Zelda:Ocarina a Role-Playing Game?

[gamingguy]

A couple people say yes, but I don't see it. There's no leveling up. The kid [Link] is the same strength as he was at the start of the game. It took 2 hits to kill skeleton monsters at the beginning, and it still takes 2 hits to kill skeleton monsters. He's exactly the same person.

The only thing that's changed is Link now has better equipment. He has ~15 Heart Containers instead of 3. And he has metal shields instead of wood. And he can throw fire arrows instead of wood. The equipment changed but Link is still the same.

"Adventure" is a better description IMHO for this kind of game where the character does not level up his Hit Points or Magic Points or other stats.

Other thoughts?

[Charlesaway]

If he increases his heart containers, could this not be considered similar to gaining HP's?

I would say it is probably more of an Adventure/RPG, but definitely not a pure adventure game... It seems to have many RPG like elements.

[Chunky]

this looks like the top 50 RPG list. I would consider it an action/rpg.

Taken from Nintendo.com:

Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, The
Category: Adventure

[ubersaurus]

Ther hero's name is Link. Not Zelda. Zelda is the one princess of damn near every game in the series.

It's a pet peeve when people mix those up :P

[maxlords]

*has bad flashbacks of pointless usenet arguments covering this very topic*

Nintendo counts it as an "Adventure" game, and I think they're qualified to judge their own games. It's not really an RPG, but most Adventure games have RPG elements. Please don't turn this into a fight people! :)

[digitalpress]

*breaks chair over Maxlord's back, then breaks bottle and waves it menacingly*

I'm indifferent on this argument, just saw an opening for a fight :P

[Lexicon]

*attacks DP with "authentic I kicked Jeff Probst in the head survivor knife"* I bite my thumb at you sir....

[Anonymous]

<Insert Biting Pillow Joke Here>

[maxlords]

*max pulls the chair leg out of his spine and spins it dangerously, like a sword* Bring it on DP! >)

[YoshiM]

Historically, The Official Nintendo's Player Guide (the big black book Nintendo released back in 1987) lists The Legend of Zelda and Zelda II as part of the "Adventure Series". However, this was pretty much before the genre "RPG" was really coined for console games IIRC as Zelda II was so much closer to an RPG (leveling up-an RPG staple) than Legend of Zelda.

We all know that an RPG at its core has stats that adjust when a character (or characters) reach a level of experience through hacking bad guys or finishing quests. Though the lines between RPG and Adventure/Action have blurred (like Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance or Gauntlet Legends for example) and new sub-genres cropped out it's always been the leveling and the need to level to get farther into the game.

So I would agree, Zelda:OoT is an adventure. One could argue about its role playing qualities (collecting items and gaining more life) but then we can talk about how the arcade game 1943: Battle of Midway was really an RPG because you collected weapons and had an energy bar.

[WiseSalesman]

i say adventure for certain, right along with Castlevania: SOTN and Super Metroid.

[Wavelflack]

Zelda series is RPG, in the classic sense that you play the role of the young adventurer. Just because it isn't stat-driven, contrived, tedious, boring, and bogged down with idiotic turn based battles...doesn't mean it isn't a role playing game.

Perhaps Zelda should get it's own genre? It could be in the rarified category of "fun, enjoyable RPGs", and practically everything else can be relegated to the "Somewhat Interactive Movie with 'Role Playing' Menu/Window Navigation" genre.

[WiseSalesman]

By that definition, SPORTS games could be RPGs. After all, you might be playing the role of Joe Montana....or at the very least, the coach of the Green Bay Packers.

[Wavelflack]

With all of the reliance on stats and such, you're quite right. I go by a more common sense definition, though, which is "playing the role of a developing character (whether by numerical values or icons), who is engaged in a quest of some sort (regardless of storyline complexity), generally in a fantasy setting".

