It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
As Stealth seems to be a bit neglected... ^^

Stealth: 2012-forward, with the launch of the Dishonored series. Of course there were previous awesome titles in the genre, but here we had a masterfully-done ability to choose between multiple paths and skills, rewarding you with different outcomes depending on how stealthy you managed to be.
avatar
dtgreene: As for what I started with:

* JRPG: The original Dragon Quest, or rather Dragon Warrior as it was called in the US. What's interesting is that, as I mentioned earlier, this game came before JRPG was firmly established as a genre, and as a result has many aspects that are not characteristic of the genre. (This is assuming that, like me, you don't put the Zelda series into this genre; if you did, then it would technically be Zelda 2, but as I said I don't regard that game as an RPG.)

* WRPG: I think the first one I really played was the NES port of Ultima 4. On the other hand, I did also play Bard's Tale 3 on an Apple 2gs (though arguably that game would fit into the first-person dungeon-crawler RPG genre that's been mentioned).
Nice. Yeah I don't think JRPG really was its own thing until Phantasy Star or so and then FF3 or FF4 for its series, though I haven't played DQ4-5 yet. Earlier ones seem more streamlined than PC RPGs but not that different structurally or story-wise.

Zelda 2 is a hybrid between JRPG and Platformer or early Metroidvania/Platform Adventure to me. It has a similar level of linearity to JRPGs and the lack of story/dialogue interaction, but pretty much no character development.

---

My maze action pick: 1990-1993 (Smash TV-Goof Troop)

My MP FPS pick: 1997-2001 (Quake 2-Tribes 2)

My misc. Action pick: 1989-1996 (Mendel Palace-Saturn Bomberman)

My 2D Platform Adventure/MV picks: 1989-2002 (WB3-Metroid Fusion) and 2013-2018 (Guacamelee-Monster Boy)

My sports pick: 1990-1995 (Slap Shot (SMS)-ISS DX and NHL '96)

My matching puzzle pick: 1993-2001 (Columns 3-Bejeweled)
Post edited July 26, 2020 by ResidentLeever
avatar
dtgreene: As for what I started with:

* JRPG: The original Dragon Quest, or rather Dragon Warrior as it was called in the US. What's interesting is that, as I mentioned earlier, this game came before JRPG was firmly established as a genre, and as a result has many aspects that are not characteristic of the genre. (This is assuming that, like me, you don't put the Zelda series into this genre; if you did, then it would technically be Zelda 2, but as I said I don't regard that game as an RPG.)

* WRPG: I think the first one I really played was the NES port of Ultima 4. On the other hand, I did also play Bard's Tale 3 on an Apple 2gs (though arguably that game would fit into the first-person dungeon-crawler RPG genre that's been mentioned).
avatar
ResidentLeever: Nice. Yeah I don't think JRPG really was its own thing until Phantasy Star or so and then FF3 or FF4 for its series, though I haven't played DQ4-5 yet. Earlier ones seem more streamlined than PC RPGs but not that different structurally or story-wise.

Zelda 2 is a hybrid between JRPG and Platformer or early Metroidvania/Platform Adventure to me. It has a similar level of linearity to JRPGs and the lack of story/dialogue interaction, but pretty much no character development.
I don't really consider Zelda 2 any sort of RPG at all. It may have an overhead view overworld map, towns, and experience points, but those are the only RPG elements I see, and none of them are what I would consider genre defining elements.

Consider also Gargoyle's Quest; that game also has a world map (with random encounters) and towns, albeit no experience points, and that game generally isn't considered an RPG. Or, for that matter, StarTropics, which is similar, but without the random encounters and with dungeons being in a Zelda 1 like perspective (unlike the side scrolling action of the other games mentioned).

