega CD version) as RPG's, but according yo your definition, they don't even come near qualifying for RPG's.
I definately think you define RPG's too tightly. For example, the older M&M series are definately RPG according to you, but how about the newer ones (part 6 and up)? They're both turnbased and realtime. And how about Sword of Vermillion? I'd definately define that as an RPG (although not a good one). And btw, who defines what an RPG is? I don't think you are the one to decide that, at least not for others. Personally, I define RPG's by their storyline (for me that is). For example, I do think of Snather (both MSX and Sega CD version) as RPG's, but according yo your definition, they don't even come near qualifying for RPG's.
Pearl Jammzz
Established Member
wonderboy in moster world is an rpg of sorts. It's a side-scrolling action-adventure-rpg. That's how I see it atleast. nun the less....EXCELLENT game
BTW, Shining in the darkness was the first rpg I ever played (was like 6 at the time, so right when it came out) and I have beaten it a good 5-6 times. It's like an old dungeon crawling game w/ a predictable story line (somewhat, a few twists....you'll understand if/when u play it). It is a good game and also the first in the shining series, the best rpg series ever? eh?
BTW, Shining in the darkness was the first rpg I ever played (was like 6 at the time, so right when it came out) and I have beaten it a good 5-6 times. It's like an old dungeon crawling game w/ a predictable story line (somewhat, a few twists....you'll understand if/when u play it). It is a good game and also the first in the shining series
, the best rpg series ever? eh?Baldur's Gate and Morrowind are on PC, or the consoles on the market atm, so I didn't get a chance to have a look at them
Snatcher = Digital Comic. Fighting is hardly nessessary in Digital Comics except Snatcher thought it would be different .
Sword of Vermillion = Yep, just played the game and have determined it's an RPG! and yes, it has no turn-based fighting. I guess I'll be making that rule more acurate then.
What I was really getting at with that "RPG's must have turn-based fighting" rule, is trying to limit the amount of games that get catergorised at RPG when they certainly are not. Prime example is Legend of Zelda: Link to the Past. When I say non-turn based fighting, I was kinda meaning non-turn based and no battle mode/screen aswell.
Battle modes only allow you to fight/run and use magic/ items. Meaning you can't just walk around the enemy and continue walking.
Sword of Vermillion has a battle mode, and battle modes are a standard in RPG's. So, new rule will end up being something like, "RPG's must have a battle mode/screen".
Might & Magic = If it's of the same style as M&M 2 then it's an RPG, just D&D style.
As for Neverwinter Nights, I haven't played it, but *tried* to watch a screaming clip of the gameplay, but streaming always lags on my computer. So I didn't get to see the gameplay. If it's like you say Mask of Destiny, then It doesn't sound much of an RPG.
Bah, RPG's should just stick to turn-based fighting and battle screens. Without turn-based fighting, it becomes less of an RPG and more of a crappy action adventure.
And yes, I know I'm just crapping on about rules and crap. Though in this day and age, more and more hybrids of genres are emerging and old genres are becoming lost amongst them. I think it's already gotton to a stage where it's pretty bad. You have two games - one is an action adventure, where you run around tomb raider style. The other is an action adventure rpg, which is exactly the same as the first, except you can level up, or buy stuff. This is why I got annoyed with the Wonder Boy in Monster Land classification, and jumped in with my bulldust. The game is exactly the same as Alex Kidd - you can buy stuff in both games. Except all because you can buy different swords, armor and shields, Wonder Boy is suddenly called rpg.
Snatcher = Digital Comic. Fighting is hardly nessessary in Digital Comics except Snatcher thought it would be different
.Sword of Vermillion = Yep, just played the game and have determined it's an RPG! and yes, it has no turn-based fighting. I guess I'll be making that rule more acurate then.
What I was really getting at with that "RPG's must have turn-based fighting" rule, is trying to limit the amount of games that get catergorised at RPG when they certainly are not. Prime example is Legend of Zelda: Link to the Past. When I say non-turn based fighting, I was kinda meaning non-turn based and no battle mode/screen aswell.
Battle modes only allow you to fight/run and use magic/ items. Meaning you can't just walk around the enemy and continue walking.
Sword of Vermillion has a battle mode, and battle modes are a standard in RPG's. So, new rule will end up being something like, "RPG's must have a battle mode/screen".
Might & Magic = If it's of the same style as M&M 2 then it's an RPG, just D&D style.
As for Neverwinter Nights, I haven't played it, but *tried* to watch a screaming clip of the gameplay, but streaming always lags on my computer. So I didn't get to see the gameplay. If it's like you say Mask of Destiny, then It doesn't sound much of an RPG.
Bah, RPG's should just stick to turn-based fighting and battle screens. Without turn-based fighting, it becomes less of an RPG and more of a crappy action adventure.
And yes, I know I'm just crapping on about rules and crap. Though in this day and age, more and more hybrids of genres are emerging and old genres are becoming lost amongst them. I think it's already gotton to a stage where it's pretty bad. You have two games - one is an action adventure, where you run around tomb raider style. The other is an action adventure rpg, which is exactly the same as the first, except you can level up, or buy stuff. This is why I got annoyed with the Wonder Boy in Monster Land classification, and jumped in with my bulldust. The game is exactly the same as Alex Kidd - you can buy stuff in both games. Except all because you can buy different swords, armor and shields, Wonder Boy is suddenly called rpg.
