Pikajew (User)

  • Contributor
  • 5 bubbles
  • 8 in CRank
  • Score: 47650
"I like all the consoles and PC"

Zelda games are not RPG games

Pikajew | 1037d ago
User blog

A lot of people think Zelda is an RPG when its an action adventure game. The only Zelda game that was an RPG was Zelda 2: The adventure of Link. Just because its a fantasy game and you go on a quest doesn't make it an RPG. After all missions are the same as quest, we use the word mission instead of quests in games that take place in the modern age.

Mission-a group or committee of persons sent to a foreign country to conduct negotiations, establish relations, provide scientific and technical assistance, or the like.(Modern day quest)

Quest-a search or pursuit made in order to find or obtain something: a quest for uranium mines; a quest for knowledge.(olden time mission)

MW1 can be an RPG because you go on missions to stop people from starting a war. While in Zelda you go on a quest to stop Ganondorf from destroying Hyrule. Both are action games but Zelda is an Action adventure and MW1 is an Action FPS. If you call all adventure game RPGs than Uncharated is an RPG.

In order for a game to be an RPG it need a levels system and you create a team or character to use any way you want to, to use in the game,=(Pokemon is the prime example what makes an RPG). If Zelda was an RPG you would be able to level up and get skill points to make your self stronger. But you only get new weapons to use.

Led-Zeppelin  +   1037d ago
Actually COD online is an RPG. Level up character, guns, get new guns, perks, kill streaks. Wish they would make a RPG Zelda game though, one that still has a big focus on story. Not grinding around for the sake of leveling up.
mynameisEvil  +   1034d ago
You... you don't know what an RPG is, do you?

Example of an RPG: Fallout New Vegas.
Example of an FPS with some RPG elements: Call of Duty Multiplayer.

There's a difference.
cgoodno  +   1034d ago
There are a few things that typically dictate whether a game is an RPG or not, though some debate them.

1. Leveling, meaning gaining experience or a similar component that leads to increasing one's notable rank.

2. The ability to learn new skills/abilities. This does not have to happen by leveling but can be gained solely by accomplishing certain tasks or reaching specified goals in the game.

3. Items and the customization of your character's ability and/or appearance through them.

4. Attributes or similar stats that designate one's strengths and weaknesses within the game. These may or may not influence one's level of proficiency with items, skills, or abilities, though they must affect at least one of them.

5. A focus on narrative from the perspective of a character of which the player has control.

CoD is not an RPG, though it may utilize a few of the elements. Zelda is not an RPG, though it may utilize a few of the elements. Rage is not an RPG, though it may utilize a few of the elements.

Fallout is an RPG as it utilizes all of the elements. Skyrim is an RPG as it utilizes all of the elements. Deus Ex: Human Revolution is an RPG as it utilizes all of the elements. Alpha Protocol is an RPG as it utilizes all of the elements.

As time goes on, more and more games are blurring the genres from which they are derived. Borderlands blurs FPS with Diablo-esque RPG elements. Many FPS multiplayer elements are utilizing RPG leveling and itemization to extend the length of play and encourage more people to 'level up' by playing online. Darksiders combined Zelda exploration and itemization with God of War action gameplay.

Having said that, most games that people would categorize as RPGs tend to be action games with some RPG elements. I believe this distinction is vitally important to understand and recognize because many of the people who play true RPGs do not want to see the genre only served in part by games that utilize them to expand their own gameplay capabilities but not utilize them all to make a true RPG.
#1.2 (Edited 1034d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
SuperNerd  +   1022d ago
That would be cool to see a Zelda game with hardcore RPG elements in it , but it just wouldent fell like a Zelda game .
BakedGoods  +   1036d ago
Zelda has been, since it's inception, categorized as an 'Action-RPG'.

You are a part of an epic story, usually with a certain degree of open-world. You acquire items and grow in power/ability. RPG's, like Zelda games, are also often story-heavy.

