Teach me about 16-bit RPGs

[JustRob]

Ok, next up is an entire genre I pretty much told to fuck off for the past 20 years. I'm in a very receptive mood and am finally ready to start learning about and playing these.

What are some good 16-bit, either SNES or Genny rpgs to start with? I'm ruling out Mystic Quest as I've tried it and it turned me off big time. I need games that have easy save points as the time I have to dedicate to them will likely be spread out over weeks.

So...suggestions?

[substantial_snake]

I would suggest starting out with Final Fantasy VI (III in the States) and Chrono Trigger on the SNES.

Chrono Trigger is largely considered the best RPG thus far and I know a lot of people who considered it their favorite game ever. It a pretty light game for genera being 20-30 hours easily for a new player. It has fun combat mechanics, relatively light story, and not a ton of long talking phases to sit through. Its also not grindy and I know that's a plus for those getting into the genera. The graphics and music are both superb and look really great even now. Overall it really is a fantastic game and a great starting point.

I also suggested FFVI because its one of my personal favorites and IMO the best Final Finatasy game. In some ways the story is pretty good for the twists it takes and in others its pretty derivative, at least at first glance. There is a very large cast of character all with their own unique personalities and back stories with one of the greatest videogame villans ever IMO. The game is quite a bit more grindy then Chrono Trigger and the battlesystem is largely the FF bread&butter of Turn Based Combat. Its a average game for the genera in completion time at about 40-60 hours depending on hour through you are at exploring everything. The music and graphics are also great at showing off with the SNES can do with a lot of memorable tracks. Overall another solid game and a great example of the genera.

Special Mention:

Secret of Mana (though I am personally not a fan)
Final Fnatasy IV
Super Mario RPG

I am personally more of a fan of 32-bit RPGs most of the time but their are some gems in the 16-bit era.

[j_factor]

Super Mario RPG is really great for beginners. It's pretty easy and "RPG lite", but new things keep happening that keep it interesting.

If you want to dive in, I recommend Eye of the Beholder. It's kind of difficult to figure out at first if you're new to things, but it's a very rewarding game.

Quest for Glory is great, if you want to "ease into" RPG-ness via another genre.

[treismac]

Earthbound for the SNES; it is unconventional, charming, and quirky as hell. Buy two copies, and send one to me for turning you on to this cult classic. Just don't look at the price when you're buying them, alright? PM me for my address. ;)

[hashiriya1]

Final Fantasy IV is all you need.

[Satoshi_Matrix]

Its trite to say, but if you want to play the best 16-bit RPGs, you really can't go wrong with anything Square put out, especially Final Fantasy 6 (Known as Final Fantasy III in the US at the time).

FF6 is probably the best Final Fantasy game ever made, with a massive 14 playable character cast spanning well over 30 hours. FF6's visuals and audio will just grab you, and the unique and well crafted story will be a great motivator to see what happens next. The villian is among gaming's all time greats, and the game has some of the most memorable gaming events EVER. Opera scene, anyone?

So yeah, if you want to experience the best of 16-bit RPGs, you can't go wrong with Final Fantasy III. (SNES)

[Edmond Dantes]

Quest for Glory is great, if you want to "ease into" RPG-ness via another genre.

I wasn't aware Quest for Glory was released on either the SNES or Genesis...

[Colorado Rockies]

Snes:
Secret of Mana
Chrono Trigger
Super Mario RPG
Final Fantasy III
Final Fantasy II
Earthbound
Lufia
Lufia II
Breath of Fire
Breath of Fire II

Genesis:
Phantasy Star II
Phantasy Star IV
Shining Force
Shining Force II
Warsong
Beyond Oasis

[badinsults]

I'd happily suggest Dragon Quest V, though it was only released in North America officially on the DS. Definitely a great JRPG. DQVI is also great, though the sheer scope of the game might be a bit much for the beginner.

[TurboGenesis]

someone mentioned Phantasy Star II, but I wouldn't reccommend it for entry level player or someone new to the genre… the game is quite difficult and frustrating even for seasoned players…

Phantasy Star IV would be more suitable for entry level play

(this is in regards to Genesis RPGs)

for the SNES, Chrono Trigger seems like a solid suggestion…

[NerdXCrewWill]

What are some good 16-bit, either SNES or Genny rpgs to start with? I'm ruling out Mystic Quest as I've tried it and it turned me off big time. I need games that have easy save points as the time I have to dedicate to them will likely be spread out over weeks.

None of the games mentioned above (aside from maybe Beyond Oasis, as I haven't played that) offer better saving than Mystic Quest. If you want a game you can save at anytime, try playing some Gameboy games on the Super Gameboy. There's some good stuff out there, like Dragon Warrior I-III, the Final Fantasy Legends series, Final Fantasy Adventure, and Pokemon (among others).

[jonebone]

None of the games mentioned above (aside from maybe Beyond Oasis, as I haven't played that) offer better saving than Mystic Quest. If you want a game you can save at anytime, try playing some Gameboy games on the Super Gameboy. There's some good stuff out there, like Dragon Warrior I-III, the Final Fantasy Legends series, Final Fantasy Adventure, and Pokemon (among others).

Or just play them on an emulator with Save States. Sure you're "cheating", but if all you care about is experiencing the game and being able to save any moment that you want, this is the perfect option for you.

Saves you hour long trips into dungeons where you only get beat by the boss because you were unprepared.

[chrisbid]

start out with final fantasy ii on the snes. it is not super long, you can save anywhere in the overworld, and there are a decent number of save points within dungeons.

another good-but-fairly-quick game is phantasy star iv for the genesis.

[JustRob]

Wow, wasn't expecting so many responses so soon, but I guess I should have figured based on the topic.

I've played Final Fantasy II (SNES). I just couldn't take the grinding. The part I don't like about those earlier Final Fantasies is the complete lack of direction besides the generic "To the west lies a great mystery" type of crap coming out of the NPCs.

I've got tons of experience with the western style of RPG. Someone mentioned Eye of the Beholder. I've played through the Gold Box D&D games, Fallouts, etc, so those are what I know.

I have Chrono Trigger and all of the Final Fantasies released for the GBA and DS, so I guess I can start with those.

