everynowandben

@Zadaris I'm planning on it 👍😎👍

I recommend everyone buy it if not just to encourage Nintendo to translate and release more Japanese-only games

Why are those screenshots in widescreen and why is no one mentioning that? N64 was not in widescreen. It's antithetical to the concept of an "upgrade" if you just go on to stretch the image out of proportion anyway.

The previous offer for the Ore expired 3/14

Byleth and Banjo

If it's a plastic case, gotta have the original or repro case. If it's a cardboard box, I don't care at all if the cartridge is loose.

I take stickers off whenever possible, and while I prefer labels and such to be in good condition, I honestly don't care at all if it's got some sharpie on it or whatever. I collect to play.

Moving towards emulation these days anyway, and better yet, softmodding for an authentic experience.

Conquest is a great game. Would love to see a sequel, or better yet, a crossover with Fire Emblem instead ::looks over longingly at my own profile image::

Just have to add that I finished Titanfall 2 yesterday on Series X, and yeah that game is super underrated - the campaign is incredible. Not sure how well it would actually translate to Switch though..

@Yosher My gf bought one for herself but neither of us use it (unless we have to) because it just isn't the same / doesn't feel good to use.

@Nerevarine76 The distinction is not arbitrary at all. It's literally the same difference between reality (object) and imagination (concept). You cannot hold an experience point in your hands.

It's also quite easy for anyone to distinguish a character getting stronger versus a weapon the character is using getting stronger.

"Similar" is by definition not a synonym of "equal."

@Nerevarine76 I disagree. Orbs/Heart containers are found, stats are earned. Please see above where I thoroughly explained the distinction between objects and concepts.

Equipment and enemy growth is not equal to character growth.

@Nerevarine76 This is from Wikipedia's entry on Chrono Cross:

"With each battle, players can enhance statistics such as strength and defense. However, no system of experience points exists; after four or five upgrades, statistics remain static until players defeat a boss. This adds a star to a running count shown on the status screen, which allows for another few rounds of statistical increases."

Sounds Iike you are awarded stats from battle, and can apply those stats to your character. That is the equivalent of experience points.

Please feel free to explain in more detail, and correct where/if needed.

Edit: We posted about the same time, I'll read the link you posted about CC and respond

Edit 2: 😄 same source I quoted above.

Your system seems like it would be great for reviews and/or recommendations.

The thing is, I don't think "RPG" is hard to define.

@TAndvig First, yes it does. My argument has stood so far (maybe Chrono Cross is the breaking point, but I don't know enough about it to say right now).

Second, I mentioned many times that just because a game has experience points (or the equivalent), it doesn't automatically make it an RPG, as said game may just have RPG elements in such a case.

@Nerevarine76 Might you please explain how character and/or stat progression works in Chrono Cross? As I mentioned, I have not played that game.

I checked out your link, and that system of measurement is certainly thorough, but here are 2 major problems I see with it:
1. Who decides what "score" is assigned to each aspect? Why does that person get to decide?
2. Are these measurements not subjective in nature, and therefore debatable, and therefore doesn't solve the issue?

@roboshort The title of the article is "Is Zelda an RPG or not?" I'm creating a working definition of RPG, and then checking whether or not Zelda fits the definition, and I'm concluding that Zelda does not fit under that definition.

I never said experience points are required for character growth, I said experience points are required for whether or not the game counts as an RPG.

You did list games where a character can grow in different ways - that doesn't change, alter, or contradict my definition of RPG since those games either do not meet the criteria I defined for what an RPG is, such as PMSS, or, do use an experience point (or the equivalent) system, and do qualify as an RPG under my working definition, such as Fire Emblem (although FE is better defined as a strategy RPG).

My viewpoint/opinion has no effect whatsoever on "what developers can do in a genre."

Wish the Starlink Star Fox team DLC would go on sale for once. I'll pick it up (along with the actual game) if it ever does, but it never has.

I'm intrigued at the very least. Another one to toss on the wishlist for now.

@chipia That's like saying, "What if an ice hockey game was called NBA Game 2021? Would it be a basketball game?"

@roboshort I've not played FFL2, but I did (an admittedly tiny amount of) research and discovered that "stats increase randomly" after battles, which is clearly the equivalent of experience points. Fire Emblem uses experience points to level up characters. Zelda 2 also uses an experience point system. PM Sticker Star is not an RPG, as there are specific, individual physical items that must be found and collected in order to increase stats such as hearts (extremely similar to heart containers in Zelda games) to increase health, and disposable one time use stickers with various strengths and abilities that are used as weapons. Shrines in BotW are not equivalent to experience points in that you find and collect spirit orbs, which are specific, individual physical items which are also not conceptual in nature.

Experience points are typically "earned" and/or "awarded" to the player for winning in combat, or satisfying specific conditions (such as completing quests or discovering a secret area for example), which is philosophically different than finding and collecting a specific physical item such as a spirit orb or heart container.