The 'action' part of Zelda is a result of real-time combat in contrast to the traditional turn-based RPG mechanic. There is also no leveling or statistics in Zelda games, this lending itself to a more 'action-oriented' RPG.

It's interesting you're challenging the definition of conventional genres. We definitely need that with the growing diversity and genre-hybrid games we've seen in the last 5-7 years.
#2 (Edited 1036d ago ) | Agree(10) | Disagree(5) | Report | Reply
armycore  +   1036d ago
Zelda games are hardly "story-heavy", especially the first one.

The main reason why the Zelda series not considered a RPG series, for those that do play quite a bit of RPG games, is because it doesn't have a level up system. That's what console RPGs like Dragon Quest, Ultima, Final Fantasy, and Phantasy Star took from the pen-and-paper RPGs they were based from.

Zelda 2 is the only Zelda game where you can grind out levels. Keep fighting enemies over and over again and Link will get stronger. You can't do that in the other Zelda games.

The series is an action/adventure series with the exception of Zelda 2 which is a true action/RPG.
LightofDarkness  +   1036d ago
True, it's as much an ARPG as Mass Effect 2 is. There's no levelling in ME2, just weapons and abilities that get upgraded as you play.
coolbeans  +   1036d ago
I recall a leveling system in Mass Effect 2. This is something I anticipated someone to say, which I disagree with entirely. My reasons:

-ME2 has you playing a custom "role" in which your decisions don't force you to play out the same thing as someone else. Unlike in Zelda where you respond "no" to a question, you have to concede until you say "yes" to advance the story.

-Although it's limited, you actually have control over your weapons as a whole. In all the Zeldas I've played, you have to acquire a certain item in a dungeon in order to advance and only be the means of treasure chests, purchases in the game's stores, or what not. Any kind of ME2 upgrades we're acquired through your own means of planet scanning.

-I guess that one reason it's tough to consider it an RPG in my mind is the linearity in development. Everyone obtained the Goron Tunic in Ocarina of TIme the same way I did. Whereas in ME2, you could've obtained those accessories in a different way than I did.
LightofDarkness  +   1036d ago
I do agree with your sentiment really, I've never thought Zelda games were RPGs. No player driven character development, no "numer-porn", no gameplay/narrative changing choices or options. It is an action-adventure game, to be sure, I just was making an observation.

Still a relevant observation, but ME2 does allow the player more freedom and allows for the player to make a number of choices concerning narrative development and character development, although not as complex as many other RPGs when speaking of character development and "number-porn".
kane_1371  +   1035d ago
Dude, what are you talking about?
ME2 had what ?
just 6 or 7 different ending, based on all the choices you make even from the first game?
You are wrong, ME2 is definitely an Acrion adventure RPG
Jinxstar  +   1034d ago
"There is also no leveling or statistics in Zelda games"

Collecting heart containers is exactly what leveling is though... That mechanic dates back to the first game though and has never been updated but if you think about it heart containers are leveling up... Not in a "square enix" sense but a system unique to zelda.
#2.3 (Edited 1034d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(3) | Report | Reply
armycore  +   1032d ago
No it's not because you have to find the heart containers. Compare that to Zelda 2 where there's no finding of heart containers, you killed enemies until you gained a level. Saying heart containers make Zelda a RPG is like saying that after every boss in MGS where Snake increases his life, that makes it a RPG.
Jinxstar  +   1032d ago
I never said "Heart containers make it an RPG" I said it was a type of leveling system. In essence you become more durable the longer you play and more you accomplish except in that they don't dole it out for ever mediocre task you do. Only when you accomplish a feat...

Do you know however what the definition of an RPG is? Its actually really simple and not as complex as everyone and their mother makes it out to be.

"a game in which players assume the roles of fantasy characters "

Thats it... We as gamers break it down further. I agree that Zelda is not an RPG but I do believe it has a leveling system. I also believe if someone wants to argue that it is an RPG I have no defense to say it's not based on that definition...