I was actually planning on playing them on the real hardware vs emulation, but I'll make an exception for the handheld remakes as they'll do nicely.

Super Mario RPG is actually right at the top of my list. From what I gather, it's the best of Square with Nintendo trappings.

[Satoshi_Matrix]

Grinding goes hand in hand with oldschool RPGs. You will have to grind in every 16-bit RPG I can think of. That said some games require it less than others, and again in that respect, I recommend FF6, both thanks to smart progression design and the fact that the grinding is of little annoyance since the battle system is so perfectly executed.

And if you really don't want to level grind, the SNES Final Fantasy III has the famous Vanish/Doom glitch once you acquire the magic to do that about 15 hours in. Vanish causes the enemy to disappear, making them invulnerable to physical attacks but magic will always hit. Then cast Doom, a spell that instantly kills the target unless they have a resistance to it, which most enemies do. Cool thing is, in the SNES original, the game code ignores all resistances once Vanish is cast, so you can kill any enemy in the game by casting Vanish and then Doom. This even works on all the bosses!

[Ryudo]

Soulblazer
Illusion of Gaia
Ys III (Genesis version) Ys is my fave series ever and while be best to start with the first two on TG16(also on Wii VC,PSP,DS) You can junp in at any game. It's an ARPG. Most the series is top down view but III is sideview. Now I say the Genesis version as it's the best between the SNES & Genny version. SNES version is buggy as hell and harder than hell. Genny version of easier and more fun. Plus th emusic is better

[burn_654]

I'm going to have to put in another vote for Final Fantasy 3/6! Beautiful, beautiful game. Very solid.

I like 5's battle system quite a bit but yes, you'll be grinding in that one. 6 though? I only grinded when I wanted to, to get additional esper magic and such. There were very few situations where I felt it was truly -necessary-.

[dra600n]

Soul Blazer is an awesome game - doesn't require grinding, you can't really get lost with direction because... well.. you'll have to play it to understand.

Final Fantasy 3(6) is an amazing game. Requires some grinding, but the story is absolutely amazing and very in depth.

I wouldn't recommend any Phantasy Star's as a starting point, and same with Earthbound. Phantasy Star games are pretty tedious with grinding, and may turn you off of RPG's in general. Earthbound also isn't for every RPG fan either.

Other titles I personally enjoy (and I think you may enjoy them if you're starting to get into RPG's) are Secret of Mana (action/rpg - decent story, fun game play, beautiful graphics, over all a very solid title), Illusions of Gaia ("sequel" to Soul Blazer, similar game play), Mario RPG (fantastic game - not much to say other than that), and Final Fantasy 2(4) { Awesome game, but takes a little more patience than other Final Fantasies in terms of grinding/figuring out where to go, but it's got one hell of a story, one hell of a cast of characters, and the music and graphics are bad ass as well).

[j_factor]

I wasn't aware Quest for Glory was released on either the SNES or Genesis...

Oops, I missed that part of the OP and just saw "16-bit". My bad.

[chrisbid]

I wouldn't recommend any Phantasy Star's as a starting point, and same with Earthbound. Phantasy Star games are pretty tedious with grinding, and may turn you off of RPG's in general. Earthbound also isn't for every RPG fan either.


not true, phantasy star iv requires very little grinding.

[Ryudo]

Sword of Vermillion another great RPG on Genesis from Yu Suzuki

[kupomogli]

I have Chrono Trigger and all of the Final Fantasies released for the GBA and DS, so I guess I can start with those.

Avoid Final Fantasy 4 Advance like the plague. The game is an extremely poor port. US version features a ton of lag, bugs that have characters taking multiple turns, etc. The PAL version fixed the lag towards the visuals, but instead has some extremely bad button lag during battle(although this could be based on playing the PAL version on emulator.)

If you're going to play FF4, the PSX version is the best one if you're going for the original 16bit graphics, SNES after. The DS version is pretty good and allows you to customzie the characters with new abilities and skills. The PSP version is the best altogether, has all the GBA content, and includes The After Years which is a crappy game except for the final chapter, which makes the game worth playing.

As others have said, Final Fantasy 6 is worth playing, it's also my favorite in the series as well. Like burn_654 mentioned, FF6 requires no grinding unless you want to. The game is of decent length and includes a lot of sidequests, especially the second half of the game where pretty much everything outside of going to the final area is a side quest.

For FF6, if you play the game, the SNES or the GBA version are the way to go. SNES is the best, as GBA has slight lag when Autocrossbow is used with more than two enemies on screen and worse audio. However the GBA does add some bonus features, so if you own the game but still play it on emulator, get the sound fix patch and you should be fine. PSX version has some bad load times(you always hear complaining about load times of Chrono Trigger on PSX but FF6 is worse.)


Illusion of Gaia

Amazing game, but not an RPG.

Also Lufia 2, among others.

[djshok]

For SNES (the king system of all rpgs) I'd recommend: Earthboud, Final Fantasy VI (III in the US), Paladin's Quest and Chrono Trigger.

For Sega Genesis I'd go with Phantasy Star IV (possibly one of the best rpgs ever) and Pier Solar which is a brand new game that was just released last year, it's sold out right now, but more will be in stock soon. Check it out here:

http://www.piersolar.com/

[theMot]

At the risk of getting shelled.... Have you played Zelda, A link to the past? If we're classing secret of mana as an rpg then so is alttp...

[Trebuken]

The above. Also Landstalker. More action oriented and may ease you into the other RPG's.

[Steven]

For SNES (the king system of all rpgs) I'd recommend: Earthboud, Final Fantasy VI (III in the US), Paladin's Quest and Chrono Trigger.

Heh, Paladin's Quest sticks out like a sore thumb listed next to those greats. What was it about PQ that you liked so much? (without spoiling it for other people). It's often called average at best or even below average. Just curious what you liked so much about it to lump it in there with those classics.



Lufia

I wouldn't recommend Lufia to an RPG newbie trying to get into the genre. It's a bit repetitive and had some annoyances that will likely drive away someone trying to find his place in the genre.