With respect to Phantasy Star, the first game is still rather atypical of the genre. I note that we have:
* Game opens up and becomes non-linear after a certain point.
* Dungeons are dark, like in Dragon Quest and WRPGs like the Ultima series.
* Dungeons are first-person, which really screams "Ultima" to me. (This is the reason I wonder why the Sega Master System of Ultima 4 doesn't have first person dungeons the way all other versions of that game, including the NES one (which is a bit more JRPG-like in other ways), do.)

In fact, I would argue that the Phantasy Star series didn't really start feeling like JRPGs until the 4th game in the series, or maybe the 3rd.

avatar
ResidentLeever: My 2D Platform Adventure/MV picks: 1989-2002 (WB3-Metroid Fusion) and 2013-2018 (Guacamelee-Monster Boy)
That first range you posted includes an era where the genre was basically extinct. The PSX and N64 aren't really known for games of this type (I can think of one notable example on the PSX, but that's it), and the Sega Saturn wasn't popular during this generation. In any case, everyone in the industry wanted to go 3D, and that led to the near-extinction of the genre until the GBA appeared.

Hence, I'd argue that the first range you gave isn't really a continuous period as far as this particular genre is concerned.


First person dungeon crawling RPGs are another genre that disappeared, at least from the US, for quite a while. The early games in the genre morphed into what would evolve into the modern WRPG; by the time you reach games like Dragon Wars and the early Might and Magic games, the classification arguably no longer applies. Then you see Dungeon Master and its clones taking over for a while, and after that the genre doesn't have any close relatives in games released outside of Japan; Japan still got some Wizardry spin-offs during this time, however.

It's not until Etrian Odyssey, on the Nintendo DS, that the genre had any representation in the west at all, after it had died out. Hence again, this genre could be considered to be one that died for a while, and I would say it was dead longer than 2D platformers were.
Post edited July 26, 2020 by dtgreene
avatar
ResidentLeever: Nice. Yeah I don't think JRPG really was its own thing until Phantasy Star or so and then FF3 or FF4 for its series, though I haven't played DQ4-5 yet. Earlier ones seem more streamlined than PC RPGs but not that different structurally or story-wise.

Zelda 2 is a hybrid between JRPG and Platformer or early Metroidvania/Platform Adventure to me. It has a similar level of linearity to JRPGs and the lack of story/dialogue interaction, but pretty much no character development.
avatar
dtgreene: I don't really consider Zelda 2 any sort of RPG at all. It may have an overhead view overworld map, towns, and experience points, but those are the only RPG elements I see, and none of them are what I would consider genre defining elements.

Consider also Gargoyle's Quest; that game also has a world map (with random encounters) and towns, albeit no experience points, and that game generally isn't considered an RPG. Or, for that matter, StarTropics, which is similar, but without the random encounters and with dungeons being in a Zelda 1 like perspective (unlike the side scrolling action of the other games mentioned).

With respect to Phantasy Star, the first game is still rather atypical of the genre. I note that we have:
* Game opens up and becomes non-linear after a certain point.
* Dungeons are dark, like in Dragon Quest and WRPGs like the Ultima series.
* Dungeons are first-person, which really screams "Ultima" to me. (This is the reason I wonder why the Sega Master System of Ultima 4 doesn't have first person dungeons the way all other versions of that game, including the NES one (which is a bit more JRPG-like in other ways), do.)

In fact, I would argue that the Phantasy Star series didn't really start feeling like JRPGs until the 4th game in the series, or maybe the 3rd.

avatar
ResidentLeever: My 2D Platform Adventure/MV picks: 1989-2002 (WB3-Metroid Fusion) and 2013-2018 (Guacamelee-Monster Boy)
avatar
dtgreene: That first range you posted includes an era where the genre was basically extinct. The PSX and N64 aren't really known for games of this type (I can think of one notable example on the PSX, but that's it), and the Sega Saturn wasn't popular during this generation. In any case, everyone in the industry wanted to go 3D, and that led to the near-extinction of the genre until the GBA appeared.

