Hyrule Warriors This game is an RPG?

[Seth]

RPGs don't have to be turn based as some people have seem to have hinted at. Besides, it's such a vague term, does it really matter? I'd say Zelda II is an RPG but again it's just semantics.

 

[Salem]

• Hearthstone is a card game yes. But it also has 60 levels per hero which you gain XP to level them up.
• Starcraft 2 has experience you get after winning vs matches and you level up to earn more forum avatars and achievements.
• Heroes of the Storm has a similar playing matches gives you XP and levels to earn rewards. It is a MOBA. And MOBAs are not RPGs, they are MOBAS. Well I guess a MOBA could be an RPG as well if there was some kind of character personality evolution or some kind of loot system. But most of the popular MOBAs don't have both of these things.

All 3 of these 3 games have XP and levels but all 3 are not RPGs. We have a CCG, a RTS and a MOBA.

1. So it's a card game RPG?
2. Only in multiplayer, not in the main game?
3. I think MOBAS should be classified as an RPG sub genre, why not? They have the main thing that separates RPGs from other games.

And RPing doesn't matter where you do it, in a game or in a movie, on a internet forum, in a fan fiction etc etc. It's all still RPing. The format in which you RP can be different but the RPing you are doing still has the same definition. RPGs are just RPing in a game.

Actually no, RPing in real-life in completely different from RPG-video games.

The reason RPG video game are RPGS are called RPG not because you can RP in them, the term "RPG" is a leftover term from the earliest Computer RPGs like Wizardly and Ultima, they took the statistical qualities from traditional table-top RPGs, that's it.

But you know we have both proved one thing. There is not one universally accepted definition of the term. And I think that's the issue. Someone needs to come up with a better way to describe all of this. A way that everyone can agree upon.

Not exactly, please see my previous paragraph.

Every game in the main series is an action adventure RPG.

You take on the role of a character who doesn't talk much and it is questionable whether link changes emotionally over the course of his adventure because the player takes on his role. But RPG's like Fallout 3 and skyrim are similar. In fact the main character is emotionless.

There is plenty of interaction with NPC's and whilst there is no levelling up system in the traditional sense you can upgrade items. In fact heart container collecting could count as upgrading your health.

I'm sorry, that argument doesn't work, if that's how you define an RPG,very single game out there is an RPG except for Tetris and similar games. Period.

 

[the8thark]

1. So it's a card game RPG?
2. Only in multiplayer, not in the main game?
3. I think MOBAS should be classified as an RPG sub genre, why not? They have the main thing that separates RPGs from other games.

1. Under my belief of what roleplaying is it is not an RPG.
2. The XP bar in SC2 happens when you vs other players or the AI in standard matches. This does not exist in the campaign mode.
3. Under the other definition of what an RPG is (XP/Level) then you would be correct. But I just feel there's no real character development in MOBAs. You just choose a character and play it. The character does not evolve as the story progresses. Well most MOBAs don't have a much of a story.

Actually no, RPing in real-life in completely different from RPG-video games.

I partially disagree with you. It feels totally different I will agree, but I believe it's core principles are the same.

The reason RPG video game are RPGS are called RPG

not because you can RP in them, the term "RPG" is a leftover term from the earliest Computer RPGs like Wizardly and Ultima, they took the statistical qualities from traditional table-top RPGs, that's it.

What you said is I partially agree with. RPG actually originates from Dungeons and Dragons. That is a RPG. Just a dice and paper one. Wizardry and Ultima, Might and Magic etc etc are all RPGs too. But for other other reasons then just their stats. The wikipedia definition I linked above I think nails it. D&D was about taking your character role playing him/her in a made up universe. And the computer games that followed based on the D&D rule set also had this role playing element.
The stats are just the rules. All games have rules. Does not make all games RPGs.

I'm sorry, that argument doesn't work, if that's how you define an RPG,very single game out there is an RPG except for Tetris and similar games. Period.

What he said about every game in the main Zelda series being an RPG, that's borderline true in my opinion. You can argue they are and argue they are not and both sides would be correct based on how they explain it. For me, the games have most of what you need to be an RPG. Link being an avatar and not a character that evolves at the story progresses is why I say they are not RPGs. But if you said that didn't matter and all the loot you get, great story, ability to role play as a character in Hyrule (Link), large numbers of NPCs etc etc is enough then the Zelda games would be RPGs.