Best to go with Chrono Trigger or Super Mario RPG first.
Lufia is one of those games you trek through after you become a big fan of the genre.

[BlastProcessing402]

The Lunar games are great 16-bit RPG's if you have access to a SegaCD.

[Aussie2B]

Grinding goes hand in hand with oldschool RPGs. You will have to grind in every 16-bit RPG I can think of. That said some games require it less than others, and again in that respect, I recommend FF6, both thanks to smart progression design and the fact that the grinding is of little annoyance since the battle system is so perfectly executed.

That really depends on how you define "grinding". If your normal way to play is to run away from or avoid every battle you possibly can, then, yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if you have to stop at some point in order to make up for all of the lost experience, but I'd say most 16-bit RPGs are easy enough that you can get by with simply fighting what you encounter naturally and never having to stop and purposely grind.

Anyway, to answer the topic question, in terms of US releases, I'd say the cream of the crop for SNES are Chrono Trigger, Super Mario RPG, and Lufia II. For Genesis, skip the traditional RPGs and go straight for Shining Force I and II.

Even though they're getting thrown around a lot in here, I'd advise against Phantasy Star II and Final Fantasy II/IV. The former is just plain lousy, and FF4 is pretty dull and unremarkable. If someone has nostalgia for them, that's fine and dandy, but I can't picture many people loving them if they're introduced to them now.

[Steven]

Even though they're getting thrown around a lot in here, I'd advise against Final Fantasy II/IV. FF4 is pretty dull and unremarkable. If someone has nostalgia for them, that's fine and dandy, but I can't picture many people loving them if they're introduced to them now.


I first played FFII/IV in 2007, and loved every second of it. I wouldn't lump it in with Phantasy Star II myself.

[JustRob]

I've played maybe the first hour or so worth of LTTP, and loved every second, but that was years ago at a friend's house.

I guess I should clarify, when I said RPG, I meant the entire realm of RPGs, tradition, j, action, etc.

I have lttp and illusion of gaia sitting here, so I was thinking of starting with those. Definitely lttp, just because it's so goddamn awesome.

The next question I have is, what are the RPG families here? Some franchises are pretty easy to know what comes next, FF and such. Most of the others have unique names and if you weren't in the know, you wouldn't know what order to play them in.

[theMot]

Most of what Square put out back in the day are regarded as the best 16 bit RPG's going. The pick of the bucnh from Square is Final Fantasy 6 or Chrono Trigger. Neither of them has aged as well as some here would have you believe but they are worth a look if only to see what all the fuss is about.

I played FF6 a couple of years back and found it a really linear and too teenage angsty for my tastes these days, back in the day though it was my favourite game ever.

Off topic: Is there a way to change this poo brown forum theme? It's annoying.

[Aussie2B]

For US-released SNES RPGs, at least, I don't know if there's anything that's crucial to play in order. I mean, all of the Final Fantasy games are completely independent. With Lufia, you'd probably be better off playing Lufia II first anyway because the first is a pretty meh game and its intro completely spoils the ending of Lufia II and lessens its impact (Lufia II is a prequel). I don't think the Breath of Fire games have much of a connection. Most SNES RPGs are standalone, at least in the US.

[Aussie2B]

The pick of the bucnh from Square is Final Fantasy 6 or Chrono Trigger. Neither of them has aged as well as some here would have you believe but they are worth a look if only to see what all the fuss is about.

How do you feel Chrono Trigger has aged? The graphics still look fantastic, the music is still amazing, the gameplay is still extremely fun and polished, and the story is still engaging. I think it shines just as well today as it did in 1995.

[theMot]

How do you feel Chrono Trigger has aged? The graphics still look fantastic, the music is still amazing, the gameplay is still extremely fun and polished, and the story is still engaging. I think it shines just as well today as it did in 1995.

Graphics still look great. Excellent example of that era

Music, again excellent for that time.

Gameplay perfect.

Story.... hmmm.... Im pushing 30 now and it just doesnt have the same appeal to me that it did when I was 14. Same with all the RPG's from that time that have these contrived love stories going on, theres a just a little bit too much 15-year-old-I-hate-my-life syndrome going on that I just can't get into these days. I just out grew the whole thing. From a Nostalgia and gaming evolution perspective they are great but when you really look at it the stories in these games was really geared towards teenagers.

Let's face it, RPG's more than anything is all about the story behind the characters, if you think that story is crap it effects the whole experience. I can happily play something like Super Mario World from back in the day because it's not a story centric game, the RPG's from back then are a struggle though.

[Baloo]

I've played maybe the first hour or so worth of LTTP, and loved every second, but that was years ago at a friend's house.

I guess I should clarify, when I said RPG, I meant the entire realm of RPGs, tradition, j, action, etc.

I have lttp and illusion of gaia sitting here, so I was thinking of starting with those. Definitely lttp, just because it's so goddamn awesome.

The next question I have is, what are the RPG families here? Some franchises are pretty easy to know what comes next, FF and such. Most of the others have unique names and if you weren't in the know, you wouldn't know what order to play them in.


Definitely check out the Tactical RPG stuff, that's my favorite genre of classic RPGs! Especially Fire Emblem and Shining Force! Here's the chronological order of the "Shining" games, though the relations are pretty slim overall, and you'll find that to be the case with most RPG series really from back in the day.:

Shining Force: The Legacy of Great Intention
Shining Force CD
Shining Force Gaiden: Final Conflict
Shining Force II
Shining Wisdom
Shining in the Darkness
Shining the Holy Ark
Shining Force III

[substantial_snake]

Graphics still look great. Excellent example of that era

Music, again excellent for that time.

Gameplay perfect.

Story.... hmmm.... Im pushing 30 now and it just doesnt have the same appeal to me that it did when I was 14. Same with all the RPG's from that time that have these contrived love stories going on, theres a just a little bit too much 15-year-old-I-hate-my-life syndrome going on that I just can't get into these days. I just out grew the whole thing. From a Nostalgia and gaming evolution perspective they are great but when you really look at it the stories in these games was really geared towards teenagers.

But...that doesn't describe Chrono Trigger's story at all.

