77 replies to this topic

[Cloud Windfoot Omega]

Technically, every game can be considered a form of RPG. since you take on a role... play it and its a game.

[Hitomi]

you don't know what your talking about, first of all RPGs date all the way back to 1975. yeah they were board games but they went by the very premis that they were ROLE PLAYING GAMES, MEANING you as the player had an actual role in the story. in RPGs you make CHOICES that change and shape how NPCs react to you and certain parts of the story. when you take that element away, it is NOT a ROLE PLAYING GAME. JRPGs lack the very thing that's makes RPGs ROLE PLAYING GAMES. in JRPGs you don't make choices, you don't live that character, you did not create that character. the story and character are predefines. Mass effect is an RPG, the fact that its also a shooter is irrelevant because it contains what makes rpgs rpgs, and that's the ROLE PLAYING. JRPGsd have NONE of that. stats and a lving system doesn not make an RPG.

 

watch this video, this guy actually knows what he's talking about. he is taking passages from a published book on Role playing games

 

 

 

also Bioware developer says JRPGs are not really rpgs

 

http://www.strategyi...-13-isnt-an-rpg

Yes i know what im talking abouti..i don't need to watch anything, and again i was talking about the video games not the board games...

 

and i don't care what Bioware said about jrpgs cuz it's wrong

Technically, every game can be considered a form of RPG. since you take on a role... play it and its a game.

yes that's right but some devs/ppl call fps games rpgs which is wrong, they could call them fps/rpg but Not rpg alone cuz they are shooters

Edited by Hitomi, 02 July 2013 - 12:51 AM.

[Cloud Windfoot Omega]

Yes i know what im talking abouti..i don't need to watch anything, and again i was talking about the video games not the board games...

 

and i don't care what Bioware said about jrpgs cuz it's wrong

yes that's right but some devs/ppl call fps games rpgs which is wrong, they could call them fps/rpg but Not rpg alone cuz they are shooters

Classification changes, if the majority  of industry experts say that something is. It is.

[Hitomi]

Classification changes, if the majority  of industry experts say that something is. It is.

but it's wrong though

[Cloud Windfoot Omega]

but it's wrong though

It has changed, making you wrong.

[TheUltimateWaddleDee]

but it's wrong though

Technically he's correct; RPGs on computers started back in the 70s, which were usually adaptions or inspired by games such as Dungeons and Dragons. However, RPGs would never have gotten where they are today without games like Final Fantasy amd Dragon Quest.

[intheworldofnim]

Technically, every game can be considered a form of RPG. since you take on a role... play it and its a game.

 

then the genre RPG should include every game that's not a puzzle.

 

seriously tho just because you have control over a characters movements does not mean you are role playing with that character. YOU as a character actually has no control over how the story plays out, its all linear story progression. All you are doing is moving character from point a to point b, you are NOT that character, that character is already predefined in the story. you have no control over that character cut scenes because they are already their for you. the only control you have is that character movements, that is NOT playing a role in a story. story wise its comparable to flipping a page in a book. Role playing games are suppose to be about creating a character and making choices for that character that effects the story and how NPCs respond to you

but it's wrong though

 

you sound like a stubborn child who doesn't want to admit his childhood beliefs are not actually real.

Squaresoft and Enix made the RPG big on consoles with Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest. Those two companies were the reason RPGs are what they are today.

 

those two companies are the reason everyone now wrongfully assumes RPGs are games with stats and a level system when traditionally speaking, those were only secondary mechanics, not actually what made RPGs ROLE PLAYING GAMES. technically, JRPGs are not really rpgs but that's what everyone has gotten used to calling them thanks to squaresoft getting loose with the rpg mechanics.

Edited by intheworldofnim, 02 July 2013 - 11:03 AM.

[TheUltimateWaddleDee]

then the genre RPG should include every game that's not a puzzle.

seriously tho just because you have control over a characters movements does not mean you are role playing with that character. YOU as a character actually has no control over how the story plays out, its all linear story progression. All you are doing is moving character from point a to point b, you are NOT that character, that character is already predefined in the story. you have no control over that character cut scenes because they are already their for you. the only control you have is that character movements, that is NOT playing a role in a story. story wise its comparable to flipping a page in a book. Role playing games are suppose to be about creating a character and making choices for that character that effects the story and how NPCs respond to you



you sound like a stubborn child who doesn't want to admit his childhood beliefs are not actually real.



those two companies are the reason everyone now wrongfully assumes RPGs are games with stats and a level system when traditionally speaking, those were only secondary mechanics, not actually what made RPGs ROLE PLAYING GAMES. technically, JRPGs are not really rpgs but that's what everyone has gotten used to calling them thanks to squaresoft getting loose with the rpg mechanics.

