| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (10)

Posted: Oct 7th 2007 1:47PM Fullmetal Salchemist said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Zelda is not an RPG.

Posted: Oct 7th 2007 3:20PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
SAUCE LOVES "TIGHT"... thas ill yo. Hey kid, you get me righ? sick ads fem

Posted: Oct 7th 2007 4:13PM Mr Khan said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@ 1

The debate about Zelda's status amongst genres is an interesting one, i would call it an "Adventure" game because i feel that RPG, even ARPG (like PSO) requires more customization than Zelda. Zelda's got 1, up to 3 swords depending on the game, and the game's focus is more on the action than the accumulation of items or experience points

Zelda is a game of skill, so RPG it is not, but that can be debated

Posted: Oct 7th 2007 8:05PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Implying that role playing games are not games of skill is a bit close minded, especially if you don't define what skill is. Zelda isn't a very action centric game compared to actual action games either. The concept of Zelda is dungeon crawling and puzzle solving. It's a primarily slow paced game based around item based problem solving.

Role playing games follow some similar themes, and though they are often slower due to their battle systems, they have similar dungeon-driven themes..

So please define skill, and why these similar genres don't share it.

Posted: Oct 7th 2007 9:27PM GewurztraminerX said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I agree that Zelda games do require more "skill" as compared to Final Fantasy, a game acceptably defined as an RPG.

What I mean by this is that, in FF you can level up beyond belief by fighting the easiest enemies over and over and eventually be stronger than the final boss 10 times over.

However, in Zelda, you can't reach level 99 - there are only so many hearts and jars to assist you. You have to actually be good at dodging your enemies to survive to the end of the game.

That being said, I prefer games like FF because I like the strategy involved with them more than the skill based Zelda games.

Posted: Oct 7th 2007 11:24PM outunderstars said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Is it just me or does that gameboy seem much smaller than it should be?

Posted: Oct 8th 2007 2:56AM Fullmetal Salchemist said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
'i would call it an "Adventure" game'

As an avid adventure gamer, I would respectfully disagree. The Zelda series is generally classified as an "action-adventure" game, and there it shall remain in my mind. I don't mean that in a bad way, the Zelda series is my favorite gaming franchise, and it consistently has the best games on any system, but it is an "action-adventure" series nonetheless.

Posted: Oct 8th 2007 4:29PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
That super mario all-stars commercial IS good.
Gee, I wish we'd get more commercials like that in the states.

Posted: Oct 13th 2007 10:25AM MrCassian said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
For the love of...

OK people, you simply cannot compare Final Fantasy and Zelda, two completely different types. In FF, sure you can level to infinity but who cares? There are usually challenges that are way beyond the final boss(FF7's Ruby Weapon, FF10's Monster Arena, ect...) and some RPGs actually have significantly harder difficulty levels that start you at level 1. OMG NO SKILL.

Posted: Oct 14th 2007 8:43PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The core reason (for me) why Zelda is not an RPG is the lack of an experience/customisation system. Once you're a decent way through most zelda games you can easily ignore monsters, and there's no reason to fight if you don't have to because you don't get XP or anything like it for your trouble. I would class Zelda as action-adventure games, since they are too 'active' to be pure adventure games (think myst, king's quest, zork etc).

That said this debate can run forever, and it's really not that important :)

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

TUAW

TUAW

Massively

Massively

WoW

WoW