[Dobie]

That STILL wouldn't rule out a sports title. Your team does develop numerically throughout the season, getting stronger/weaker and such, the quest is usually the pursuit of a Championship. The whole thing is one big fantasy--you as the coach/quarterback (or whatever) of a given team. Now if you define fantasy as being like the fantasy definition for books (style similar to Lord of the Rings), then you end up ruling out other widely accepted RPGs.

Though, even the DP guide has one game description as a "Sports RPG," Tecmo World Cup Soccer. So I suppose there COULD be a true RPG sports title. But, like in the case of Tecmo World Cup, its a damn boring proposition.

To me, a true RPG is a turn based game. This is where the genre started out, with board and dice centered games like Dungeons & Dragons, versus the computer generated adventures we have now. Yes, the lines do blur somewhat, with "active" fight systems in games such as PSO or Secret of Mana, but the turn based requirement is my own personal definition. So for it to be a true RPG to me, it has to have that turn-based element. Simple as that. Anything else I classify as "adventure."

[NvrMore]

Why am I not surprised he brought this up :roll:

Anyway, Nature boy, myself and a few others had a somewhat in-depth discussion about this in the top 50 RPG thread (I don't want to retype everything).

Basically, regarding statistical (FF series) characteristic representation vs. Graphical (other RPG classes (e.g. action/RPG)). They're the same thing, they just look different, both entail characteristic improvement/development they just don't look the same.

Regarding the classification of the Zelda series, well that comes down to the current shift in the classification of all genre's. It's getting to a point where people are having great difficulty in differentiating between genre's because so many have begun to mix together (partly due to the transition to 3D). The RPG genre actually consists of a large number of sub-classes (Action/RPG, Strategy/RPG, Adventure/RPG, puzzle/RPG etc.), but because there are so many new casual gamers about, games are being thrown into simplified and highly generalised classifications because so many people don't / can't understand the differences. e.g. in five years time I doubt the 3D platformer will be known, because all of the 3D platformers will have been classified as adventure games because they involve "free roaming", regardless of the platforming basis of the games.

Quick point about judging by games being turn-based is again wrong (in general) because not all non-video game RPGs were turn based, in fact the original RPGs involved people taking on the roles of their characters and "acting" the part in real time within a predefined area, with attack being represented via physical contact between players.

Anyway, it's all covered better in the other thread :/

[maxlords]

This is EXACTLY the same discussion I've seen on usenet several times about both RPG classification and this game being classified as an RPG. I mean...almost word for word. No one ever agrees on this. If you think it's an RPG...you won't yield at all. If you think it's not..you won't yield at all.

Fact - Not all games are RPGs. Games like Castlevania: Symphony of the Night are flat out NOT RPGs (IMHO) although they do have RPG elements. Not every game that has RPG elements is an RPG!

Fact - Some games cross genre borders. This is more and more common with newer games.

Fact - It's pointless to agrue it cause you'll never get anywhere.

</rant>

[Quazick]

I'm more than likely stateing what everyone else said but IMO it's an Action-RPG or Action-Adventure.
It has RPG elements just no battle system.

[YoshiM]

@Nvrmore: wasn't the first RPG (ie playing via a determined set of rules in a book, not "cops n' robbers" or something like that) a dirivitive of the fantasy wargame Chainmail? Using its combat rules and then emphasizing a bit more on the character interaction than mass hack-and-slash? That was my impression, anyways.

Now if we are talking about pretending to be a knight in the back yard and the woods beyond the property line was the Haunted Forest, then yeah people have been role-playing for years and years before the name was coined.

[gamingguy]

RPGs use stats to determine the outcomes of battles. They also allow the characters to increase their stats to become stronger.

Legend of Zelda doesn't use stats to determine battle outcomes. It uses the player's ability to jiggle the joystick faster than the monster can move out of the way.