I also believe MGS has a type of leveling system... I honestly don't know what to categorize MGS as though.... Probably best to go with the original "Stealth espionage"...

Just because a game doesn't have 500 different menus filled to the brim with numbers doesn't mean it can't be considered an RPG.

I mean if you agree with cgoodno's definition above then Saint's Row is a perfect example of an RPG. However most gamers would not put that in the RPG category... I don't see what not. You get XP for every little thing. Customizations, upgrades, progresive story, Shops, Places to rest, economy, the list goes on... What about assassins creed? or other games....

It's all in how you see it and I don't think any of those are RPG's but I think Skyrim is even though I would be hard pressed to tell you the difference between why it is and saints row isn't... Despite all that I see no reason why Zelda can't have it's own unique leveling system and if someone were to push it why it wouldn't be an RPG....
#2.3.2 (Edited 1032d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report
Redempteur  +   1032d ago
Zelda is action adventure.
Mass effect 1 was a action rpg
Mass effect 2 was a action adventure with rpg elements
dedicatedtogamers  +   1036d ago
The Legend of Zelda series was originally an RPG hybrid, much like Mass Effect and Dark Souls are part RPG, part action game. It was meant to require the twitch-based skills of an arcade game (go ahead and try to beat the original LoZ playing it like a turn-based RPG) but the exploration and leveling-up of a computer RPG.

Nowadays, it's mostly just a puzzle collection, but in the past it had the same exploration and freedom that RPGs have.
kane_1371  +   1035d ago
no lvling, no rpg, simple as that.
Ingram  +   1036d ago
An RPG is not just categorized and defined by the western culture, keep in mind Bethesda's games, or old Bioware/blizzard games might seem a more pure kind of RPG just because they mimic the book kind of classic RPG better, but you see, Videogames themselves have expanded the definition of the genre.

I'll say it again; Videogames have expanded the definition of the genre,FF is an RPG, PS1's Alundra or Vagrant Story were two very different examples of Action RPGs, etc.

The way I see it, BakedGoods nailed it: The basic premises are an evolving character, a long and complex storyline, a fantastic and flexible context, and NPC's.

I might be wrong, then again, I think your point is debatable.
dedicatedtogamers  +   1036d ago
But that's the thing: Zelda doesn't fit your criteria. The character is barely evolving, other than health upgrades and a few additional puzzle-solving items that have almost no utility in combat. The storylines in Zelda games are perhaps long-ish. but are just a slight step up in complexity from Super Mario. The content is NOT flexible: you and I will traverse the exact same dungeons in the exact same order and solve the exact same puzzles with the exact same items in the exact same way. LoZ is the opposite of "flexible".

As far as NPCs go, Zelda's NPCs are about as boring as you can get.
saint_seya  +   1034d ago
Its like calling DMC or GoW rpg games.. they are action games, just with upgrades.
dominiquerenning   1036d ago | Spam
D3mons0ul  +   1036d ago
Does RPG even have a solid meaning anymore?
JL  +   1036d ago
Sorry, but you're absolutely wrong. Zelda is an RPG...or it was an RPG. We'll talk Legend of Zelda here (the one that started it all).

See, the problem is, since the start of the Zelda franchise, games have evolved greatly. Thus, as games in general have evolved, genres have had to evolve as well. Games have become more intricate and complex in general. Therefore, being as how one of the main characteristics of an RPG is its complexity beyond the typical game, it has had to rise to greater complexity. If you look at it, all games nowadays are essentially RPGs because the majority of them incorporate RPG elements. From Madden to COD to FF to Arkham City, all have some sort of RPG element in it. Therefore, so as not to have to label all games RPG, we've come to a point where the definition of RPG is much more complex than it started out in video games.