 

[Blue Star]

I'm fairly certain there are NO games in the Zelda main series that is an RPG.

Back in the day, there was this gaming magazine called EGM. And they defined the N64 Zeldas as Action/RPGs. Interestingly, they defined WW and other Zelda games as Adventure.

There was this video game book I read for research back when I was still a middle school kid, and they had the defining features of an RPG. Too bad I don't remember the criteria. But I do remember that Zelda did share quite a few features of an RPG, but it was never a full-fledged RPG.

Back on topic: No, I don't think Hyrule Warriors is an RPG. No overworld. No dungeons. No towns/NPCs. No major things to collect to progress the story (that's an old school RPG trait there). Just click on the levels and begin. That's not an RPG to me. It's still awesome, though.

Yeah, but certain things like the definitions of RPGs shouldn't be left to opinions

But Like someone else said- This isn't really an opinion.

I disagree with these statements. If we're just going to go based on someone's black and white definition, then a lot of RPGs aren't RPGs.

Technopedia.com defines RPGs as

• Levels or character statistics that could be improved over the course of the game
• A menu-based combat system
• A central quest that runs throughout the game as a storyline

No menu based combat system? Not an RPG, then. But wait, isn't that like 99% of the modern ones?

Back in the day, the menu based combat systems and the towns/npc interactions were what defined RPGs for me. So a lot of the RPGs that come out these days don't feel like RPGs to me. XD

 

[Musicfan]

Back in the day, there was this gaming magazine called EGM. And they defined the N64 Zeldas as Action/RPGs. Interestingly, they defined WW and other Zelda games as Adventure.

There was this video game book I read for research back when I was still a middle school kid, and they had the defining features of an RPG. Too bad I don't remember the criteria. But I do remember that Zelda did share quite a few features of an RPG, but it was never a full-fledged RPG.

Back on topic: No, I don't think Hyrule Warriors is an RPG. No overworld. No dungeons. No towns/NPCs. No major things to collect to progress the story (that's an old school RPG trait there). Just click on the levels and begin. That's not an RPG to me. It's still awesome, though.



I disagree with these statements. If we're just going to go based on someone's black and white definition, then a lot of RPGs aren't RPGs.

Technopedia.com defines RPGs as

• Levels or character statistics that could be improved over the course of the game
• A menu-based combat system
• A central quest that runs throughout the game as a storyline

No menu based combat system? Not an RPG, then. But wait, isn't that like 99% of the modern ones?

Back in the day, the menu based combat systems and the towns/npc interactions were what defined RPGs for me. So a lot of the RPGs that come out these days don't feel like RPGs to me. XD

I still think a lot of RPGs have a menu based battle sytem it's just that you can also directly control the character also.

 

[Curmudgeon]

Seems like a lot of nits being picked over something so trivial.

Remember that Role-Playing Games existed as pen and paper affairs, spinoffs and expansions of tactical tabletop wargames, long before they ever got to consoles. The original conversions on PC attempted to replicate those rules systems (TSR's AD&D games) or create new IPs in a similar mold (Ultima, Bard's Quest). JRPGs are the direct descendants (even if they are inferior in order of complexity) of those early efforts. As hardware improved in the mid 80s, action-RPGs like Faria and Hydlide started to show up and genre lines get smudged, blurred, and moved. Modern JRPGs barely fit their own categorization.

Zelda was originally revolutionary precisely because it broke the rules. It took character progression and the semi-sandbox vibe from early cRPGs and hack and slash elements from action games. Then they put it in a prettier, more polished package than any previous attempt.

The lot of you are attempting to stuff something into a box in the dark when you really have no idea what the object is or the size of the box. You can't agree on whether Zelda is an RPG or not because it was so instrumental in completely smashing down the walls between various types of games. Franchises like the Dynasty Warriors series exist as a result. So how do you define something that descends from a progenitor that is a mutt?

 

[Akuhime-sama]

Gathered from where? Would you be kind enough to quote your source please.

I gathered this from pretty much everywhere media wise. It's not really something you can quote.
But- if you want an example, the very one you used, wikipedia, uses the term "Role-Playing-Game" and not "RPG" as the topic of that article, and obviously, it makes more mention to things that are not video games- (like D&D).