Legend of Zelda also doesn't level up Link's stats. Instead, he picks up better equipment. Steel swords. Reflective shields. Heart containers to store more life energy. Armor to reduce heart container damage to 1/2. Asbestos-lined Tunics to reduce fire damage. Strip away the equipment, and you have the same Link as at the beginning of the game. His stats have not changed... just his equipment.

So wheras RPGs rely on character stats to determine success or failure in battle, Zelda does not. Zelda relies on the player's joystick finesse and finding good equipment. So for me, Zelda falls into the same category as Indiana Jones, Pitfall, Adventure.



Final Thought: The definition offered earlier by Waveflack would make Pac-Man an RPG. It's too broad. Clarifying that RPGs use >>>character stats<<< (not equipment) for determining battle outcomes is better IMHO.

[MankeyMan]

But you don't strip him down. Thats like saying that if you were to remove all of the experience that a character has received then he would be exactly the same as at the start of the game, and is a completely baseless argument.
In your definition of an RPG you get improved stats as experience for fighting. In Zelda you receive extra armour, heart containers, spells etc.. for getting to certain points in a dungeon or doing a special mission, which is your reward for doing that. If you weren't awarded these then you wouldn't be able to get through certain parts of the game (you can't beat Ganon without the Master Sword), just as in say FF you wouldn't be able to beat bosses without being at a certain level. This means that the extra equipment is your statistical strength, like armour is your statistical defence. Just because it doesn't use numbers it doesn't mean that it isn't an RPG.

[NvrMore]

Exactly Mankey, well said.

*Sigh*

"gg", it's truely sad that you drag up the same thing again and again because you couldn't have your own way the last time you broght it up.. at least have the decency to try to continue it in the same thread as last time.

However, I'll humor you (again :roll: )


RPGs use stats to determine the outcomes of battles. They also allow the characters to increase their stats to become stronger.

Yes, as do non-stat visualisation type RPG's such as Action/RPG's. Again the difference is in little more than the representation. To make a simple point, action RPG's calculate damage based on the stats of the player's character, the only difference being that they are calculated in real time rather than a turn-based manner and as such the player is given a greater deal of control over their character.


Legend of Zelda doesn't use stats to determine battle outcomes. It uses the player's ability to jiggle the joystick faster than the monster can move out of the way.

Note: even in the statistical RPG, many games do not share the same selection of stats, many have more than others which is in no way to say that those lacking exactly the stats held in others aren't RPG's otherwise the FF series couldn't be called such due to their reduced set of characteristic stats.

Back to the point. Yes Zelda does, the only difference is that the statistics differ from other RPG's and it doesn't display them in the same manner, it still calculates based on values drawn from stats such as (names differ, but I'll use the easiest to recognise) Toughness, Strength, Resistance and Vitality, but again these stats are represented in a different manner to that of the statistical RPG. The Dexterity and Speed are represented by the player's control and increase (in most cases LOL ) as the play becomes more adept at playing the game, thus providing greater involvment in the game.

On an equivalent note, were the point of bringing the players ability and freedom to manipulate the control system brought into question regarding a game being an RPG, then the latest FF games and many other modern stat-based games would also fall into question because the battles do not pause turn by turn and rely upon the player to flick through control menus and select actions quickly and effectivly in order to be successful - thus relying the player to "jiggle the joystick" faster than the enemies can reach their next reaction time and.. react.


Legend of Zelda also doesn't level up Link's stats..

You tried to twist this point last time, I and others already answered it in the last thread, go there and read the answer again if your memory is so conveniently short.


Clarifying that RPGs use >>>character stats<<< (not equipment) for determining battle outcomes is better IMHO.

Again you're trapped in representation, as described above action RPG's do indeed make use of stat determinations during battles, your problem lies with the given style and level of control given to the player and the representation of the characters characteristics being anything but numerical values.
You also seem to believe that because the player had direct control of inflictiong the blow on an enemy (rather than the computer running through a preset animation), there was not statistical evaluation of the result of the action (attack) based on charateristic factors, yet this thinking in itself is mind-boggling, as even in stat based RPG's you aren't shown the statistical evaluation as it is made, so all you have is a series of numbers to look at representing the character's stats, exactly as in real-time RPG's you have the same thing but in graphical representation.
.. Which only leaves you with a case of real-time vs. turn based, but that doesn't work because many stat-based RPG's are real time (including the newer FF games).