One of the defining characteristics of Chrono Trigger is that it didn't have an angst filled main character like many of the 16 and 32 bit RPGs had. It also really didn't have a contrived love story and was really just a big adventure to defeat the "bad guy"..or at least thats how I took it. Granted I first beat Chrono Trigger about 3 years ago so maybe I am not looking into it as hard as someone younger playing it but the lack of all of those elements (which are often done badly) was one of the reasons why I love Chrono Trigger for what it is.

[theMot]

But...that doesn't describe Chrono Trigger's story at all.

One of the defining characteristics of Chrono Trigger is that it didn't have an angst filled main character like many of the 16 and 32 bit RPGs had. It also really didn't have a contrived love story and was really just a big adventure to defeat the "bad guy"..or at least thats how I took it. Granted I first beat Chrono Trigger about 3 years ago so maybe I am not looking into it as hard as someone younger playing it but the lack of all of those elements (which are often done badly) was one of the reasons why I love Chrono Trigger for what it is.


It was a great game back in the day but the story is just purile shit to me now. Sorry but it is.

[JustRob]

Ya know, that's actually the main reason I can't fucking stand Final Fantasy these days. I picked up X a couple of years ago just to give it a try and see what the deal was. That was an eye opening experience. I gave it a good 12 hours or so and all I did was stare at some whiney fuck with spikey hair and press the X button over and over. I didn't feel like I had any control over the game outside of continuous "Hit A till the next cutscene" bullshit that the games have become.

That's really the one shining moment that put me off of anything jrpg. This thread is my olive branch to the other side of rpgs that I've completely ignored over the years.

Some of these games you've all recommended seem to have really awesome storylines, and that's the reason I want to play them. The part I need to come to terms with is the specific gameplay that I always saw as a common identifier with in the genre. I played the first few hours of FFII on snes and was ok with it until this overwhelming feeling of what the fuck was I supposed to do again kicked in.I've played 7th Saga and actually liked it from what I played (I think that was the one, something about a robot?) I've played through the first few time jumps in Chrono Trigger years ago and the game was amazing. I even tried some 32-bit games. I remember playing the beginning of Legend of Dragoon and kinda liked it, but I was drunk as hell and don't remember too much of it. I even tried that Lunar Dragon something or other on the DS, but that made me a bit homicidal after an hour or so and gave it back to the wife and told her to never let me see it again.

Basically, aside from a few good memories, my experience with the genre has been marred by gameplay that I just couldn't stomach. I really do want to give it another honest, unbiased try. I'm sure some of you have similar stories with other genres.

I guess I was just too indoctrinated by western style rpgs to really give these a chance. I really appreciate all the responses, please, keep them coming.

[substantial_snake]

It was a great game back in the day but the story is just purile shit to me now. Sorry but it is.

That's fine, I'm not going to be raging about your opinion but I still don't see how any of your specific crititisms apply to Chrono Trigger. It seemed more like to were just applying typical bitch points about the genera to the game.

[Aussie2B]

Story.... hmmm.... Im pushing 30 now and it just doesnt have the same appeal to me that it did when I was 14. Same with all the RPG's from that time that have these contrived love stories going on, theres a just a little bit too much 15-year-old-I-hate-my-life syndrome going on that I just can't get into these days. I just out grew the whole thing. From a Nostalgia and gaming evolution perspective they are great but when you really look at it the stories in these games was really geared towards teenagers.

Let's face it, RPG's more than anything is all about the story behind the characters, if you think that story is crap it effects the whole experience. I can happily play something like Super Mario World from back in the day because it's not a story centric game, the RPG's from back then are a struggle though.

First off, not everybody values the same things in RPGs. You can't say for a fact that RPGs are for their stories more than anything else. I personally put gameplay first, whether it's an action game or an RPG, it doesn't matter. If the game is boring to play, I don't care how great the story supposedly is. I'd rather save myself the tedium and read a book or watch a movie if all I'm getting out of it is a story.

As for Chrono Trigger, like substantial_snake said, you're not describing Chrono Trigger much at all. There are no whiny, angsty characters. The closest the game gets is Marle's rebellion about being a princess, but it all ties together nicely given the history and the manipulation going on in the castle. And when she finally reconciles with her father, I think that's one of the most touching scenes in the game. The love story is also pretty touching too, I think. But, in the end, you're talking about small pieces in the overall plot. There are so many different little stories to follow, like Robo's struggle with his intended purpose, Frog's aim for revenge, etc., and the overall goal to ensure a positive future for mankind, by addressing misdeeds all throughout time. It's not just some "BAWWWing" teenager plot.

Age really doesn't play into it. I'm closing in on 30 myself. There are plenty of people here 30+ that still love Chrono Trigger. There are many Japanese RPGs with childish, immature nonsense that makes me roll my eyes, but Chrono Trigger isn't among them. It may star teenagers and it may be friendly for teenager consumption, but that doesn't mean there isn't anything that can resonate with an adult.

[Aussie2B]

Basically, aside from a few good memories, my experience with the genre has been marred by gameplay that I just couldn't stomach. I really do want to give it another honest, unbiased try. I'm sure some of you have similar stories with other genres.

If that's the case, then, honestly, you may want to look outside of 16-bit RPGs. Gameplay in RPGs has evolved a lot over the years. There is far more available than your standard turn-based battle system mimicking Dragon Quest or the ATB system of Final Fantasy.

I'd recommend checking out some PlayStation RPGs. You might enjoy the innovative battle systems of games like Star Ocean: The Second Story and Valkyrie Profile.

[Ryudo]

Well I recommended the Ys series as it's ARPG and great for beginners. While only Ys III is on those two genesis is the better of the two.
But it's best to start with Chronicles on PSP then Oath(remake of 3). Old school feel with newer look. Oath is to me the greatest gaming remake I ever played.

[kupomogli]

Okay, so Lufia 2. The first one sucks. The gameplay isn't really that bad, it's the pacing that kills the game. Even the easiest battles take such a long time because there are long pauses between every character and enemies turn.

Lufia 2 isn't the best, but it's a lot better than your average RPG. In battle, other than your standard gameplay, the item point system is a really unique concept allowing you to use certain skills based on equipped items and damage received. Outside of battle the game is similar to a Zelda title requiring puzzles to be solved in order to proceed. Except for one, the puzzles aren't too difficult.

