Zelda Categorization Issues

[metal_gameboy]

Some websites and people say most (if not all) Zelda games are RPGs, but others say the games are Action/Adventure. To me, they look and play like Action/Adventure games; they do have light RPG elements (say item collecting and magic), but I wouldn't consider calling them full-blown RPGs. Only Zelda II: the Adventure of Link would be considered an RPG to me.

Along with my views, Nintendo.com also lists many of the Zelda titles as Action/ Adventure.

On the other hand, EBGames.com lists them as RPGs.

What do you think? RPG or Action/ Adventure?

 

[Dark Samurai]

I'd go with Nintendo on this one... I mean, c'mon... Nintendo made the game, not EB.

 

[metal_gameboy]

See, that was my exact thought too, with the additional thought that they don't play much like RPGs. Maybe the gaming industry should make a huge database that tells everything about any video game so everyone will get their facts straight, something similar to the iMDB, but until then EB can look around.

 

[VertigoXX]

ARPG

 

[CrazyGoon]

If you don't know what genre a game is, try comparing it to other games. For example, Metroid is the same genre as The Legend of Zelda. I could give you a proper explanation of the genre, but I think it's a bit too advanced for critical debate, and besides, genres are a touchy subject - I wouldn't want to upset people who are already accustomed to referring to games as RPG's whenever they see stuff like:
detailed storylines,
ability to find(or upgrade) items, weapons, & armour,
presence of money, which enables the purchasing of items, weapons, & armour,
presence of 'experience points', which enables the increasing of 'attributes' of a character,
non-linearity,
being able to have control over more than one character,
and god knows what else you may like to throw into the mix.

And don't trust the genres that developers/publishers may like to brand games with. For example, The Legend of Zelda may be listed as an Action/ RPG, and Metroid as an Action game, with the former being hybrided with RPG all because of something stupid - such as being able to interact with other characters - of which was non-existant in Metroid.

 

[metal_gameboy]

I know already it's a Action/Adventure title with slight RPG elements, but others such as EBGames call it a full-blown RPG with no subcategorization or mixed categorization. You'd think as big as the Video Game industry is that they would have a huge official database that states what type of game it is, and any other information that would be deemed important such as average length, staff credits, console it plays on, and so on. Along with that, they can list the basic elements of a specific genre. I would be suprised if I'm the first one to put this idea forth because of how old the industry is; better late than never, I guess.

presence of money, which enables the purchasing of items, weapons, & armour

Don't know about that one. A lot of games use currency to buy items, which vary from RPGs, Fighting games, Party Games, Etc.

And did it really start with RPGs, because it seems that older games such as Pac-Man and Donkey Kong (or older) started it. Earning enough points (the currency) and you can get (purchase) an extra life (upgrade). That sounds right, doesn't it?

being able to have control over more than one character

Doesn't include Mario Kart: DD, I suppose :lol:

 

[CrazyGoon]

Don't know about that one. A lot of games use currency to buy items, which vary from RPGs, Fighting games, Party Games, Etc.

That's the whole point! 😛 No, it appears your thinking that I endorse categorizing a game a "RPG" when it exhibits such things - it's quite the opposite, really! All those things I listed are what many misguided people refer to as "RPG elements", in which when they encounter them in games, they immediately consider the game to be some sort of an RPG.

If you understand why the currency example is flawed, you should be able to realise the flaws in the others.

 

[metal_gameboy]

I do understand the others, even joked about one of them.

 

[CrazyGoon]

I know already it's a Action/Adventure title with slight RPG elements, but others such as EBGames call it a full-blown RPG with no subcategorization or mixed categorization.

Just out of curiosity: which of the "RPG elements" examples that I listed above did you encounter in most of the 'Legend of Zelda' games?

 

[metal_gameboy]

I'd say ability to find and upgrade items, weapons, and armour. Thinking with that whole RPG thing again, that's another element that's not really clustered in with RPGs; lots of games have item collecting.