[portnoyd]

::cracks maxlords with a baseball bat::

Now you see, in the classical sense

::smacks DP with a goat::

Zelda 64 would be an adventure game

::stuffs lexicon into a lunch box::

period. You can't sugarcoat it. Because

::gutpunches flukey::

technically FF10 is a RPG,

::dropkicks DP::

a strategy game (Blitzball),

::throws the lexicon lunch box::

a sports game (Blitzball),

::headbutts fluke::

a puzzle game (assorted size quests),

::hits maxlords with the baseball bat again::

and a desert topping! But it's really just an RPG. And I'm sure there are worse combos than FF10 too, but at heart, they are what the seem to be. :) Zelda 64 may have "RPG, Puzzle, Naked Rock Paper Scissors" elements, but it's still an adventure game, just call it that. As Carlin says, we use words too much.

And technically Pacman is an RPG by the definition of character improvement because Pacman eats pellets and ghosts and gets POINTS WHICH LEVEL HIM UP THE HIGH SCORE BOARD! Yay! :D

Just my opinion. And boy, was I hankerin to give a spankerin :D

dave

[Nature Boy]

I've come up (within the last week) with my own definition of an RPG:

"Any game whose length is so large that I lose interest after, at most, about 20 hours of gameplay, and I have to come back to it after several months off, if I come back to it at all"

I've also considered adding "a game you can easily play while power walking on a treadmill" but I think the first definition describes it much better. I figure I could probably play Britney's Dance Beat while using the treadmill too (and it falls short on the length definition).

(And yes, I do still enjoy buying and playing RPGs...)

[gamingguy]

But you don't strip him down.

Yes you can. You can remove all of Link's equipment and restore him to the same, weak person he was before. Link does not "level up" his stats.

That's not true with RPGs. You can strip the swords, shields, etc off, but the character is still leveled up. The character still has much, much higher stats at the end compared to the beginning.

Bottom Line: In Adventure games like Zelda, the character remains the same. In RPGs like FF, the characters gain strength.



Also, you ignored my "stats are used to determine battles" argument. In Zelda, the outcome is determined by joystick finesse. In RPGs, the outcome is determined by the stats. You have great stats, you survive. You have lousy stats, you die.

Paralyzed Christopher Reeve could play an RPG like Chrono Trigger based upon stats... but not an Adventure game like Zelda which requires eye-hand coordination.



I don't think I want to discuss this anymore. For some reason, people think the term "Adventure" is not as good as "RPG" and will bend all logic to force the "RPG" label onto anything that moves... even Pac-Man!

I have to disagree. I'd rather play an "Adventure" game like Zelda (or Haunted House or Gauntlet) that has lots of action and joystick jiggling than play an "RPG" like FF8. To me, labeling Zelda: Ocarina of Time with "RPG" is an insult to its creators.

IMHO.

Seeya!

[NvrMore]

(Sorry couldn't resist :D )

What you give, you shall recieve..

::Straps wet kippers to his feet and drop kicks Portnoyd::


Yes you can. You can remove all of Link's equipment and restore him to the same, weak person he was before. Link does not "level up" his stats...

Really, I'll have to try stripping link of his heart containers some time (health), and of course there's all those items which boost his abilities which I just can't seem to get rid of.. have you ever played a Zelda game?, at all?, ever?


Bottom Line: In Adventure games like Zelda, the character remains the same. In RPGs like FF, the characters gain strength.