If you're a fan of Lufia 2, then you should later on try out the (32bit) Wild ARMs series on the PSX and PS2. Wild ARMs XF is a tactical RPG for the PSP and is as good as any of the main games and is better than just about every tactical RPG released. Wild ARMs isn't even developed by the same company, but really seems like Lufia 2 is what inspired them to develop the series. The puzzle solving in dungeons, similarities to the item point system called FP, allowing the use of force skills, but then a lot of different gameplay aspects added into the series. Each game expands on what the previous game offered while adding new gameplay concepts.

Phantasy Star 4 is by far the best in the series and an amazing game.

Breath of Fire 2. The first one is decent, but not as good as the second one. I'd recommend playing the GBA version though. The graphics aren't much worse and all enemies give double exp and double gold, otherwise the game requires quite a bit of grinding.

Ogre Battle is a strategy RPG. Some people like it, some people don't. I personally love the game. Battles take place on one of multiple world maps. You have multiple units, each type has a certain amount of front/back row attacks, can move different across terrain, have stat bonus' due to terrain/time of day, etc. There are multiple class types that you can upgrade characters into over time, allowing for more damage, more attacks in each row, and some characters like Werewolves, Weretigers, or Vampires who are pretty much crap until dark(although Weretigers aren't too bad during the day.)

Sword of Vermillion, Secret of Mana, Secret of Evermore, Final Fantasy Mystic Quest, Lunar 2, Dark Wizard, etc.

Like Aussie2B stated, if you're looking to get into RPGs, then try out PSX titles also. The amount of quality RPGs on the PSX far overshadow the 16bit gen. Xenogears, ports of Tactics Ogre, Ogre Battle, Final Fantasy Tactics, Star Ocean the Second Story, Breath of Fire 3 and 4, Arc the Lad 2 and 3, Dragon Warrior 7, Front Mission 3, Tales of Destiny, Tales of Eternia, Wild ARMs 1 and 2, Brigandine, etc.

[JustRob]

You guys are fucking awesome.

Ok, my next question is, what are the differences between the different rpg sub-genres? ie, traditional, strategy, tactical, action, etc. and what would the "best" game for each sub-category be for my purposes?

[Aussie2B]

"Traditional" would be games that take after the Dragon Quest/Final Fantasy school of design, but it could be applied to the overall presentation or to the gameplay or to both. Like, to use Star Ocean again, it would be a traditional RPG in that it's not a strategy RPG or any other kind of sub-genre, but it doesn't have a traditional battle system. Rather, it has a real-time battle system.

"Strategy" and "tactical" are the same thing. People just use "tactical" to confuse people, haha. They generally take after the Fire Emblem/Shining Force school of design, with grid-based map movement and all that jazz. More about the gameplay than story compared to traditional RPGs.

"Action RPG" is a stupid term that gets thrown around for anything and everything, and often for games that really aren't RPGs because silly people call them such just because said games have elements that are also often associated with RPGs. Usually the term is applied to adventure games, like Zelda, Secret of Mana, Illusion of Gaia, Alundra, etc. etc.

[Satoshi_Matrix]

The way I think of it is if the game can be played one handed or not. if it can, its a traditional RPG - slow paced, take your time and enjoy it. If you need both hands, its an action RPG, means you can't blink without something happening on screen.

[Nescollector]

I've played Final Fantasy II (SNES). I just couldn't take the grinding. The part I don't like about those earlier Final Fantasies is the complete lack of direction besides the generic "To the west lies a great mystery" type of crap coming out of the NPCs.

I didn't think it needed much if any grinding at all. You can find most all weapons and armor. FF3, now that requires alot of grinding? FF2 for the Snes, is one of the best games of all time.

[kupomogli]

I use tactical and strategy as two different meanings. Sure in a technically sense they're the exact same meaning, but I think of them as different types.

Ogre Battle has static character abilities. It's all about setting them up a certain way. I basically think of this type of game as strategy gameplay. Similar to games such as Warcraft, Age of Empires, Command and Conquer, Advance Wars, Romance of the Three Kingdoms, etc.

Games like Shining Force, Tactics Ogre, Final Fantasy Tactics, Vandal Hearts, etc, all have a choice between attacks and abilities. So I use the term tactical.

Pretty much the exact same meaning, but it does differentiate the type of gameplay.

[j_factor]

Technically the difference between a strategy game and a tactics game, whether they be turn-based or real-time, is that a strategy game involves resource management and the building of units and/or bases/buildings, whereas a tactics game does not. Starcraft is a strategy game -- you have to collect minerals and gas, and expend those resources to construct buildings and create units on the battlefield. Sid Meier's Gettysburg is a tactics game -- you start the scenario/battle with a number of units, and that's pretty much it. With that in mind, games like Shining Force should be called "tactical RPGs". However, more people tend to call them "strategy RPGs". The distinction isn't really important, because RPGs with true strategy gameplay are very rare.


"Action RPG" is a stupid term that gets thrown around for anything and everything, and often for games that really aren't RPGs because silly people call them such just because said games have elements that are also often associated with RPGs. Usually the term is applied to adventure games, like Zelda, Secret of Mana, Illusion of Gaia, Alundra, etc. etc.

"Action-RPG" is very much a valid term for RPGs that have no separate battle screen and real-time combat. Zelda is an action-adventure game, not an adventure game, nor an action-RPG. The Ys series are action-RPGs.

[Aussie2B]

I'm not really interested in turning this into Digital Press's millionth RPG genre definition argument, but a separate battle screen or turn-based combat isn't how I personally define an RPG. Trying to come up with specific requirements will never work because there will ALWAYS be exceptions that otherwise blatantly belong in the genre. Rather, it's a simple matter of I know it when I see it. It's that aim to come up with specific requirements where things get stupid. Yes, Zelda games aren't RPGs and most people don't identify them as such, but, then, why are games like Secret of Mana, Illusion of Gaia, Alundra, Crystalis, etc. etc. so often referred to as RPGs? It's just silly. Those are all CLEARLY the same type of game. All of those are blatantly inspired by Zelda's design, yet because they happen to have stats for HP or MP or have equipment or whatever else insignificant detail, suddenly they belong to an entirely different genre? That kind of logic is just absurd. People are allowed to define genres however they see fit, but I at least expect consistency in their methods.