You didn't name a single game that contradicts my point, and therefore my point still stands. RPGs must have experience points (or the equivalent) but not all games with an experience point (or equivalent) system are RPGs.

Edit: Added reasoning regarding PM: SS, and further explained differences between items and experience.

@DownRightSam I would have to say at the very least, Zelda 2 has RPG elements. I wouldn't say it's a perfect example of a typical RPG, however, if I saw it labeled as "RPG" somewhere, I'd think that was fair, or at least not totally inaccurate. Gun to my head, yes or no, I'd say yes. However, I think Zelda 2 is probably best described as "action adventure with RPG elements."

@BAN I'll copy paste the distinction I made above (twice):

When you get the heart container for beating the boss, you found it after fighting the boss. The actual act of beating the boss didn't allow you to "earn" a health upgrade, it allowed you to "collect" the health upgrade afterwards.

To add to this, if it were an RPG, it might be possible to beat the boss and not earn enough experience points to get to the next level and therefore not increase your health. In Zelda, you ALWAYS unlock the heath upgrade when you defeat the boss.

heart icons are "on" or "off", whereas gaining experience doesn't necessarily mean you've gained an increase in anything but a number in and of itself. Even when you find a heart piece, which is similar to what I'm getting at (in that you've increased "something" without receiving an actual benefit [besides getting another step closer to an actual benefit]), you've still "found" it like a physical item (because it is a physical item) instead of "earning" it like a conceptual and/or numerical increase via experience points (or the equivalent).

And that's how it's different.

Here's yet another example of the difference: In Zelda, you can can decide not to collect a heart container. In an RPG, you earn the experience points from defeating the boss whether you want it or not. In other words, you don't collect it, you earn it in an RPG. In some non-RPGs, such as Zelda (except 2), you do earn the chance to collect the upgrade (hear container, coins, etc), but this is philosophically different than earning the upgrade itself (experience points, coins, etc).

These are examples of the conceptual difference, and are not meant to be taken as blanket statements defining what an RPG is or is not. The blanket statement is that an RPG must have an experience point (or equivalent) system, although not all games with an experience point (or equivalent) system are RPGs.

@TAndvig I'm unfamiliar with the specifics of those games - Do they have experience point systems?

Edit: I looked up those games, and yeah they all have experience point systems, so... Yeah. My point still stands.

@Nerevarine76 Of course there is no rule, or this poll wouldn't exist. We're all debating what the rule is or should be.

I've not played Chrono Cross so I can't comment on that unless you'd care to explain it to me. Sorry!

In regards to having RPG elements, a game could be defined as something like "Twin stick shooter with RPG elements" just as a random example. That doesn't make it an RPG.

What do you think the rule for what an RPG is if not what I said?

@Nerevarine76 Having RPG mechanics doesn't make a game an RPG. Definitions of an absolute nature will undoubtedly lead to splitting hairs when deciding what counts and what doesn't, and I'm arguing that it doesn't count.

@NinChocolate Zelda (outside of 2) does not have experience points (or the equivalent) and is therefore not an RPG.

I'm using specific criteria for a working definition. Your argument is not based on concrete criteria, but on vague concepts and feelings, and therefore is weak by comparison. Come up with a set of criteria we can compare against if you want to be taken more seriously. Not trying to be rude - trying to help you form a better argument.

@Nerevarine76 Someone else pointed that out, and I have to say that it's interesting, but as I understand it, the enemies and equipment are leveling up, not the player character, and therefore it's not an RPG.

@NinChocolate I still disagree. Having RPG elements doesn't make a game an RPG. No one is getting "short-changed" by what genre a game is defined as.

@NinChocolate Important or unimportant has nothing to do with definition.

@QueenOfHearts38 That characteristic makes the game an action adventure, not an action RPG.

@NinChocolate Part of the conversation is not the same as part of the genre.

@NinChocolate A game that influences a genre doesn't make it part of that genre.

@roboshort My argument is that experience (or the equivalent) is necessary. You'd have to name the specific TTRPGs you're talking about and explain the specific character growth systems that do not feature experience (or the equivalent) you're referring to in order for me to comment on them.

Here are just some of many, many games that feature character growth that are not RPGs: Metroid, Mega Man, Paper Mario: Sticker Star

@roboshort I disagree, lots of games allow you to "grow your character" that are not RPGs.

@chipia I'll copy paste the distinction I made above:

When you get the heart container for beating the boss, you found it after fighting the boss. The actual act of beating the boss didn't allow you to "earn" a health upgrade, it allowed you to "collect" the health upgrade afterwards.