Bottom line? LOL

What's apparent here is that despite your qualms with Zelda (and other non-stat RPG's) being an RPG being answered numerous times you continue to ignore that which doesn't suit you (as per ususal) and have no understanding of RPG's because your experience with them is grossely limited to the FF games and other such FF clones.


Also, you ignored my "stats are used to determine battles" argument. In Zelda, the outcome is determined by joystick finesse. In RPGs, the outcome is determined by the stats. You have great stats, you survive. You have lousy stats, you die.

Nope, that was answered (again :roll: ) in great detail for you, but you yet again conveniently ignore it because it doesn't suit you and doesn't match what you think, so yet again your self-opinionated ignorance shows you as incapable of reasoned discussion.


Paralyzed Christopher Reeve could play an RPG like Chrono Trigger based upon stats... but not an Adventure game like Zelda which requires eye-hand coordination.

What the hell has a mans disability got to do with RPG's?

oh yeah, I must have missed the memo, right?..

Definition of an RPG: A game that a paralyzed individual can play

Is that really your problem with it?, is this because you have pathetic hand-eye coordination and don't want to accept that you just plain suck at RPG's which don't do all the hard stuff for you so you can watch all the pretty FMV's?


I don't think I want to discuss this anymore. For some reason, people think the term "Adventure" is not as good as "RPG" and will bend all logic to force the "RPG" label onto anything that moves... even Pac-Man!

Awwww :puppydogeyes:

You dragged it all up again, hoping to disguise it as a new topic so that you could throw the same crap around again and try to get your own way.. but the meanies wouldn't concede to your proclaimations.

By the way, nobody's down-playing adventures, they just know about RPGs and have actually played a variety of them (not just FF games too :o ).


To me, labeling Zelda: Ocarina of Time with "RPG" is an insult to its creators.

Don't even try that crap, you don't know the first thing about the Zelda series and it's creator and have very little experience and understanding of the games. To claim that opinions differing from your own are an insult to the creators of the game, is complete and total idiocy.

[gamingguy]

Okay, I'll open my mind for a minute...



Please give me examples of "adventure" games (not RPGs) to demonstrate why Zelda doesn't fit in that category.

[Ruudos]

An Adventure.
Of course it has RPG elements, but that doesn't make it a RPG.
It also has Action elements, that doesn't make it an action game.

RPG is a sort of Adventure game.
If you call Zelda a RPG, what are examples of Adventure games then???

[NvrMore]

It's nonsense like this which led to your current state "gamingguy"


Please give me examples of "adventure" games (not RPGs) to demonstrate why Zelda doesn't fit in that category.

Here's an even better idea :D . Instead of continuously expecting everyone else to run around after you, to repeadedly explain the same things over and over again because you keep dragging them up hoping to push your opinions onto others, and demanding that they repeatedly support their points when you consistently refuse to / can't support your own,.. why not actually grow up a little, let go of the apron strings and try to understand the concept of reasoned discussion and how to participate in such.

[Ruudos]

And that's what I think is the difference between a (Action) RPG and Adventure game.

In a RPG you can level up weapons and magic (fighting many foes over and over again), while in an Adventure game you cannot, there you have to find a new sword or item.

I shall try to explain this to compare Zelda 3 with Secret of Mana.
Zelda 3 is an adventure game in my book and Secret of Mana an Action RPG.

Many people say these games are very a like, while this may be the case, but I noticed a big difference between these two games.

The difference is the leveling up in SoM of all your weapons and magic spells. I found it boring to repeat the same spell over and over again in the Water Palace until my MP were gone, I talked to that woman again and could proceed. Same with upgrading the weapons in the area between two towns. This is in many games, but not in what I call Adventure games, such as Zelda 3.
Here you have a weapon, can buy some potions, but then you have to go to a certain castle and complete it. You can't make yourself stronger at certain points by just fighting. Only thing you earn with fighting the small enemies is some money and small hearts.

[gamingguy]

NVRMORE: Please focus on discussing the TOPIC, not criticizing the person. That's why I ignore most of what you say. I'm not interested in discussing myself or my habits.