[kupomogli]

Yes, Zelda games aren't RPGs and most people don't identify them as such, but, then, why are games like Secret of Mana, Illusion of Gaia, Alundra, Crystalis, etc. etc. so often referred to as RPGs? It's just silly. Those are all CLEARLY the same type of game. All of those are blatantly inspired by Zelda's design, yet because they happen to have stats for HP or MP or have equipment or whatever else insignificant detail, suddenly they belong to an entirely different genre?

All the others I wouldn't describe as an RPG, but on Secret of Mana, Secret of Evermore, and the Ys titles have experience and stat gains over the other titles. Let's say that you remade Secret of Mana to play like Chrono Trigger and running into a Rabite would trigger the battle, what else is there that's different? The game includes rare item drops, gold to purchase a various amount of equipment that has to be upgraded, experience points to increase your stats and hp/mp levels, etc.

With Zelda, Illusion of Gaia, Evergrace, etc. What all these titles share in common are that they don't have any sort of experience gain. Health and sometimes power/defense up depending on the game, is found in secret locations and after defeating a boss.

Secret of Evermore and Mana take it one step further as there is the inclusion of the percentage on your attack rating. Attacking at less than 100% doesn't deal full damage, so in a way that sort of to counteract that it not being a turn based title. It still retains the I attack you, you attack me style gameplay, just this time you can dodge. You can't attack, attack, attack.

[Aussie2B]

The game includes rare item drops, gold to purchase a various amount of equipment that has to be upgraded, experience points to increase your stats and hp/mp levels, etc.

Castlevania: Symphony of the Night has all of those things too.

[j_factor]

I'm not really interested in turning this into Digital Press's millionth RPG genre definition argument, but a separate battle screen or turn-based combat isn't how I personally define an RPG. Trying to come up with specific requirements will never work because there will ALWAYS be exceptions that otherwise blatantly belong in the genre. Rather, it's a simple matter of I know it when I see it. It's that aim to come up with specific requirements where things get stupid. Yes, Zelda games aren't RPGs and most people don't identify them as such, but, then, why are games like Secret of Mana, Illusion of Gaia, Alundra, Crystalis, etc. etc. so often referred to as RPGs? It's just silly. Those are all CLEARLY the same type of game. All of those are blatantly inspired by Zelda's design, yet because they happen to have stats for HP or MP or have equipment or whatever else insignificant detail, suddenly they belong to an entirely different genre? That kind of logic is just absurd. People are allowed to define genres however they see fit, but I at least expect consistency in their methods.

So is there no such thing as an action-RPG to you? What would you call Ys III, Shadowrun (Genesis), or Ultima VII, if not action-RPG?

[Gameguy]

"Action RPG" is a stupid term that gets thrown around for anything and everything, and often for games that really aren't RPGs because silly people call them such just because said games have elements that are also often associated with RPGs. Usually the term is applied to adventure games, like Zelda, Secret of Mana, Illusion of Gaia, Alundra, etc. etc.
If a game uses stats and requires you to level up it's an RPG or some sort of RPG hybrid, if a game focuses on inventory items and puzzle solving it's an adventure game or adventure hybrid. It's pretty simple to sort out. There's no stats or leveling up in Zelda(heart containers don't count, so many non-RPG games also have health expansions), you just find inventory items to help you proceed further into the game. Secret of Mana has stats you have to build up so it's an RPG. Illusion of Gaia isn't as clear and could go either way, but you do have stats like attack and defence affected by different jewels so it's mostly considered an RPG. There are some games that are a hybrid of both of these genres too.

Action-Adventure;
Zelda
Alundra

Action-RPG;
Secret of Mana
Illusion of Gaia

[Edmond Dantes]

Stuff like this is why I really don't care about genre. Telling me "its a side-scrolling game with an experience system" is a lot more informative than "it's an Action-RPG" simply because the latter is open to interpretation, and the former isn't.

Personally, I consider Zelda an RPG, because I asked Taboo: The Sixth Sense if it was and it said sure. Taboo hath spoken!

[Aussie2B]

So is there no such thing as an action-RPG to you? What would you call Ys III, Shadowrun (Genesis), or Ultima VII, if not action-RPG?

Pretty much, yes. I've never encountered a game that I couldn't describe more clearly with different terminology. I also don't like "Action RPG" because to me it's an oxymoron. Action games are at one end of the spectrum, while RPGs are at the opposite end. A game can't be both at the same time. A so-called "Action RPG" is neither an action game nor an RPG. If one is aiming to describe a game in the middle of the spectrum, that's what "Adventure" is for. Anyway, I'd have to play those games first to describe them. But I imagine I'd call Ys III a side-scrolling adventure game, just as I would with Zelda II, Faxanadu, Battle of Olympus, etc. etc.

[Ryudo]

If a game uses stats and requires you to level up it's an RPG or some sort of RPG hybrid, if a game focuses on inventory items and puzzle solving it's an adventure game or adventure hybrid. It's pretty simple to sort out. There's no stats or leveling up in Zelda(heart containers don't count, so many non-RPG games also have health expansions), you just find inventory items to help you proceed further into the game. Secret of Mana has stats you have to build up so it's an RPG. Illusion of Gaia isn't as clear and could go either way, but you do have stats like attack and defence affected by different jewels so it's mostly considered an RPG. There are some games that are a hybrid of both of these genres too.

Action-Adventure;
Zelda
Alundra

Action-RPG;
Secret of Mana
Illusion of Gaia

QFT
Truth

[j_factor]

Pretty much, yes. I've never encountered a game that I couldn't describe more clearly with different terminology. I also don't like "Action RPG" because to me it's an oxymoron. Action games are at one end of the spectrum, while RPGs are at the opposite end. A game can't be both at the same time.

What makes you say that? This doesn't make sense to me. Take any regular RPG, swap out the battle system for real-time action combat, and you have an action-RPG. Nothing else has to change, so there's no spectrum.