Hence, I'd argue that the first range you gave isn't really a continuous period as far as this particular genre is concerned.
It is a common RPG trope of the time to have a separate overworld and separate encounters in terms of the game engine. I'd definitely call Zelda 2 an ARPG.

Those aspects of Gargoyle's Quest still clearly draw from RPGs but it's considered Action Adventure. However there's generally a lot of overlap between the old school Action Adventures and ARPGs, and between RPG and Adventure too. In AA you tend to get upgrades via found items or more specific rewards (and/or buying them) instead of being able to grind, but then again the exploring for things like heart pieces in Zelda is basically an equivalent to grinding.

"* Game opens up and becomes non-linear after a certain point."
I've always seen this as a major trope in JRPGs, so why don't you think so? Earlier FFs and DQ are different in that they open up sooner but have difficulty gating rather than key item or story gates, and that seems more in line with WRPGs.

Sorry but I don't understand what you mean by dungeons being dark here.

First person or third person is more of an aesthetical difference I think, though it does make them more claustrophobic and in combination with the repetitive tiles, hard to navigate.

Regarding MVs:
Extinct isn't the right word since the term didn't exist "officially" until around 2003 to describe the portable Castlevanias. But it is basically synonymous with Platform Adventure nowadays, which existed from around 1986 onwards but didn't catch on like MV did.

I've documented this genre thoroughly on a site of mine and it arguably begins long before Super Metroid, back in 1984-1985 with Below the Root, Brain Breaker and Hero of the Golden Talisman. Then Metroid 1 introduces more non-linearity, multi-purpose tools and solidifies the genre definition besides the lack of experience point leveling and NPCs, which other pre-SotN games had long before it and which are generally considered optional nowadays anyway.

I also don't consider 2D a requirement of the genre anymore, having played games like The Divide, Exhumed, System Shock and Metroid Prime. Certain early and late 90s years are like droughts within the genre's history though, unless you include Zelda-like ones (meaning ones with an overworld and dungeons split instead of one big maze) and basically linear ones, but since there are basically linear MV games and ones with dungeons (such as Guacamelee or Ori 1) I don't tend to exclude them from the genre.

The site: https://platformadventure.weebly.com/
Post edited July 26, 2020 by ResidentLeever
avatar
ResidentLeever: It is a common RPG trope of the time to have a separate overworld and separate encounters in terms of the game engine. I'd definitely call Zelda 2 an ARPG.

Those aspects of Gargoyle's Quest still clearly draw from RPGs but it's considered Action Adventure. However there's generally a lot of overlap between the old school Action Adventures and ARPGs, and between RPG and Adventure too. In AA you tend to get upgrades via found items or more specific rewards (and/or buying them) instead of being able to grind, but then again the exploring for things like heart pieces in Zelda is basically an equivalent to grinding.
Thing is, I don't see that as being enough to separate the genres, and I would struggle to classify Zelda 2 and Gargoyle's Quest into separate genres. Either both are some form of RPG, or neither is. (I opt for the latter so that the term RPG is actually meaningful.)

Also, separate overworld and separate encounters is found in Gargoyle's Quest, hence you can't use that aspect to distinguish the games genre-wise. (I note that Gargoyle's Quest has overhead-view towns, which is perhaps more RPG-ish than the side-scrolling towns of Zelda 2.)

avatar
ResidentLeever: Sorry but I don't understand what you mean by dungeons being dark here.
Simple: When you enter a dungeon, you can't see anything at all; the screen is pitch black. In order to see anything, you need a light source, like a torch or light spell.

This is a mechanic you see in many early WRPGs, including Ultima and Bard's Tale (but not in Wizardry except in dark areas where light spells don't work anyway), but isn't generally seen in JRPGs. No Dragon Quest game other than the first uses this mechanic, and it isn't seen at all in the Final Fantasy series.