I'm interested in discussing the GAME and the TOPIC. Please stick to that. Thank you.



RUUDOS: Well said. I hadn't thought of it quite that way.

[NvrMore]

"Gamingguy", your "habits" are exactly what caused so much trouble last time. I've been more than patient and giving with you, both before and after your incident, but if you're going to continue behaving and pulling the same nonsense you did before, then I will treat you approriately. Your behaviour has already wrecked enough discussions and led to your being in the state you are now, grow up and actually learn to participate in a reasoned discusion, otherwise I seen no reason to be anymore patient than I already have been.

By the way, the innocent victim act still doesn't work :roll:


@Ruudos: I'm afraid you've lost me slightly on where exactly you're trying to make your point (most likely I'm reading something wrong).

Your example of comparing two real-time games of different style (ALTTP Vs SoM) is a good one, but you appear to be basing the comparison on the weapon systems, notably the weapon experience sub-system contained in SoM and the lack thereof that same style of system in ALTTP.
It's just that, I don't understand the comparison because that weapon experience system isn't a common or standard feature of any style of RPG. In most RPGs (stat based, action/rpg, adventure/rpg etc.) weapons function on a standard pick-up and use system, rather than the experience system available in SoM, indeed I've found that system is far less common and have only seen a few mild variations outside of the Seiken Densetsu series of games. Indeed that comparison holds up between the two games you chose but not in the bigger picture.

I'm sure I must be misinterpreting your point somewhere, if I have please let me know what I'm missing. Perhaps you were pointing more towards the experience based character development system (commonly found in stat-based RPGs) versus the collection based development system in which case it would again fall into being just a (intentionally) deceptive difference of development representation between the games (I'll not get into it unless that's what you meant)

[Ruudos]

Well maybe that wasn't the best example. But the HP example stays the same. This other way of levelling up is what makes the difference to me. Otherwise you could almost call Super Metroid a RPG too (you find new Energy tanks, new armor, new weapons)

[gamingguy]

Or Banjo-Kazooie. He gains health energy just like Zelda. Is Banjo a RPG character? Hardly.

[NvrMore]

@Ruudos: NP, it wasn't too bad an example, I think I got the general gist of what you were trying to get at. Unfortunately we're now right back at a point which Nature Boy and I reached in the original discussion several months ago.. Genre mixing X_x .

Indeed metroid is a fair example of collective bonuses of similar style to Zelda, but to lump one genre of game in with another because they share a common characteristic is just far too generalised and leads rigfht back to the very same problem we have right now.

E.g. As to your example, if a game can be said to belong to another genre simply based on it sharing a characteristic more commonly associated with that other genre then SMW (and to an extent SMB3) could be said to be an RPG because it allows free roaming movement throughout the game world (RPG characteristic) and a world map (RPG Characteristic).

Similarily a number of sports titles could be said to be RPG's because players develope and gain improved characteristics as they develop, or RTS's (in the case of managment) due to their resource management and strategic planning elements. etc.

Basically, most games could be lumped into another genre if it was only neccesary that they share a characteristic commonly associated with that particular genre, but as you can see this simply doesn't work :/

@gamingguy: Quit trying to mooch off Ruudos's points.

Does it help you? Hardly :roll:

[gamingguy]

Based upon NvrMore's argument, we can conclude that Zelda is NOT a role-playing game. Yes Zelda increases his HP, but that *one* shared characteristic does not make it an RPG. Zelda is an adventure game.

[NvrMore]

Good lord you're an idiot, really, how could you misunderstand such a simple example, or was it simply that in your desperate haste to proclaim that you're correct, you grasped at something which you hoped would support you but which in fact was just way over your head and thus in turn you ended up making a complete ass out of yourself by trying to use an example which was used (pay careful attention I'll say it very, very simply) to highlight the flaw in claiming a single shared trait can be used to place a game in another genre.