But anyway- my point is, I see "Role-playing" used more for anything, and a MUCH vague-er term than "RPG", as, from what I know, is only a type of video-game genre. And this comes not from particular sources, but something I've picked up over the years. Mainly in various media. (And remember, this is just what I gathered, meaning I just put 2 and 2 together. I never said I saw it outright)

And RPing doesn't matter where you do it, in a game or in a movie, on a internet forum, in a fan fiction etc etc. It's all still RPing. The format in which you RP can be different but the RPing you are doing still has the same definition. RPGs are just RPing in a game.

See again- this is what I see more as "Role-Playing"- This is the term I see most that is the vague version. Just "Role-playing" could be anything.
Where as, "RPG" I've seen used only for a Genre of video game.

But you know we have both proved one thing. There is not one universally accepted definition of the term. And I think that's the issue. Someone needs to come up with a better way to describe all of this. A way that everyone can agree upon.

I still say that the two terms "RPG" and "Role-Playing" have different definitions- simply because they are used in different ways.
And yes. We need a better term that defines the "Number-oriented" video games that I know as "RPG"
But we only need it because there seems to be confusion. If there was no confusion, and "Role-Playing" was the other term, used more vaguely, then I'm sure "RPG" would be a fine term all on its own, to mean that a video game had those "Number-oriented" criteria that so define it. (such as Health stats, Atk/Def, speed, EXP, Leveling, etc...)

 

[Akuhime-sama]

---

Well, Again, I'm using the term "RPG" not to refer to anything else but a type of VIDEO GAME genre, in which your creature/character/thing that you play Levels up, gains EXP, has Number-based health count, and has stats. All of which I listed must be Number-based.

And I use the term "Role-Playing" as everything else. Specially things that are not VIDEO GAMES, such as D&D.

Now, if you can tell me that there is another term out there for the genre of Number-based video games I've mentioned, then I will promptly use it. Until then, that's what I am referencing when I say "RPG"- simply because I was told that "RPG" is what name my reference is known by.

And all the Zelda games [that I know about] do not have the number-based criteria that makes them fall under the category of what I'm referencing. [Whatever the term for those may be], and therefore, no Zelda game is an "RPG", in the sense I am using.
But by all means- let me know if there is a better term for what I mean. I'm just using terms I was informed on.

 

[the8thark]

Well, Again, I'm using the term "RPG" not to refer to anything else but a type of VIDEO GAME genre, in which your creature/character/thing that you play Levels up, gains EXP, has Number-based health count, and has stats. All of which I listed must be Number-based.

I guess you and I disagree then on this basic fundamental level.
You feel an RPG is all about "Levels up, gains EXP, has Number-based health count, and has stats" to quote you.
I feel it's about the 3 points I listed earlier in this topic. Ie the game has the role playing element to it. If the game has XP or not in the traditional sense does not matter.

It seems we differ on our opinions here rather strongly. And over the course of this topic we are not coming any closer to an agreement. We both can claim our opinions to be fact if we wanted to but I think that would be foolish. We just have different opinions on this. Time for us both to accept this fact I think.

And as a footnote, Zelda games do have attack, defense stats etc etc. They are just not shown to the players as numbers. We all know how strong each sword is in each Zelda game and how well each armour protects us. We can even work out how many hits bosses take to die with each sword as an example using the numbers. The numbers are there for most RPGs. Whether they are directly shown to the player or hidden (as is the case in most Zelda games) doesn't matter, the numbers still exist. These numbers do or don't qualify a game as an RPG though. Depends on your opinion of the RPG definition. A definition we both disagree on.

 

[Blue Star]

Well, Again, I'm using the term "RPG" not to refer to anything else but a type of VIDEO GAME genre, in which your creature/character/thing that you play Levels up, gains EXP, has Number-based health count, and has stats. All of which I listed must be Number-based.

And I use the term "Role-Playing" as everything else. Specially things that are not VIDEO GAMES, such as D&D.

But I was talking about video games and not D&D? :?

 

[Salem]

Well, Again, I'm using the term "RPG" not to refer to anything else but a type of VIDEO GAME genre, in which your creature/character/thing that you play Levels up, gains EXP, has Number-based health count, and has stats. All of which I listed must be Number-based.