(By the way, Final Fantasy 1 and 3 use a magic system similar to classic Wizardry, where you have a certain number of casts of each spell level. Final Fantasy 1, interestingly, also has spells the resemble the Power Word spells from Dungeons & Dragons; if the target has 300 HP or less, the spell always works if the target isn't immune, but a target with 301 or more HP is never affected.)


Anyway, because I feel like it, some non-answers for genres I actively avoid:

* Fighting game: The period before Street Fighter 2.
* FIrst person shooter: The period before Wolfenstein 3D.

(Can you name any games that would fit these genres that were released during these periods?)

(I can't put MMOs here because the MUDs of the early games could be considered to be early examples of this.)
Post edited July 26, 2020 by dtgreene
avatar
ResidentLeever: It is a common RPG trope of the time to have a separate overworld and separate encounters in terms of the game engine. I'd definitely call Zelda 2 an ARPG.

Those aspects of Gargoyle's Quest still clearly draw from RPGs but it's considered Action Adventure. However there's generally a lot of overlap between the old school Action Adventures and ARPGs, and between RPG and Adventure too. In AA you tend to get upgrades via found items or more specific rewards (and/or buying them) instead of being able to grind, but then again the exploring for things like heart pieces in Zelda is basically an equivalent to grinding.
avatar
dtgreene: Thing is, I don't see that as being enough to separate the genres, and I would struggle to classify Zelda 2 and Gargoyle's Quest into separate genres. Either both are some form of RPG, or neither is. (I opt for the latter so that the term RPG is actually meaningful.)

Also, separate overworld and separate encounters is found in Gargoyle's Quest, hence you can't use that aspect to distinguish the games genre-wise. (I note that Gargoyle's Quest has overhead-view towns, which is perhaps more RPG-ish than the side-scrolling towns of Zelda 2.)
Yeah I would use exp point leveling here, just saying that those things come from RPGs too. Personally I think interactive dialogue with meaningful choices is a more important requirement (I also like char creation and manual stat/skill point distribution with a variety of stats and skills) but this is what people generally agree on and I can accept it for Action RPGs and JRPGs.

"having to light up dungeons"
Oh I see. Well, but this is a pretty common mechanic in related genres so I never thought of it as an RPG mechanic specifically. I would say it goes under the umbrella of using tools to traverse and/or explore a world, which tends to be a part of all RPGs for sure but also related genres. Perhaps it's more common in action adventure and MV games when it comes to tools that aren't just used like keys, I haven't looked at the numbers on that but RPGs tend to not focus as much on complex real-time character movement besides the branch of WRPGs that I think started with Ultima Underworld. IIRC, Gothic also has some skills or spells like that, I need to play more such games.

The different spell stock system style is a decent point, sure. But this also seems like only a detail compared to structure and story/dialogue interactivity differences.

Early Fighting games: International Karate and IK+ for example, that's one of the few good ones I think.

Early FPS: I haven't really played any of them besides faceball/midi maze, but there are games like Cybercon 3 and Midwinter 1-2.
Post edited July 26, 2020 by ResidentLeever
avatar
dtgreene: Thing is, I don't see that as being enough to separate the genres, and I would struggle to classify Zelda 2 and Gargoyle's Quest into separate genres. Either both are some form of RPG, or neither is. (I opt for the latter so that the term RPG is actually meaningful.)

Also, separate overworld and separate encounters is found in Gargoyle's Quest, hence you can't use that aspect to distinguish the games genre-wise. (I note that Gargoyle's Quest has overhead-view towns, which is perhaps more RPG-ish than the side-scrolling towns of Zelda 2.)
avatar
ResidentLeever: Yeah I would use exp point leveling here, just saying that those things come from RPGs too. Personally I think interactive dialogue with meaningful choices is a more important requirement (I also like char creation and manual stat/skill point distribution with a variety of stats and skills) but this is what people generally agree on and I can accept it for Action RPGs and JRPGs.
But then there are games that are generally considered RPGs, but don't have experience points. See, for example, most SaGa games. Or we could look at games like Ultima 1 and 2, which have experience points, but they don't really do much; in particular, more XP doesn't make you strnger.