Yep, that's the most prominent element in all Zelda titles. All of those elements have appeared in at least 1 Zelda title:

detailed storylines -- All of them

ability to find(or upgrade) items, weapons, & armour -- All

presence of money, which enables the purchasing of items, weapons, & armour -- All

presence of 'experience points', which enables the increasing of 'attributes' of a character -- Zelda II

non-linearity -- Oracle of Seasons/ Ages

Any other RPG stereotypes -- Name 1 and you're bound to think of a matching Zelda title

(Thought HTML tables worked for a second...)

Non-linearity is more of a Metroid element though.

 

[metal_gameboy]

In fact, I think the only RPG specific element not in a Zelda title is the Anime cutscenes...

 

[CrazyGoon]

In fact, I think the only RPG specific element not in a Zelda title is the Anime cutscenes...

Lol. Never heard of that one 😀

So, what genre would you classify, for example, "Legend of Zelda: Link to the Past"? And why?

 

[metal_gameboy]

In fact, I think the only RPG specific element not in a Zelda title is the Anime cutscenes...

Lol. Never heard of that one 😀

Some PS2 RPGs have them. Can't recall which ones, but I'm sure a good number of the 1,000+ RPGs on the system have them.

I'd still consider it an Action/ Adventure, only because it boasts more A/ A elements like all-terrain fighting (360 degree live, not turn-based), no leveling up, massive dungeons to explore; some others, but not going into great detail.

Never defined the A/ A type elements. Talking all this time about RPGs.

Speaking of, I just thought of this: turn-based has to be the one element specific to RPGs.

 

[CrazyGoon]

I'd still consider it an Action/ Adventure, only because it boasts more A/ A elements like all-terrain fighting (360 degree live, not turn-based), no leveling up, massive dungeons to explore; some others, but not going into great detail.

Speaking of, I just thought of this: turn-based has to be the one element specific to RPGs.

Good thinking. Your on the right track with trying to find things that are unique only to RPGs. But if you think that the "presence of 'experience points', which enables the increasing of 'attributes' of a character" is unique only to RPG's, then you need to play more games 😉.

Like-wise, turn-based gameplay isn't unique to a single genre.

Shining Force contains both examples (plus a few more from my list), and believe me - it aint no RPG 🙂

I believe I should mention at this point in time, that "elements" of a game is a red herring in game categorization. "Elements" are another way of saying "aspects". A game can contain as many (or as little) aspects as the developer wishes. They are usually additions that are included for the purpose of making a game more unique or exciting.

If you were to take your favourite RPG, then imagine what it would be like if you removed one of the 'aspects/elements', chances are, you'd still believe it's the same game as it was before - only less exciting/ unique.

These "elements" are in ways 'icing on the cake' - without them, there would still be the same cake, only it's less exciting (and perhaps less tasty 😛). If you were to take the 'cake' away, however, it would cease to be a cake. As would a game cease to be of a specific genre, if you were to take away the key fundamentals that the game revolves around.

Anyway, that's enough of my "gold". I let you take it or leave it at this point. If all of this went over your head, then I suggest what I recommended to start with: If you don't know what genre a game is, try comparing it to other games. Just don't let "elements" and perspectives deceive you.

 

[metal_gameboy]

Good thinking. Your on the right track with trying to find things that are unique only to RPGs. But if you think that the "presence of 'experience points', which enables the increasing of 'attributes' of a character" is unique only to RPG's, then you need to play more games .

Never said Experience Points are unique to RPGs. At one point, I loosely called it an RPG stereotype, but never unique to RPGs. Lots of game have Experience points; one of which is Zelda II, an Action/ Adventure title.

Like-wise, turn-based gameplay isn't unique to a single genre.

It isn't? Well, it sure as hell appears in a lot of them, so I had the impression it was. Doesn't work that well in other genres I would suppose

Shining Force contains both examples (plus a few more from my list), and believe me - it aint no RPG 🙂

Oh, it isn't? My sources say otherwise. I hear it's a strategy role playing video game.