And I use the term "Role-Playing" as everything else. Specially things that are not VIDEO GAMES, such as D&D.

Now, if you can tell me that there is another term out there for the genre of Number-based video games I've mentioned, then I will promptly use it. Until then, that's what I am referencing when I say "RPG"- simply because I was told that "RPG" is what name my reference is known by.

And all the Zelda games [that I know about] do not have the number-based criteria that makes them fall under the category of what I'm referencing. [Whatever the term for those may be], and therefore, no Zelda game is an "RPG", in the sense I am using.
But by all means- let me know if there is a better term for what I mean. I'm just using terms I was informed on.

Exactly this, I was trying to say this for the past posts, you put it better than I ever could.

 

[the8thark]

But I was talking about video games and not D&D? :?

Both are games. Both can be RPGs. Just one is dice and paper and the other is on a TV screen. The only difference is their display output. The core mechanics are exactly the same. And what makes them RPGs or not RPGs are exactly the same. (and it's not the numbers).

Now, if you can tell me that there is another term out there for the genre of Number-based video games

That is called all video games. All video games have numbers at their core. Sometimes the numbers are shown to the player and other times they are not. Even Mario has numbers at it's core. How many hits a boss takes to die, now many hits Mario takes to die, his point or star counts. etc etc all numbers.

You are trying to make up a new genre of video games that are "all games where some of the core numbers (life, XP, damage, etc etc) are shown to the player directly as different numerical values". And that's cool, under whatever definition you want to call this you are correct. It's nothing to do with the definition of an RPG though as RPGs are defined based on the game elements and role playing elements. If the numbers are directly shown to the player or not does not factor into ant definition of a RPG.

 

[Salem]

That is called all video games. All video games have numbers at their core. Sometimes the numbers are shown to the player and other times they are not. Even Mario has numbers at it's core. How many hits a boss takes to die, now many hits Mario takes to die, his point or star counts. etc etc all numbers.

You are trying to make up a new genre of video games that are "all games where some of the core numbers (life, XP, damage, etc etc) are shown to the player directly as different numerical values". And that's cool, under whatever definition you want to call this you are correct. It's nothing to do with the definition of an RPG though as RPGs are defined based on the game elements and role playing elements. If the numbers are directly shown to the player or not does not factor into ant definition of a RPG.

The difference between RPGs and non-RPG video games, is that you can level grind to improve your characters, the more monsters you kill, the more your level increases, stats increases. This to me what makes the difference between RPGs and non-RPGs, this is probably what Akuhime-sama was talking about.

 

[the8thark]

The difference between RPGs and non-RPG video games, is that you can level grind to improve your characters, the more monsters you kill, the more your level increases, stats increases. This to me what makes the difference between RPGs and non-RPGs, this is probably what Akuhime-sama was talking about.

I am aware this is what you both are talking about. And it's the point we both agree to disagree on. That's cool though we all have our different opinions on the subject.

 

[Akuhime-sama]

I guess you and I disagree then on this basic fundamental level.
You feel an RPG is all about "Levels up, gains EXP, has Number-based health count, and has stats" to quote you.
I feel it's about the 3 points I listed earlier in this topic. Ie the game has the role playing element to it. If the game has XP or not in the traditional sense does not matter.

It seems we differ on our opinions here rather strongly. And over the course of this topic we are not coming any closer to an agreement. We both can claim our opinions to be fact if we wanted to but I think that would be foolish. We just have different opinions on this. Time for us both to accept this fact I think.

And as a footnote, Zelda games do have attack, defense stats etc etc. They are just not shown to the players as numbers. We all know how strong each sword is in each Zelda game and how well each armour protects us. We can even work out how many hits bosses take to die with each sword as an example using the numbers. The numbers are there for most RPGs. Whether they are directly shown to the player or hidden (as is the case in most Zelda games) doesn't matter, the numbers still exist. These numbers do or don't qualify a game as an RPG though. Depends on your opinion of the RPG definition. A definition we both disagree on.

Well, as we agreed, There needs to be two distinct terms, and I'm only using what I know has been used by others.
And I did not know Zelda games had that- well, they don't have leveling up at least.
I'm just looking at it from how the game is shown- since I know not what is behind damage count.

Though, I don't know if I would call it one since it's quite different from what I'm thinking about.