Also, interactive dialog feels more of a visual novel mechanic than an RPG one. (As a side note, interactive dialog is all that's needed to separate a visual novel from a kinetic novel, in which there's no gameplay at all (kinetic novels are entirely cutscene).)

For me, the definition of RPG that I'm currently going with (at least in the CRPG context, not the TTRPG one) is that the primary factor (perhaps even the only one) in determining the success of an action is the character's skill, not the player's. In particular, this means that accuracy and evasion need to be deterministic or dice roll based, not based off collision detection or timing.

If you took your favorite RPG and got rid of XP based leveling (but left the game otherwise the same, aside from the resulting necessary rebalancing), would it still be an RPG?

avatar
ResidentLeever: "having to light up dungeons"
Oh I see. Well, but this is a pretty common mechanic in related genres so I never thought of it as an RPG mechanic specifically. I would say it goes under the umbrella of using tools to traverse and/or explore a world, which tends to be a part of all RPGs for sure but also related genres. Perhaps it's more common in action adventure and MV games when it comes to tools that aren't just used like keys, I haven't looked at the numbers on that but RPGs tend to not focus as much on complex real-time character movement besides the branch of WRPGs that I think started with Ultima Underworld. IIRC, Gothic also has some skills or spells like that, I need to play more such games.
The important thing here is that dark dungeons is a mechanic that is far more common in WRPGs than JRPGs; hence seeing it in an early JRPG is a sign that the JRPG genre hasn't firmly established itself at that point.
Post edited July 26, 2020 by dtgreene
avatar
ResidentLeever: The different spell stock system style is a decent point, sure. But this also seems like only a detail compared to structure and story/dialogue interactivity differences.
The thing is, structure, to me, isn't usually a genre-defining aspect.

Story really isn't a genre-defining aspect unless we're separating visual/kinetic novels from their story-less counterparts (whatever they would be). Even then, I would say it might be hard mechanics (or the lack thereof) that separate such games from games like Progress Quest, which is a 0-player game that apparently has a story.

By the way, one interesting era in 2D platformers is the one starting in 2007, with the release of Syobon Action, and continuing into 2010, with the release of Super Meat Boy. These two games present interesting takes on the genre, with Syobon Action being a troll game (reasonable actions cause you to die in funny ways) and Super Meat Boy being a precision platformer. I can also mention the rom hack Kaizo Mario World, released in 2007, which combines both precision platforming and trolls.
avatar
ResidentLeever: Yeah I would use exp point leveling here, just saying that those things come from RPGs too. Personally I think interactive dialogue with meaningful choices is a more important requirement (I also like char creation and manual stat/skill point distribution with a variety of stats and skills) but this is what people generally agree on and I can accept it for Action RPGs and JRPGs.
avatar
dtgreene: But then there are games that are generally considered RPGs, but don't have experience points. See, for example, most SaGa games. Or we could look at games like Ultima 1 and 2, which have experience points, but they don't really do much; in particular, more XP doesn't make you strnger.

Also, interactive dialog feels more of a visual novel mechanic than an RPG one. (As a side note, interactive dialog is all that's needed to separate a visual novel from a kinetic novel, in which there's no gameplay at all (kinetic novels are entirely cutscene).)

For me, the definition of RPG that I'm currently going with (at least in the CRPG context, not the TTRPG one) is that the primary factor (perhaps even the only one) in determining the success of an action is the character's skill, not the player's. In particular, this means that accuracy and evasion need to be deterministic or dice roll based, not based off collision detection or timing.