Very simply put..

The example was used to highlight the fact that if such over-simplistic logic were to be used then other games which clearly belong to a particular genre would be thrown into a genre to which they clearly do nt belong, simply because they contain a characteristic which is more commonly associated with another genre.

e.g. Super Mario World would be classified as an RPG because it uses a world map and allows free roaming. SMW is clearly not an RPG, but if using such overly simple logic for classification, it could be said to be one. Thus the method does not work, as a genre is defined by more than a single characteristic.


But this is all beside the point now..

I'm bored with trying to be nice and humoring you Troy. I've been more than patient in giving you the opportunity to prove that you may actually have learned something from what you brought on yourself last time, but you're pulling the same tiresome sh!t that you always have. Honestly, I have no desire to continue being so patient when all you're going to do drag down discussions in your usual self-opinionated and brat-like manner because of your inability to participate in, or even comprehend the concept of reasoned discussion.
Indeed in part I felt sorry for you being that time and again your actions and behaviour has proved how pathetic your life really is, especially so much so that you were so quick to re-signup and continue posting on a board that you dislike so much, no doubt under that deluded thinking that you were being really clever outhinking everyone and that nobody would notice. And all after your all too common preaching about obeying board rules and maturity and the whiney attempts to get people banned for not doing as you deemed the rules stated.. but when all is said and done, you can't even practice what you preach, proving how worthless what you say really is.

[Kess]

GRR! I HATE WHEN PEOPLE SAY ITS AN RPG.

Is it turn based? No
Is there HP? No
Is there Magic? Kinda.
Is there a battle menu? No.
Are there different weapons and armor to equip? To a certain extent.

Very few yes's. Listen, this is an ACTION RPG, not an RPG RPG. 'nuff said.

[gamingguy]

Summary of NvrMore's argument for 'Why Zelda is a role-playing game':
(1) If you don't agree with NvrMore you're an idiot.
(2) Plus, you're an idiot.
(3) And finally, you're an idiot.
(4) Also pathetic.
(5) And you don't know how to participate in reasoned discussion.


Wow. I am so overwhelmed NvrMore. I just can't compete against that level of logic/reason. "You're an idiot." Amazing. Why didn't I think of that thoroughly reasoned point?

/end sarcasm



nvrmore: YOU are the one who continues unleashing the insults, not I. YOU are the one who can't hold a CIVIL discussion.

Anyway, from now on my eyes are blind to NvrMore's posts. You can speak and zing insults all you want, but you'll get no response from me.

Seeya...

[gamingguy]

Very few yes's. Listen, this is an ACTION RPG, not an RPG RPG. 'nuff said.


The most important thing Zelda is missing is "dice-rolling" for determining battle outcomes. A true RPG uses stats to decide how battles will turn out, whereas Zelda use joystick jiggling.

Zelda has more in common with Mario Sunshine than Dungeons&Dragons. Zelda is primarily an "Adventure" game IMHO.

[NvrMore]

Note to other board members who have recently become tired of arguments between posters. My apologies for my less than patient response to gamingguy's / theaveng's posts but frankly I'm tired of his behaviour and despite trying to look the other way and give him another chance he's just going right back to how he was before and frankly I'd rather deal with this now than sit around and watch him drag down threads and post his usual brat-like crap everywhere.



nvrmore: YOU are the one who continues unleashing the insults, not I. YOU are the one who can't hold a CIVIL discussion.

Anyway, from now on my eyes are blind to NvrMore's posts. You can speak and zing insults all you want, but you'll get no response from me.

Seeya...

gamingguy, Troy, theaveng, whatever you want to call yourself. It has been said before and it will be said again, the innocent victim act doesn't work. Despite your desperate and delusional attempts to cry victim and blame everyone else for the results of your behaviour.