A so-called "Action RPG" is neither an action game nor an RPG.

It's both. You have action, and you have role-playing.


If one is aiming to describe a game in the middle of the spectrum, that's what "Adventure" is for. Anyway, I'd have to play those games first to describe them. But I imagine I'd call Ys III a side-scrolling adventure game, just as I would with Zelda II, Faxanadu, Battle of Olympus, etc. etc.

I thought you wanted clear terminology. That's not clear at all. None of those games are adventure games, and it doesn't even make sense that you would call them that.

[Icarus Moonsight]

Why all the Might and Magic/Wizardry evasion? :D Adventure and exploration, sans action.

[Aussie2B]

What makes you say that? This doesn't make sense to me. Take any regular RPG, swap out the battle system for real-time action combat, and you have an action-RPG. Nothing else has to change, so there's no spectrum.

If it's truly an RPG to begin with, then it's still just an RPG, except it went from one with a turn-based battle system (presumably) to one with a real-time battle system, like Star Ocean. If you entirely change the complete nature of the gameplay, then, yes, it may change the genre. Then it would likely be an adventure game, but it could honestly turn into anything if you change it that drastically.


It's both. You have action, and you have role-playing.

No, because it's neither full-on action nor full-on role-playing. It can have elements akin to an action game or akin to an RPG, but it doesn't make it those. I mean, there are even puzzle, golfing, and fishing games with elements commonly found in RPGs.


I thought you wanted clear terminology. That's not clear at all. None of those games are adventure games, and it doesn't even make sense that you would call them that.

Well, it doesn't make sense to me that it doesn't make sense to you. :P If you take issue with that, then take it up with the developers/publishers themselves of those games and other games like them. I mean, Battle of Olympus even says on the box that it's part of the "Adventure Series". Honestly, that's at the root at how I define genres. I go with how the developers define their own games. Games like Zelda, since they were first made, were being labeled as adventure games, so that's what I go with. Nobody has to follow my methodology, but nobody is going to change how I see these things either.

[j_factor]

If it's truly an RPG to begin with, then it's still just an RPG, except it went from one with a turn-based battle system (presumably) to one with a real-time battle system, like Star Ocean.

One with a real-time battle system... in other words, an action-RPG.


If you entirely change the complete nature of the gameplay, then, yes, it may change the genre. Then it would likely be an adventure game, but it could honestly turn into anything if you change it that drastically.

Wait, what? It might be an adventure game if you got rid of the combat entirely. Otherwise that doesn't make sense.


No, because it's neither full-on action nor full-on role-playing. It can have elements akin to an action game or akin to an RPG, but it doesn't make it those.

It contains action gameplay, and it contains role-playing gameplay.


I mean, there are even puzzle, golfing, and fishing games with elements commonly found in RPGs.

I'm not sure what games you're referring to, but there's nothing particularly preventing a fishing RPG from existing (although that would be weird, and probably not very good). Car Battler Joe is a racing RPG and World Court Tennis is a tennis RPG (yes, really).


Well, it doesn't make sense to me that it doesn't make sense to you. :P If you take issue with that, then take it up with the developers/publishers themselves of those games and other games like them. I mean, Battle of Olympus even says on the box that it's part of the "Adventure Series". Honestly, that's at the root at how I define genres. I go with how the developers define their own games.

Oops, looks like you're going to have to accept the term "Action/RPG" then:

http://i.imgur.com/Mhebi.jpg

IT SAYS IT ON THE BOX! IT'S GOSPEL! ...But wait! Let's look at the back cover...

http://i.imgur.com/NEO8d.jpg

It says it three times! They really mean it!

Do you take issue with that? Maybe you should take it up with Vic Ireland.


Games like Zelda, since they were first made, were being labeled as adventure games, so that's what I go with. Nobody has to follow my methodology, but nobody is going to change how I see these things either.

Most people refer to Zelda as action-adventure.

[Cryomancer]

If Zelda is an RPG, Metroid is an RPG. They're the same game with a different camera angle. I've never once in my life heard anyone call Metroid an RPG. I think people are just getting hung up on the elf ears and fantasy setting.

Anyway for 16 bit RPGs, Chrono Trigger and Earthbound are probably my picks for overall best. I'm still a big fan of Evermore but it's never gonna be everyone's thing. But ultimately every game has it's own shades and specifics and moods that will or will not gel with what you are in the mood for at the time.

Far as grinding goes, I have two suggestions. For one, especially if you are playing on a handheld, try to do your grinding while doing something else. Watch a TV show or something and play one handed and just check it and save every so often. For Earthbound specifically: at the start of the game, just grind Ness up to like level 10, shouldn't take too long. Whenever I do this right away, I have no real problems with enemies for the rest of the game.

[Zebbe]

I wonder if there has EVER been an RPG topic which didn't derail into a war of definition...

Anyway, I recommend Beggar Prince for Mega Drive/Genesis and Popful Mail for Sega/Mega-CD (which is a "fake" RPG though).

[Edmond Dantes]

If Zelda is an RPG, Metroid is an RPG.

Sounds good to me. Can we all agree on this?

Personally one of my favorite RPGs is Dungeons & Dragons: Warriors of the Eternal Sun for the Genesis. The battle system actually emphasizes tactics over grinding (you actually cap out at like level eight or so, so grinding doesn't really happen).

Also, Shining Force I and II, also on the Genesis. Grinding is helpful, but again emphasizes strategy.

Chrono Trigger, Final Fantasy IV and VI and Secret of Mana are some of my favorite games of all time. Oddly, I don't remember any of the FFs besides the very first one having that much grinding (even the first one wasn't so bad about it) or progression that consisted only of following vague hints--4 and 6 tell you pretty explicitly what you're supposed to do next.

[kupomogli]

Okay. Debate has ended. There is one game that no one can deny as being a action RPG.

Action
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f0/Magic_of_Scheherazade_-_Water_World_Mooroon.png

RPG
http://admintell.napco.com/ee/images/uploads/gamertell/magic_of_scheherazade.jpg

Magic of Scheherazade ftw.

[JustRob]

I have that one sitting right here actually. Really enjoyed it too.