If you took your favorite RPG and got rid of XP based leveling (but left the game otherwise the same, aside from the resulting necessary rebalancing), would it still be an RPG?

avatar
ResidentLeever: "having to light up dungeons"
Oh I see. Well, but this is a pretty common mechanic in related genres so I never thought of it as an RPG mechanic specifically. I would say it goes under the umbrella of using tools to traverse and/or explore a world, which tends to be a part of all RPGs for sure but also related genres. Perhaps it's more common in action adventure and MV games when it comes to tools that aren't just used like keys, I haven't looked at the numbers on that but RPGs tend to not focus as much on complex real-time character movement besides the branch of WRPGs that I think started with Ultima Underworld. IIRC, Gothic also has some skills or spells like that, I need to play more such games.
avatar
dtgreene: The important thing here is that dark dungeons is a mechanic that is far more common in WRPGs than JRPGs; hence seeing it in an early JRPG is a sign that the JRPG genre hasn't firmly established itself at that point.
SaGa has a use-based system which is a variation on exp points, and you're talking about exceptions now.

I disagree, it's a fundamental part of roleplaying to me but as I said I can accept that JRPGs do their own thing.

I don't agree that stats over skill are what defines RPGs either but evade and hit rolls are a part of non-ARPGs (and various ARPGs), sure. It has nothing to do with roleplaying after all, but rather if a game is "abstracted" and tactical or not.

Regarding your question I think it depends on the game, but as I said I see use-based leveling as an equivalent.

"dark dungeons"
That's pretty arbitrary since JRPGs still used a bunch of other elements from WRPGs when they evolved into more of their own thing by removing character creation, interactive dialogue and open worlds. It's like saying that if they still had hobbits they would be WRPGs but not when they still have elves and orcs.

Story is definitely an important part of RPGs too, it just isn't unique to them and has become less so over the years as action genres have incorporated more RPG and Adventure elements (and copied movies). It's the combination of various elements rather than any one thing that makes an RPG.


avatar
ResidentLeever: The different spell stock system style is a decent point, sure. But this also seems like only a detail compared to structure and story/dialogue interactivity differences.
avatar
dtgreene: The thing is, structure, to me, isn't usually a genre-defining aspect.

Story really isn't a genre-defining aspect unless we're separating visual/kinetic novels from their story-less counterparts (whatever they would be). Even then, I would say it might be hard mechanics (or the lack thereof) that separate such games from games like Progress Quest, which is a 0-player game that apparently has a story.

By the way, one interesting era in 2D platformers is the one starting in 2007, with the release of Syobon Action, and continuing into 2010, with the release of Super Meat Boy. These two games present interesting takes on the genre, with Syobon Action being a troll game (reasonable actions cause you to die in funny ways) and Super Meat Boy being a precision platformer. I can also mention the rom hack Kaizo Mario World, released in 2007, which combines both precision platforming and trolls.
While there were some troll games before that like Takeshi's Challenge (and other poorly designed games, intentional or not) I'd agree that it's more of a defned subgenre from that point onward, yeah.

Precision platformers have always been around I think - SMB was more unique for its "avoid the enemies" gameplay and short, hard levels.
Post edited July 26, 2020 by ResidentLeever
avatar
ResidentLeever: SaGa has a use-based system which is a variation on exp points, and you're talking about exceptions now.
Actually, not entirely true.

SaGa 1, in particular, doesn't use any sort of use based character growth at all. In particular:
* Humans gain stats by using buyable consumables.
* Espers (Mutants) gain stats based off what the RNG decides after each battle. (Note that the RNG is quite poor in this game; it gives you the same results after each battle.)
* Monsters change form when eating meat, and when doing so the monster gains entirely new stats and abilities.

I also note that, in SaGa 2 and SaGa Frontier, Robots and Monsters still have growth systems that do not depend on actions performed.

These growth systems really don't feel like variations on experience points to me.

avatar
ResidentLeever: "dark dungeons"
That's pretty arbitrary since JRPGs still used a bunch of other elements from WRPGs when they evolved into more of their own thing by removing character creation, interactive dialogue and open worlds. It's like saying that if they still had hobbits they would be WRPGs but not when they still have elves and orcs.
Yes, it is one characteristic I use that puts Dragon Quest 1 more in line with WRPGs, but there's also the open world, as I mentioned.