To add to this, if it were an RPG, it might be possible to beat the boss and not earn enough experience points to get to the next level and therefore not increase your health. In Zelda, you ALWAYS unlock the heath upgrade when you defeat the boss.

heart icons are "on" or "off", whereas gaining experience doesn't necessarily mean you've gained an increase in anything but a number in and of itself. Even when you find a heart piece, which is similar to what I'm getting at (in that you've increased "something" without receiving an actual benefit [besides getting another step closer to an actual benefit]), you've still "found" it like a physical item (because it is a physical item) instead of "earning" it like a conceptual and/or numerical increase via experience points (or the equivalent).

@chipia The items you're talking about are items, and they would "be there" whether or not the player character is "there" or not. Experience is conceptual, and only "there" when the player character is there to earn it. That's the difference.

@BloodNinja The part where you put text in caps and in bold, and then the part where you were laughing your f***ing a** off. Seemed like things someone would do if they were not in calm and collected state of mind.

Also, wondering what you think about immersive sims like Thief, Deus Ex, System Shock, etc. Surely you must admit those games provide more choice than "yes/no/fight/flight"

@BloodNinja I'm not arguing that point either, I already conceded my friend. You said "no idea how you got the "east vs. west" stuff" and I was just explaining where I got it - I wasn't arguing a point. No need to fly off the handle.

@chipia But when talking about a meaningful, working definition, we should look for a common denominator, which I believe is experience points (or the equivalent).

To further clarify, my belief is: all RPGs must have experience points (or the equivalent), but, not all games with experience points (or the equivalent) are RPGs, and may simply contain RPG elements.

@BloodNinja This is from https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/377559/what-defines-a-jrpg-and-how-is-it-different-from-an-rpg

"JRPGs focus more on storytelling with well-established characters. WRPGs focus more on letting the player live out fantasies and express their player-character the way they want. JRPGs tell the player a story through the eyes of one of the characters. WRPGs let the player choose what kind of person they want that character to be and then the game shows the player how the story plays out with their character in it."

I believe the above to be generally true, and to me it sounded like what you were talking about in regards to why you don't think FF is an RPG. I mistook exactly what point you were getting at. My apologies, and thank you for clarifying.

Anyway, are you then saying only TTRPGs are true RPGs and the video games that people call RPGs don't count?

@BloodNinja I disagree. It is typical in Western RPGs to create your own role, but a typical characteristic of Japanese RPGs is to play the role of a pre-defined character. It seems to me that you are saying that "western RPGs are the only true RPGs," which I believe is simply untrue.

@BAN You're missing a key distinction in that the heart icons are "on" or "off", whereas gaining experience doesn't necessarily mean you've gained an increase in anything but a number in and of itself. Even when you find a heart piece, which is similar to what I'm getting at (in that you've increased "something" without receiving an actual benefit [besides getting another step closer to an actual benefit]), you've still "found" it like a physical item (because it is a physical item) instead of "earning" it like a conceptual and/or numerical increase via experience points (or the equivalent).

@Silly_G That is very interesting about BotW - I was unaware of that. I think I would say it's still not an RPG though since it's only the enemies that are "leveling up" while the player character is not.

@the4seer I agree with your outcome, but not with your reasoning. None of those things, even in combination, definitively make a game an RPG. Some RPGs don't have those qualities, and games that are not RPGs do have those qualities.

@LordGeovanni I disagree. When you get the heart container for beating the boss, you found it after fighting the boss. The actual act of beating the boss didn't allow you to "earn" a health upgrade, it allowed you to "collect" the health upgrade afterwards. The same exact logic applies to upgrades "specifically locked behind some logic and skill to obtain."

Edit: To add to this, if it were an RPG, it might be possible to beat the boss and not earn enough experience points to get to the next level and therefore not increase your health. In Zelda, you ALWAYS unlock the heath upgrade when you defeat the boss.

@the4seer It seems to me like you're focusing on the wrong aspect of what makes Zelda 2 an RPG. It's much less about "playing a role", and much more about progression via earning experience points.

@the4seer Did you see the argument above where using that line of logic means Pac-Man is an RPG, at which point pretty much any game is an RPG, at which point RPG and game are synonymous, at which point there is not a debate or discussion?

@LordGeovanni It looks like you aren't making a key distinction between "finding" upgrades and "earning" (can't think of a better word for it, but I'll explain) upgrades. In Zelda (except Zelda 2), you increase health by "finding" heart containers in the environment, which is a mechanic not (typically) found in RPGs. In RPGs, you (can) "earn" health increases directly through experience (or the equivalent) point increases, and/or by spending the "earned" points. In the same way, this is also an example of why the more recent Paper Mario games are also not RPGs.

@dsparil Kid Icarus has RPG elements, yes. RPGs must have experience points (or the equivalent) but having experience points doesn't automatically mean it's an RPG. It's like how all squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares.

@sanderev Fire Emblem is in no way, shape, or form an RTS. Also, Animal Crossing has no experience points or leveling system and is therefore not an RPG.

If you don't get experience points (or the equivalent of), it's not an RPG.