Well CrazyGoon, I must say I agree on that cross-genre games haven't done too much good to gaming in general (although one could also say that it's not cross-genre, it's just a new genre). But that's just the reason why I define RPG's based on their storyline. And yes, Wonder Boy in Monster World is on the edge of what I'd call RPG, because the story is so linear.
But then again, I define Snatcher as RPG, but that's a very very linear story as well (although you have the freedom to go anywhere on your quest to solve it - you just have to do a certain thing to 'trigger' the next curve in the storyline). I just recently got to play the Sega CD version of Snatcher (yes I know, I'm 10 years late), and I thought less of it as an RPG as the old MSX version, where you had more frequent and intense battles, and also a sort of leveling system (money to buy upgrades).
I just think I can't define straight rules for what an RPG is. I'd say Zelda games are RPG's as well, although the leveling it completely linear (you can't level up without going through the story), as well as the stoyline. Your freedom to go anywhere is hugely limited as well since you don't have certain objects (like the hammer to pound those stakes or the glove to lift those rocks). The only thing that makes me think of Zelda as RPG's is the storyline....which isn't even that special
But then again, I define Snatcher as RPG, but that's a very very linear story as well (although you have the freedom to go anywhere on your quest to solve it - you just have to do a certain thing to 'trigger' the next curve in the storyline). I just recently got to play the Sega CD version of Snatcher (yes I know, I'm 10 years late), and I thought less of it as an RPG as the old MSX version, where you had more frequent and intense battles, and also a sort of leveling system (money to buy upgrades).
I just think I can't define straight rules for what an RPG is. I'd say Zelda games are RPG's as well, although the leveling it completely linear (you can't level up without going through the story), as well as the stoyline. Your freedom to go anywhere is hugely limited as well since you don't have certain objects (like the hammer to pound those stakes or the glove to lift those rocks). The only thing that makes me think of Zelda as RPG's is the storyline....which isn't even that special
Nearly every game has a storyline... not so much racing/ flight sims, puzzles and shmups (ok, that's actually quite a few ) but platformers, action games, adventure games, RPGs, strategies have stories. RPG shouldn't be classified so broadly - it needs to be specific. It's probably the name which confused everyone into thinking you can just use it everywhere. Role-playing. Hey, so I play a role of a character or a band of characters, therefore it's a Role-playing game? No, you take the role of being mario and saving the princess in Super Mario Bros., but it's no RPG. It's easy to classify platformers and shmups, because platformers you look to see if the game revolves around you jumping over pits and stuff, and shumps, well, no one ever classify's a shmup incorrectly.
) but platformers, action games, adventure games, RPGs, strategies have stories. RPG shouldn't be classified so broadly - it needs to be specific. It's probably the name which confused everyone into thinking you can just use it everywhere. Role-playing. Hey, so I play a role of a character or a band of characters, therefore it's a Role-playing game? No, you take the role of being mario and saving the princess in Super Mario Bros., but it's no RPG. It's easy to classify platformers and shmups, because platformers you look to see if the game revolves around you jumping over pits and stuff, and shumps, well, no one ever classify's a shmup incorrectly.Have we forgot what RPG means?
Role Playing Game.
e.g. A game where you take on the role of something esp. a person or hero.
But RPGs have become defined more concisely as time has gone on.
To Crazygoon: You answered your own question. If you're going to classify games, you're going to have to classify some of them as two or more genres because if just one genre was used, it would leave out a big aspect of said game. Action/Adventure, Strategy/RPG, Puzzle/Fighter, etc.
I for one, find this argument pointless.
And to Eticam: rethink your idea about cross-genre games. If you think they "haven't done too much good to gaming", then what would happen if these cross-genre games were just left out? Strict single-genre games would not be as good as they are today. Cross-genre games help single genre games define who they are better than they can do by themselves. If there were no cross-genre games, single genre games wouldn't be as defined and as they are. So if there were not predominant cross-genre games, there would be no sense of refined single-genre games (wherever there is light, there will always be darkness).
On that note, Shining Force and Warsong are two of the best strategy/rpgs I've come across.
Role Playing Game.
e.g. A game where you take on the role of something esp. a person or hero.
But RPGs have become defined more concisely as time has gone on.
To Crazygoon: You answered your own question. If you're going to classify games, you're going to have to classify some of them as two or more genres because if just one genre was used, it would leave out a big aspect of said game. Action/Adventure, Strategy/RPG, Puzzle/Fighter, etc.
I for one, find this argument pointless.
And to Eticam: rethink your idea about cross-genre games. If you think they "haven't done too much good to gaming", then what would happen if these cross-genre games were just left out? Strict single-genre games would not be as good as they are today. Cross-genre games help single genre games define who they are better than they can do by themselves. If there were no cross-genre games, single genre games wouldn't be as defined and as they are. So if there were not predominant cross-genre games, there would be no sense of refined single-genre games (wherever there is light, there will always be darkness).
On that note, Shining Force and Warsong are two of the best strategy/rpgs I've come across.
Similar threads