If those were the games that made people think thIs, then that is also a change in classification.

[Hitomi]

Technically he's correct; RPGs on computers started back in the 70s, which were usually adaptions or inspired by games such as Dungeons and Dragons. However, RPGs would never have gotten where they are today without games like Final Fantasy amd Dragon Quest.

Im talking about consoles not computers

It has changed, making you wrong.

no im not wrong, what ppl call things nowdays is wrong.

then the genre RPG should include every game that's not a puzzle.

 

seriously tho just because you have control over a characters movements does not mean you are role playing with that character. YOU as a character actually has no control over how the story plays out, its all linear story progression. All you are doing is moving character from point a to point b, you are NOT that character, that character is already predefined in the story. you have no control over that character cut scenes because they are already their for you. the only control you have is that character movements, that is NOT playing a role in a story. story wise its comparable to flipping a page in a book. Role playing games are suppose to be about creating a character and making choices for that character that effects the story and how NPCs respond to you

 

you sound like a stubborn child who doesn't want to admit his childhood beliefs are not actually real.

 

those two companies are the reason everyone now wrongfully assumes RPGs are games with stats and a level system when traditionally speaking, those were only secondary mechanics, not actually what made RPGs ROLE PLAYING GAMES. technically, JRPGs are not really rpgs but that's what everyone has gotten used to calling them thanks to squaresoft getting loose with the rpg mechanics.

Have some respect will u...

Edited by Hitomi, 02 July 2013 - 03:29 PM.

[Ghost]

if the first RPG was made on a computer in 1970's by an American group that means RPG's started in the west. You have to bring proof that the japanese made it before the early 1970's. The japanese are clearly better in story wise but freedom in general Western RPGs can't be beaten.  

[BanjoKazooie]

Yes it is.

People could deny it all they want, but Retro and Rare are very similar.

how so? Rare made countless amazing top selling games with fun quirky characters and amazing stories. Retro has made 3 primes that couldn't live up to the originals, and DKCR which also didn't live up to the originals WHICH WERE MADE BY RARE! Retro has a far way to go to prove their talent, they haven't even made a new IP yet! Rare had Banjo, killer instinct, conker, battletoads, and they made donkey kings and 007s as well! Retro has nothing in common with Rare other than the DKC series, which they just followed the footwork left by Rare, while adding little worthwhile to the game other than their stupid Tiki enemies. KREMLINs FTW!

Edited by BelieberDirectioner, 02 July 2013 - 03:34 PM.

[Cloud Windfoot Omega]

its so sad that  some people cannot handle classification changes.

[Zinix]

how so? Rare made countless amazing top selling games with fun quirky characters and amazing stories. Retro has made 3 primes that couldn't live up to the originals, and DKCR which also didn't live up to the originals WHICH WERE MADE BY RARE! Retro has a far way to go to prove their talent, they haven't even made a new IP yet! Rare had Banjo, killer instinct, conker, battletoads, and they made donkey kings and 007s as well! Retro has nothing in common with Rare other than the DKC series, which they just followed the footwork left by Rare, while adding little worthwhile to the game other than their stupid Tiki enemies. KREMLINs FTW!

Are you serious? 3 games that couldn't live up to the originals? Retro innovated Metroid, they changed it from a 2.D side-scroller  to a different genre, FPS. It was a breathe of fresh air and each game was more challenging than the last. To say that Retro's vision didn't live up to the original games is extremely foolish. If you want to say a Metroid game couldn't live up to the originals,look no further than Metroid Other M. Which is exactly the same genre as the the originals, 2.D!. Each and everyone of Retro's games has been a success financially, there's no denying this. Now, this is just ridiculous at this point. I'm laughing at how you're saying that DKCR couldn't live up to the originals, it practically was  as good as the original Donkey Kong Country game except it lacked Kremlings (legal issues) and some animal buddies. It also possessed the same difficulty as the original games as well. 