Final Fantasy 2 has some semblance of interactive dialog, in that you learn keywords and can use them in conversations with some NPCs. (With that said, the game underuses this particular mechanic.)

Dragon Quest 3 has character creation, and that mechanic would return again in Dragon Quest 9.

Final Fantasy 1 and 4 both have elves in some form (more in 1 than 4), and dwarves are present in 1, 3, 4, and 5.

In any case, seeing what is usually a WRPG element in a JRPG is a sign of WRPG influence; either the game was released before JRPGs fully established their conventions, or the game has some WRPG influence that came later (though DQ9's character creation may have come from MMORPGs, which are a separate genre with their own convention).

avatar
ResidentLeever: Story is definitely an important part of RPGs too, it just isn't unique to them and has become less so over the years as action genres have incorporated more RPG and Adventure elements (and copied movies). It's the combination of various elements rather than any one thing that makes an RPG.
The thing is:
* Story isn't necessary for a game to be an RPG; look at early RPGs which didn't have much story at all, or if they did, it was only found in (optional) NPC dialog and/or the manual. The early Wizardry games didn't have much more than an excuse plot, for example, and neither did Rogue.
* Story isn't sufficient for a game to be an RPG. In fact, if you have only story and no other game aspects, you would have a kinetic novel, not an RPG.

avatar
ResidentLeever: I don't agree that stats over skill are what defines RPGs either but evade and hit rolls are a part of non-ARPGs (and various ARPGs), sure. It has nothing to do with roleplaying after all, but rather if a game is "abstracted" and tactical or not.
Actually, I would argue that the abstraction that you are referring to is what defines the RPG genre and separates it from other genres. (Also, note that I don't consider the games commonly referred to as "ARPGs" to be RPGs at all.)
Post edited July 26, 2020 by dtgreene
avatar
ResidentLeever: While there were some troll games before that like Takeshi's Challenge (and other poorly designed games, intentional or not) I'd agree that it's more of a defned subgenre from that point onward, yeah.
There is such a thing as a well defined troll game.

One troll game that I think is pretty good, and I think really doesn't fit the categorization you've given (it's not a platformer of any sort, for example) is at
https://userinyerface.com/

(The site refers to the game as "A worst-practice UI experiment".)
"Yes, it is one characteristic I use that puts Dragon Quest 1 more in line with WRPGs, but there's also the open world, as I mentioned."

Ok but can you at least see that it is comparatively minor to something like open world vs linear quest or interactive vs non-interactive story/dialogue choices?

"Final Fantasy 2 has some semblance of interactive dialog, in that you learn keywords and can use them in conversations with some NPCs. (With that said, the game underuses this particular mechanic.)

Dragon Quest 3 has character creation, and that mechanic would return again in Dragon Quest 9."

These are from before the split in the genre and I don't know what you're trying to argue with the elves comment, that was a hypothetical example to show how arbitrary your other point was.

Anyway, we disagree on most of this. Let's focus on which periods we prefer and not details of genre definitions that don't align with the general definitions.
Post edited July 26, 2020 by ResidentLeever
avatar
ResidentLeever: While there were some troll games before that like Takeshi's Challenge (and other poorly designed games, intentional or not) I'd agree that it's more of a defned subgenre from that point onward, yeah.
avatar
dtgreene: There is such a thing as a well defined troll game.
I never said there wasn't.
avatar
dtgreene: There is such a thing as a well defined troll game.
avatar
ResidentLeever: I never said there wasn't.
Oops, I meant "designed", not "defined".

(By the way, have you tried the one I linked?)
avatar
ResidentLeever: I never said there wasn't.
avatar
dtgreene: Oops, I meant "designed", not "defined".

(By the way, have you tried the one I linked?)
Yes.