This shouldn't be used to judge a old game like Legend of Zelda, however. During its time, it was absolutely an RPG by the standards at that time. Granted it was a different type of RPG, but RPG indeed. It was open world with non-linear gameplay. It DID have leveling up (increasing health, getting better weapons, etc). Inventory, quests, puzzles. All that good ole fashioned RPG stuff.

Granted, Zelda took a more hack-and-slash approach to the genre, thus making it more action oriented and "physical" than your typical RPG at the time, but it was nonetheless an RPG. In fact, it paved the way for action RPGs. And even your action adventure games of today like God of War, Arkham City, Assassin's Creed, etc. And therein lies the confusion.

See, due to the evolution of games, it's come to a point where all games pretty much have to take on RPG elements to become "bigger and better" and more immersive for gamers. Thus, you look at something like God of War or Assassin's Creed and you see basic elements of RPGs in them. At the same time, RPG games have had to evolve past the basic elements to be able to stand on their own as true RPG games. For that reason, you look back on Legend of Zelda and it does indeed bare more resemblance to modern action-adventure games than modern RPGs.

However, this is not fair due to the age difference. Essentially it would be like claiming that Karl Benz's first automobile isn't a car. It doesn't have 4 wheels, it's an open body, no windshield, no conventional steering wheel, and so on. This is absolutely false, though, because obviously it is a car. Just the automobile industry has evolved so much since that time that design of cars has changed drastically.

This is the same case with something like Legend of Zelda. Yes, it doesn't exactly conform to today's standards of an RPG, but that's because games and game design have evolved so much that it's all turned into something completely different. But Zelda can't be held to those standards due to those technologies not existing back then, and standards in design being different back then.

So, in closing. Legend of Zelda absolutely IS/WAS an RPG. An innovator of its time even. It's just RPGs (and games in general) have evolved in design so much since then, that the game kinda falls short in comparison to modern standards.
theonlylolking  +   1036d ago
So why does it say here http://www.gamestop.com/wii...
that the game is action adventure?
JL  +   1036d ago
Missed that very first part of my reply there where I said I'd be talking about Legend of Zelda, huh? That was for the very simple fact that, as I mentioned, genres and game design have evolved. And how the basic style of Zelda wouldn't be considered as RPG in modern times due to the evolution, but was in fact absolutely RPG when the franchise started.
guitar_nerd_23  +   1036d ago
I thought Zelda pretty much invented the term 'Action RPG'.
TopDudeMan  +   1036d ago
I do think stats are an important aspect of an RPG. It is more of an action adventure game.
kramun  +   1036d ago
Well, they are and they aren't. An RPG is a Role Playing Game, and for all intents and purposes that is what the Zelda games are. It's not a hardcore RPG like Baldurs Gate or D&D, but it is still an RPG. You can argue until you are blue in the face about what an RPG is, but essentially it is an RPG.

The line is blurred with RPGS, what some may consider an RPG some will say it's not. Deus Ex is an RPG, but it is completely different to Skyrim. Demon/Dark Souls is an RPG but it is completely different to Final Fantasy.

I don't think you can say that Zelda isn't an RPG just because it doesn't fit your criteria, because at it's heart it is an RPG when you take it to its basic level.

Besides, who cares? The Zelda games still rock.
TheoreticalParticle  +   1036d ago
Of course the Zelda games aren't RPG Games.

Because that would be calling them Role Playing Game Games.
Shane Kim  +   1036d ago
Like someone above said, it's hard to define what is an RPG and what is not. Zelda was defenantly an RPG game when it first came out but today I see it more as an adventure game.

Just because you get new weapons doesn't make it an RPG. If that was the case then Uncharted would be one because I get better weapons at the end of the game than in the beginning.

As I see it, an RPG should include:
-open world (or somewhat open)
-character development as in stats, weapons, abilities etc
-a party of characters rather than just one
-main quests and side quests
-the most important aspect that differs an RPG from an action adventure game (or a action RPG for that matter), and that is a combat system.