[NayusDante]

If you like the Goldbox games and the western RPG aesthetic, you might like Drakkhen (SNES). I could never get into it, but it sounds like something that might fit.

I balk at the suggestion of PSX FFIV. Horrible sound effects and absurd load times.

You might really enjoy the later releases of FF1 and FF2, which have been upgraded to match 16-bit sensibilities. The PSX release was pretty true to original difficulty, but GBA and PSP releases toned it down so the pacing really feels like an SNES RPG.

[kupomogli]

I balk at the suggestion of PSX FFIV. Horrible sound effects and absurd load times.

The PSX version of FF4 does not have the poor load times. The load times are just as good as those on the SNES.

The only thing about the PSX version is that the music whenever entering battle comes in a half second later than the SNES version, slightly after the battle already already loads rather than the same time. That isn't really an issue as a lot of games do that even purposefully on the older consoles so you'll quickly get used to it. If you've never put a decent amount of time into the SNES version you won't even notice it.

Here's two videos if you'd like to compare the load times..

SNES
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEBv7PniHoI

PSX
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fl49p9NQuf4

The load times of FF1 and 2 on Origins are also really good, but not nearly as good as the Wonderswan Color versions. Only Final Fantasy 5 and 6 had some really poor load times.

[Aussie2B]

IT SAYS IT ON THE BOX! IT'S GOSPEL! ...But wait! Let's look at the back cover...

It says it three times! They really mean it!

Do you take issue with that? Maybe you should take it up with Vic Ireland.

I don't understand why you always, sooner or later, start acting like an indignant smart aleck. It's totally uncalled for. Like I said, I'm not looking for a genre definition argument. If someone asks me about my thoughts on this as you had been, sure, I'll explain my outlook, but I'm not demanding that anyone agrees with me. But also like I said, I'm not changing my outlook either. If it upsets you that I won't agree with you, well, I don't know what to tell you about that.

To specifically address that comment and not the snarky attitude behind it, I never said I go with what EVERY developer/publisher says. That would present massive amounts of contradiction. I'm talking more about historical standards. Games like I had mentioned were being called adventure games long before people started throwing around "Action RPG".

[Richter Belmount]

If a game uses stats and requires you to level up it's an RPG or some sort of RPG hybrid, if a game focuses on inventory items and puzzle solving it's an adventure game or adventure hybrid. It's pretty simple to sort out. There's no stats or leveling up in Zelda(heart containers don't count, so many non-RPG games also have health expansions), you just find inventory items to help you proceed further into the game. Secret of Mana has stats you have to build up so it's an RPG. Illusion of Gaia isn't as clear and could go either way, but you do have stats like attack and defence affected by different jewels so it's mostly considered an RPG. There are some games that are a hybrid of both of these genres too.

Action-Adventure;
Zelda
Alundra

Action-RPG;
Secret of Mana
Illusion of Gaia

So resident evil series is a action rpg cause you collect items?

[portnoyd]

Did you ever notice how an innocent thread could get turned into a gigantic, derailed shitfeast in a blink of an eye? Did you ever notice that? It's usually trolls like me, but most of the times, it's normal people like you out there. You're average folk who just caught up in discussion that isn't really discussion. It's just arguing about tripe and makes people aggravated. Not really constructive, not really intelligent. And That Makes Me Sad™.

http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/files/2011/09/AndyRooney.jpg

[substantial_snake]

So resident evil series is a action rpg cause you collect items?

I don't even know how you reached that conclusion from the text you quoted. It is has some form of stat based leveling up then its an Action-RPG but if it focuses on puzzles and item collecting its an Action-Adventure. Resident Evil would fall under an Action/Adventure variant...which is exactly was Survival Horror is. :roll:

I also agree with this definition, at least for games during this time period. Today since nearly every game has some sort of RPG element its harder to pin but back then this is always what defined the difference between Action/Adventure and Action-RPG generas for me. More importantly both genera play and feel different, if you can't tell the difference then so be it but that's really all I need for the separate classifications.

[j_factor]

I don't understand why you always, sooner or later, start acting like an indignant smart aleck. It's totally uncalled for.

Just having a little fun. No butthurt intended.


Like I said, I'm not looking for a genre definition argument. If someone asks me about my thoughts on this as you had been, sure, I'll explain my outlook, but I'm not demanding that anyone agrees with me. But also like I said, I'm not changing my outlook either. If it upsets you that I won't agree with you, well, I don't know what to tell you about that.

To specifically address that comment and not the snarky attitude behind it, I never said I go with what EVERY developer/publisher says. That would present massive amounts of contradiction. I'm talking more about historical standards. Games like I had mentioned were being called adventure games long before people started throwing around "Action RPG".

Okay. No snark here. I have NEVER heard ANYONE call those "adventure games". Ever. Some people call Zelda "action RPG" but they are wrong (IMO); the rest of us call it action-adventure. Nobody calls it an adventure game. I honestly find your use of the phrase "adventure games" really bizarre and unlike I have ever heard that term used. And most people don't lump Zelda and Secret of Mana into the same genre. Secret of Mana is an action-RPG -- at least, that's what everyone else called it when it came out.

The images I posted were of a game from 1993, and it throws around the term "action/RPG" in a manner that assumes the reader knows what that means (in other words, it's already a common term). Its predecessor, released in 1992, also says "action/role-playing game". Granted, the first action-RPGs are significantly older, but still, this is historical standard.

I don't care if you agree with me on how genres work, you can call Zelda a shmup for all I care, but recognize that your way of categorizing things is novel and not the norm.

[Gameguy]

Did you ever notice how an innocent thread could get turned into a gigantic, derailed shitfeast in a blink of an eye? Did you ever notice that? It's usually trolls like me, but most of the times, it's normal people like you out there. You're average folk who just caught up in discussion that isn't really discussion. It's just arguing about tripe and makes people aggravated. Not really constructive, not really intelligent. And That Makes Me Sad™.

http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/files/2011/09/AndyRooney.jpg
RIP Andy Rooney.

[Icarus Moonsight]

So resident evil series is a action rpg cause you collect items?

I thought it was because it had cutscenes?