There is no discussion in gaming I love more than the "Is Zelda an RPG" discussion. It's almost as good as the PSP vs. DS arguments. So what do you think - is Zelda an RPG or not? (Thanks Mickeymac and WolfRamHeart for the idea)

I think there's merit to both sides of the argument. On one hand, Nintendo has often referred to the game, especially back during the 8 and 16-bit eras, as an RPG. But you could also say that since the main character doesn't necessarily level up, it can't be a true RPG. I guess I call it an RPG at times because it was often referred to as one in gaming magazines years ago. I just got so used to seeing it listed as an RPG, that I began to believe it actually was. So while I know it doesn't have many of the so-called "defining characteristics" of an RPG, it will always be an RPG to me.

So my answer is: YES

i think it's more of an action/adventure/puzzler game than a RPG

but maybe that's just because the only RPG games i like are Kingdom Hearts and Crystal Chronicles: Echoes of Time

(p.s. i hate turn-based RPG's >.<)

Its Action RPG but I would say its more of an Action/Adventure game.

well RPG does stand for Role Playing Game wicth if you think about it, it applyes to almost evry game in exsistence. since your takeing the "Role" of the hero.

No. Zelda is not an RPG. It lacks too many of the characteristics that set RPG's apart from other games. Zelda is an action/adventure, but not an RPG.

i agree with VGP. its an action/adventure

Zelda II is probably the closest to an RPG.

Absolutely not! It's not even close. Look at games that are RPGs: Dragon Warrior/Quest series, Final Fantasy series, even Super Mario RPG. The gameplay in the Zelda series is nothing like the gameplay in these games. The Zelda series are action-adventure games. I don't even think that there's an argument here. I don't care that Nintendo has sometimes referred to Zelda as an RPG, they are mistaken as well.

Final note: Zelda is not even an action-RPG. Super Mario RPG is an action-RPG. Zelda is not even close.

The fighting is a big thing for me because in zelda you walk up to guys and just slice them.but in rpgs, when you go up to a bad guy then it turns into some battle field and you are on one side and the villain is on the other.you take turns hitting.zelda isnt like that

Yep. Definitely an Action RPG.

Action Adventure. But you do 'play a role' so in theory every game with a PC could count. I don't know I'm no RPG nut, thanks to turn-based fighting.

Dark Lord: "I'm going to hit you!"
Hero of Light: "That's fine, I'll get my turn"

So the qualifications for a game to be in a particular genre are for the game's company to say it's so?

I remember when Nintendo used to call it an RPG. I always found that humorous. It shares no RPG qualities. There's no experience (except in Zelda 2, which is hardly a Zelda game anyway, more like an awesome Zelda-themed Castlevania). There's very little story. It's not turn-based. There are few spells (and in most games, none). There's only one playable character.

And most of all, there's no role to play. You always play as Link (let's all forget about the CD-i games, ok?), and not only does he never talk (again, let's all forget about the CD-i games... and that one line of internal dialog in Zelda 2), but he features almost no characterization or character development.

It has nothing to do with role playing, nothing at all... though it is a game, so I guess Nintendo got it half right.

Furthermore, Miyamoto went on record once saying that he hates RPGs and associates them with people who lock themselves in a dark basement to play games alone. I need to find that quote. I remember it being linked on Earthbound.com, or whatever the site was before it became Starmen.net. I always thought that was very funny, especially considering his own Zelda series is continually mislabeled as an RPG.

I'm not sure why people want to call it an RPG, but I also don't really care. I just think it's funny. Nintendo just said it was an RPG to try to pull in fans of the genre since they had no RPGs at the time.

Although the series consistently has some RPG elements, in particular Zelda II, it quite simply isn't an RPG. What an RPG is you can gather by reading the above posts. =P

Miyamoto actually said that? I had no idea!

It's not true, Miyamoto! My basement is very well-lit!

Adam, I couldn't have said it better myself.

Granted, I am remembering this quote from over ten years ago, probably. N64 era, I believe. And I can't find it now, so no telling how accurate I recall it.

Or you know what, it might not have been Miyamoto. It might have been Nintendo's president (the one before Iwata, forgot his name). He was known for making controversial comments. I wish I could find the quote. It was funny, whether you like RPGs or not.

i live in my room on the 2nd floor of my house!!!! (even though my room is very dark)

@ Malnin
In the context, I think you could safely assume I meant video game RPGs.

And in that era, the JRPG was the predominant one, which meant Final Fantasy as the prime example, though I read the quote originally on an Earthbound site. You can understand why they'd have wanted to make digs at RPGs at that time, too.

The Main series? No. It doesn't have anything that is usually considered unique among Role Playing Games - stat increases(unless you count health increases and found equipment, but those are more like the permanent upgrades found in Metroid or Viewtiful Joe); it has very little story throughout, certainly not up to RPG standards at least, and it's certainly not a central, or even memorable part of the game; The controls and gameplay don't really change that much when you're in a town/overworld/dungeon, and the transitions between them are pretty smooth, unlike most RPGs where there's usually a really stark contrast, especially control-wise, between the 3 environs - almost like they were 3 seperate games.

The only really RPG-ish element in Zelda is the Side Quests, and even then, they tend to be less explicit, and require more logic and exploration, or at least making sure you talked to the right people - more like a point 'n' click adventure game than an RPG, really.

Which brings us to our main point - Zelda is an Adventure game. It's about exploration and solving puzzles, not about improving your character through stat management, or continuing some big huge story. Yes, you do have the main quest that you're always working towards, but the meat of the game - the part that makes it an enjoyable experience - is not the destination, but the journey itself.

Really, if Zelda is an RPG, then I'm a halibut - it defies all logic and reason based on the definition of the Role-playing genre. Yes, I understand that many people, even Nintendo themselves, have been calling it an RPG, but the simple fact of the matter is that the Zelda series has been mislabeled for the past 2 decades, and no one's had the sense to change it.

I think there's a pretty good consensus here. Have you changed your mind, Corbie?