 

Retro has proven they are if not as talented as Rare. Just because they aren't pushing out a game every year like Rare did (which is impossible due the budget for video games being significantly higher than the SNES/64 days), doesn't mean that Retro haven't achieved the same success as Rare. Retro has released four critically acclaimed games, and it's soon to be 5.  Retro and RARE has many similarities, it's just simply bewildering how people can't see these. Nintendo wanted both RARE and Retro to help the Donkey Kong series. Nintendo gave both Retro and Rare the ability to work on whatever they wanted to. Check. Both studios achieved success within little time? Check. These two companies are EXACT. there's no denying it. Retro is the modern day Rare. There isn't denying it, it's simply unassailable..

 

EDIT:

 

The sales of all of Retro's games:

http://www.vgchartz....ountry-returns/ 5.98 million units   

 

http://www.vgchartz..../metroid-prime/ 2.82 million units

 

http://www.vgchartz....prime-2-echoes/ 1.33 million units

 

http://www.vgchartz....e-3-corruption/ 1.65 million units

 

All of their games on Nintendo consoles have sold over the 1 million mark! Financially impressive.  It's just futile at the moment to argue against fact and statistics 

Edited by Zinix, 02 July 2013 - 04:56 PM.

[Hank Hill]

Seeing as this thread is getting hostile rather quickly from multiple sources, I'm going to give everybody a chance to cool down.

 

If the hostilities continue, I'll be forced to lock the thread. I'm sure you people can hold good conversations without being at each other's throats.

 

At least I really, really hope you can...

[BanjoKazooie]

Are you serious? 3 games that couldn't live up to the originals? Retro innovated Metroid, they changed it from a 2.D side-scroller  to a different genre, FPS. It was a breathe of fresh air and each game was more challenging than the last. To say that Retro's vision didn't live up to the original games is extremely foolish. If you want to say a Metroid game couldn't live up to the originals,look no further than Metroid Other M. Which is exactly the same genre as the the originals, 2.D!. Each and everyone of Retro's games has been a success financially, there's no denying this. Now, this is just ridiculous at this point. I'm laughing at how you're saying that DKCR couldn't live up to the originals, it practically was  as good as the original Donkey Kong Country game except it lacked Kremlings (legal issues) and some animal buddies. It also possessed the same difficulty as the original games as well. 
 
Retro has proven they are if not as talented as Rare. Just because they aren't pushing out a game every year like Rare did (which is impossible due the budget for video games being significantly higher than the SNES/64 days), doesn't mean that Retro haven't achieved the same success as Rare. Retro has released four critically acclaimed games, and it's soon to be 5.  Retro and RARE has many similarities, it's just simply bewildering how people can't see these. Nintendo wanted both RARE and Retro to help the Donkey Kong series. Nintendo gave both Retro and Rare the ability to work on whatever they wanted to. Check. Both studios achieved success within little time? Check. These two companies are EXACT. there's no denying it. Retro is the modern day Rare. There isn't denying it, it's simply unassailable..
 
EDIT:
 
The sales of all of Retro's games:
http://www.vgchartz....ountry-returns/ 5.98 million units   
 
http://www.vgchartz..../metroid-prime/ 2.82 million units
 
http://www.vgchartz....prime-2-echoes/ 1.33 million units
 
http://www.vgchartz....e-3-corruption/ 1.65 million units
 
All of their games on Nintendo consoles have sold over the 1 million mark! Financially impressive.  It's just futile at the moment to argue against fact and statistics

When Retro makes their own IP that is amazing I will believe they are the new Rare, but until then, Rare will always be far superior in my heart. And I prefer other M over the primes, and although I enjoyed returns it was mainly because it brought back nastalgia from the original games made by Rare. Rare>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Retro.
That is the last I have to say of this. Peace.

[intheworldofnim]

If those were the games that made people think thIs, then that is also a change in classification.

its a misnomer

[quoteIm talking about consoles not computers[/quote]

where talking about RPGs in GENERAL, not what system they are on. the system is completely irrelevant to this discussion.

 

 

no im not wrong, what ppl call things nowdays is wrong.

and you are one of those people

Have some respect will u...

 

you are being completely unreasonable

Edited by intheworldofnim, 06 July 2013 - 05:05 PM.

[TheUltimateWaddleDee]

its a misnomer

To be honest I stopped caring about this argument right after I posted that; I was in one with what classifies a game as an RPG earlier, and this argument went completely off topic, thus me thinking it was going to get locked.

[Xiombarg]

*bunch of quotes*

 

Is it really necessary to kill a topic?