You were banned for a reason, and although you're desperately trying to avoid that point and hide under a new user name it doesn't distract from the fact that your attitude is still the same and you still lack the ability and mentality to participate in any kind of discussion. You continue dragging up the same thngs over and over again because you won't let it go unless you can have your own way and make everyone agree with you. You act like a spoiled brat and expect everyone to do everything for you and when you can't have your own way or are confronted with facts which you don't like you get into childish strop and try to play the innocent victim.

e.g. contrary to your little act above, I have discussed this subject with all of the other posters who have brought up points and to the best of my knowledge have yet to put any of them down.
But you however, despite having this exact discussion a few months ago in which you didn't get your own way (top 50 RPG thread in which all of this had been addressed) decided to drag this same topic up again in a new thread rather than continuing it from the other because you were hoping that by prentending to be someone else, you would be able to get away with gnoring the discussion and answers which you didn't like and pulling the same crap you always have.

As you so frequently prove, unlike the other posters troy, you don't deserve to be treated in a civil manner or shown any respect because at best you're nothing more than a troll. You were banned from message boards that you don't like, yet you weren't even able to go longer than a few hours before signing up again and continuing to post, despite all of your preaching about obeying rules, respecting others and maturity.. I can't even begin to imagine how pathetic your life must be.

[gamingguy]

I didn't even bother to read your message NvrMore. I'm tired of the insults. So, just save your breath 'cause I'm not listening.

Bye NvrMore.

[gamingguy]

If anyone's still listening, I don't consider Kingdom Hearts an RPG either. Even though it uses Stats, those stats are basically worthless since success or failure depends on how fast you can jiggle your joystick. For me, a "true" RPG uses nothing but stats to determine battle outcomes.

IMHO.

[NvrMore]

Oh look, the blind can see :roll:

Get used to it, you deserve nothing more.

Why are you still here, theaveng? you were banned remember?. After so much whining about the rules of the board, maturity and wanting to get people banned I'd love to know why you couldn't even last a day without a message board, it's mods and members whom you protested so much about.

Oh, and why exactly do you consider yourself exempt from what you preach to others? do you undestand the meaning of hypocrisy?

[YoshiM]

By the Gods and their avatars, this thread STILL lives? I stopped reading it a while ago. NvrMore and the others have done a good job explaining and carrying the topic intelligently. Gamingguy (who's theaveng?! He would've gotten away with it if it weren't for those meddling kids) seems to just reiterate his same thoughts over and over again.

GG: while this is a board to discuss one's thoughts and debates, there are always things that no one will see eye to eye on. For any ridicule and such you get, you bring it onto yourself. This was observed with the whole other fiasco thread where you and I were duking it out mainly because, a lot of the time, you read what you want to read (or read between lines that had nothing to begin with). Adding a post with a "la la can'thearyou" message just adds to the childishness of your attitude.

Besides, everyone credible knows Zelda is a puzzle game.

[gamingguy]

Besides, everyone credible knows Zelda is a puzzle game.


I agree. Hadn't thought of Zelda fitting into that genre, but it does make a lot of sense. Thanks Yoshi!

[Quazick]

If anyone's still listening, I don't consider Kingdom Hearts an RPG either. Even though it uses Stats, those stats are basically worthless since success or failure depends on how fast you can jiggle your joystick. For me, a "true" RPG uses nothing but stats to determine battle outcomes.

IMHO.

You are the biggest idiot around...

NOTHING but stats eh?
So in final fantasy tactics when I move someone does that make it not a "true" rpg?
When I push a button it's not exactly relying on stats now is it?

And also Kingdom Hearts relies on Levels, Hit points and Magic Points.

Zelda DOES NOT.

There are parts in knigdom hearts that you just can't beat without being on a certain level....sounds like an RPG to me..

[digitalpress]

I sense an unwanted member of these forums returning, for reasons that I cannot possibly fathom.

This is generally considered a bad idea.

@gamingguy: all eyes are on you. Tread lightly.

>>LOCK<<