I believe I should mention at this point in time, that "elements" of a game is a red herring in game categorization. "Elements" are another way of saying "aspects". A game can contain as many (or as little) aspects as the developer wishes. They are usually additions that are included for the purpose of making a game more unique or exciting.

Elements and Aspects are Red Herrings to Traits, why we didn't use that before I don't know. All 3 are basically the same meaning to an extent.

If you were to take your favourite RPG, then imagine what it would be like if you removed one of the 'aspects/elements', chances are, you'd still believe it's the same game as it was before - only less exciting/ unique.

These "elements" are in ways 'icing on the cake' - without them, there would still be the same cake, only it's less exciting (and perhaps less tasty ). If you were to take the 'cake' away, however, it would cease to be a cake. As would a game cease to be of a specific genre, if you were to take away the key fundamentals that the game revolves around.

Going back to that whole specific thing again, huh?

Nice "Gold", but I never asked for any "Gold". I mean, great opinion and all, but I was never asking for advice on how to pick out genres, but merely questioning why can't all the websites get a correct and agreed-upon genre classification. I can tell the difference from seperate things, anyone can, it's not hard 😛 .

 

[Pyrite]

I always tought Zelda as a Action RPG. If Zelda is not a RPG game at all that explains why Zelda is the only RPG game I like (and Mario RPG). I think the only argument to Zelda not being an role playing game is that you only play one character and that is Link.

 

[metal_gameboy]

Speaking of RPGs, I wonder how that new Tingle RPG is going to be like. Are they still thinking about it? Never hear that much about it. That could also be because Twilight Princess is overshadowing it.

 

[CrazyGoon]

I won't bother with the nit-picks so I'll just jump to the conclusion:

I can tell the difference from seperate things, anyone can, it's not hard 😛 .

Defining genres is more than just "spotting the differences". The most important thing, is what you choose as the basis of your comparison. If you use the icing, your not comparing genres, but instead, comparing aspects.

I mean, great opinion and all, but I was never asking for advice on how to pick out genres..

Sorry if I bored you, but I thought that you'd be interested to learn how to define genres, so that you could answer the question of your thread yourself. In which, I may aswell answer now:

why can't all the websites get a correct and agreed-upon genre classification.

That's simple - people keep on defining genres using the "icing" - the irrelevant stuff. Ranging from perspectives, to themes, and, of course, "elements", people keep insisting on using these things as the basis of their comparisons, and as a result, end up with a differing analysis.

If Zelda is not a RPG game at all that explains why Zelda is the only RPG game I like (and Mario RPG).

Do you like Metroid?

 

[Pyrite]

The SNES metroid? Yeah but what does it have to do with Zelda?

BTW Nintendo says that Zelda is an Adventure game so that puts a end to the debate, RPG's are really not my choice of games.

 

[metal_gameboy]

I mean, great opinion and all, but I was never asking for advice on how to pick out genres..

Sorry if I bored you, but I thought that you'd be interested to learn how to define genres, so that you could answer the question of your thread yourself. In which, I may aswell answer now:

Once again, I knew how to define genres before, I was just wondering why every website on the internet doesn't have the same classification for each individual game.

I can tell the difference from seperate things, anyone can, it's not hard 😛 .

Defining genres is more than just "spotting the differences". The most important thing, is what you choose as the basis of your comparison. If you use the icing, your not comparing genres, but instead, comparing aspects.

why can't all the websites get a correct and agreed-upon genre classification.

That's simple - people keep on defining genres using the "icing" - the irrelevant stuff. Ranging from perspectives, to themes, and, of course, "elements", people keep insisting on using these things as the basis of their comparisons, and as a result, end up with a differing analysis.

:roll: I believe I said something like this before: maybe the Entertainment Software Association should create a website or database that correctly establishes what type of genre a video game is. Along with the games, they should define the genres themselves. They can also put any technical information the game has, say like staff credits, platforms, how many players, release dates, Etc.

It would be a good idea because, website or internet user, we are totally mixed on what what we think a game is. A legitimate source for game information would be a great resource for gamers and developers.