The combat system should rely only on your stats rather than your physical attributes (i.e how fast you are with your mouse and keyboard/controller) othwerwise, all that leveling would be unnecessary.

In conclusion, Zelda lacks many of these aspects, hence why I like to call it an adventure game.
#12 (Edited 1036d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
ZombieAssassin  +   1035d ago
Wikipedia says they are "high fantasy action-adventure video games" so I'm gonna go with that.
e-p-ayeaH  +   1034d ago
lol
kariyanine  +   1035d ago
The definition of RPG is always one to get people on edge. The truth is that any game you play could be defined as an RPG, you are Playing the Role of a character in a Game. To define it to mean that only games where you level up, and in truth you do level up and get stronger in Zelda by collecting heart containers, is being fairly narrow minded.
MelonSaurus  +   1035d ago
Any game where you play the role of one specific character, is an RPG. *waits*
coolbeans  +   1034d ago
That definition makes basically 90% of all video games RPG's. Super Mario Galaxy games, Killzone 2+3, Half-Life series, and many more examples proves that's not the definition of an rpg.
Ingram  +   1033d ago
You can't use literal semantics to define what "RPG" means, in the same way french fries are not damn french.It's like saying "Liberals"(capitalis ts) are just people who want to be free or that "Republicans"(right wing) are people who want to form a greek-like socialist republic.

RPG has a tradition, and as such, it adscribes its own meaning to that particular genre.Imagine the difference if we aditionally change the medium to one in which 90% of the exponents are by definition "RPG's"(You control the fate of a character).Book RPG's =/= Videogame RPG's

Look at Baldur's Gate, it's the purest form of RPG yet very different from Fallout.Is Diablo an RPG? debatable, are Starcraft or GTA RPG's? no they're not.

You see, the line is drawn far from the exact meaning of the words Role Playing Game, yet it's not a blurry line since we can all easily categorize in their own superior genres other forms of gaming in where we control one or more characters.(Rayman is a platformer, Age of Empires is RTS, etc)

IMHO merely acting could be an RPG, but when we're talking Video Game RPG's, the thing just expands wildly.
#15.2 (Edited 1033d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
Fanatyk  +   1034d ago
RPG = ROLE playing game. Not level playing game. Level system is just an addition. So an RPG is a game, where you have moral choices, or choices that in any other way reflect the character of player's character.

And it doesn't have anything to do with teams. Gothic/Elder Scrolls are RPGs and do not involve any kind of team.

And actually, RPG is different from cRPG (computer RPG) - if we want to be accurate. So your post absolutely misses the point.

Cheers,
Adam
Redempteur  +   1032d ago
PLEASE, in everygame you are playing a role .

If i play with sonic , i play a role SONIC , but that doesn't make it a RPG.
Fanatyk  +   1032d ago
Yes, but it has nothing to do with LEVELING either. And nothing to do with TEAMS. It's just a vague border between games where RP is an important (or main) part of the game, or not.

PLEASE
Xanatos  +   1032d ago
i love "japanese rpgs" and how silly they can be, i enjoyed ff13 for what it is but if this is what defines a traditional rpg for some people then i guess im not an rpg fan even with all the "japanese rpgs" ive played. With that said I have never felt more like part of a story of a character where my actions matter like I did playing Mass Effect 2, if what makes an rpg(role playing game) is numbers popping on the screen when you do/take damage or having a number to track your characters progression then maybe they shouldn't be called rpgs, maybe they should be called "fantasy battle simulators" or whatever because if i can take ff13 again as an example i really didnt feel like i was playing a role, i just felt like i was watching a role and thats fine. I guess im just a western rpg type of fan then.
CrescentFang  +   1032d ago
You don't take the "role-playing" word literally because than it's basically applies all video games. Video game RPGs are all math. You have stats that directly effect the gameplay/mechanics and play a vital role in it.
deniselujan   1028d ago | Spam
suejosephson   1014d ago | Spam

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
Remember