Zelda Is Not An RPG

[Abengoshis]

You play a role - it's a role playing game. In that sense isn't every game a RPG?

 

[Signa]

Yeah, it kinda ticks me off too. Zelda is Not an RPG. Anyone who says so has not played real RPGs of any sort. Zelda 2 did kinda qualify as a RPG since you did level up and get stronger, but that is the only exception.

well yea it's action/adventure.

it would be an RPG in the same way that say... Gran Turismo or Army of Two are both RPGs. You play a "role" in both games right?

by definition I usually look at RPGs as having level caps and swappable pants.

Actually, Gran Turismo is closer to a RPG than Zelda is. In GT, you "battle" other cars for experience (trophies) and money, which can entitle you to buy better cars and upgrades to "battle" other stronger cars. That describes a RPG a lot more than Zelda with a stat-less character system and pre-scripted item acquisition.

 

[martin's a madman]

Well, in Twilight Princess Link does learn new sword techniques which are both optional and make fighting later in the game easier. The retrieval of items does have the leveling affect of making tasks simpler or even possible.

Just because the game doesn't count your levels for you or let you put skill points in so your character get's more skilled doesn't mean it can't be considered an RPG, it allows you a more realistic human tendency by giving you technologies that allow you to do things.

Any leveling is to be done by the player, you become more familiar with certain things. One point in the game you might never look on the ceiling to find a missing switch, but later on in the game you've developed the thought processing associated with Legend Of Zelda to do exactly that. Also, the heart containers are a leveling system and the "Grindable qualities" could very well be collecting the pieces of heart.

We can't fall into the trap of having a certain genre of a game being done one specific way. Common consent gave shooters regenerating health which takes away from the submersion. Leveling doesn't actually have to do with having increasing number measured levels. They can be simply having your character gradually become more able over time.

 

[JourneyThroughHell]

For some reason whenever I hear that people say that Zelda games are RPGs I getting REALLY ticked off by it. I want to hear other people's thoughts on this... I plan to make a video or write an article about htis because I'm really passionate about it and it just annoys me to no end. But in order to plan it out I need a good collection of general feedback (though I have some general and some incredibly idiotic feedback already) though first of all this is my take on it:

Zelda games are not RPGs because there is no significant grindable mechanics whereby the player can perform repeated tasks to decrease the difficulty of certain tasks. All improvements and upgrades that the player can accumulate are based on several one-time events, many of which are simply alterations to the gameplay features rather than optional increases. The only grindability that comes from Zelda games is the way the player can collect items from enemies and grass although this mechanic is incredibly minor

That's pretty much right, but the term "grindable mechanics" is sort of weird.
Also, are you the VelocityEleven guy from Youtube?

indeed I am, how do you know me?

Through my general knowledge of the Youtube community, I happen to know a lot of the ranters and commentary makers.

 

[Velocity Eleven]

well I must say that you people have a far better understanding of this than the vast majority of people I've spoken to

For some reason whenever I hear that people say that Zelda games are RPGs I getting REALLY ticked off by it. I want to hear other people's thoughts on this... I plan to make a video or write an article about htis because I'm really passionate about it and it just annoys me to no end. But in order to plan it out I need a good collection of general feedback (though I have some general and some incredibly idiotic feedback already) though first of all this is my take on it:

Zelda games are not RPGs because there is no significant grindable mechanics whereby the player can perform repeated tasks to decrease the difficulty of certain tasks. All improvements and upgrades that the player can accumulate are based on several one-time events, many of which are simply alterations to the gameplay features rather than optional increases. The only grindability that comes from Zelda games is the way the player can collect items from enemies and grass although this mechanic is incredibly minor

That's pretty much right, but the term "grindable mechanics" is sort of weird.
Also, are you the VelocityEleven guy from Youtube?

indeed I am, how do you know me?

Through my general knowledge of the Youtube community, I happen to know a lot of the ranters and commentary makers.

anything in particular?

 

[PureChaos]

TECHNICALLY it's an RPG but i always considered it to be action/adventure. one of the things i thought separated it from 'proper' RPGs is the lack of a level up system, though the lack of the level up system is not necessarily a bad thing

 

[InfernoJesus]

In Zelda games, you role-play as Link as you follow his story. This is by definition role-playing.

 

[Velocity Eleven]

Well, in Twilight Princess Link does learn new sword techniques which are both optional and make fighting later in the game easier. The retrieval of items does have the leveling affect of making tasks simpler or even possible.

Just because the game doesn't count your levels for you or let you put skill points in so your character get's more skilled doesn't mean it can't be considered an RPG, it allows you a more realistic human tendency by giving you technologies that allow you to do things.

Any leveling is to be done by the player, you become more familiar with certain things. One point in the game you might never look on the ceiling to find a missing switch, but later on in the game you've developed the thought processing associated with Legend Of Zelda to do exactly that. Also, the heart containers are a leveling system and the "Grindable qualities" could very well be collecting the pieces of heart.

We can't fall into the trap of having a certain genre of a game being done one specific way. Common consent gave shooters regenerating health which takes away from the submersion. Leveling doesn't actually have to do with having increasing number measured levels. They can be simply having your character gradually become more able over time.

TECHNICALLY it's an RPG but i always considered it to be action/adventure. one of the things i thought separated it from 'proper' RPGs is the lack of a level up system, though the lack of the level up system is not necessarily a bad thing

collecting heart pieces is not grindable, and this has nothing to do with the quality of zelda games, just their definition

 

[zelda2fanboy]

Zelda 2 was an RPG. That whole game was just one big level grind.

 

[Tarkand]

In Zelda games, you role-play as Link as you follow his story. This is by definition role-playing.

As in Halo, you role-play as Master Chief as you follow his history. This is by definition role-playing.

See what I did there?

I think the main reason why people think Zelda is a rpg are as follow:

- Back in its NES day, the Zelda game were complex and massive - very 'rpg-like' in those aspects. You also saved your game, which wasn't a very common mechanism back then. To many people, this made Zelda into an 'rpg'.

- It's filled with elves, magic, potions, etc - all staples of the rpg genre. A lot of people have a hard time looking deeper into anything, so if it looks like an rpg, it must be one.

I would also warrant that many people who call Zelda an rpg aren't fan of the serie.

Zelda has a lot more in common with Metroid (another adventure/action game) or even Tomb Raider rather than any rpg, be they WRPG or JRPG. There is no 'experience point' in Zelda, no level, no progression... your character evolves by finding things and solving puzzles. Don't get me wrong, I love the Zelda games, but when I want my 'rpg fix', it doesn't deliver, because it's not an rpg.

 

[ray=out]

amidoinitrite?

 

[Julianking93]

I don't know why its called an RPG.

You don't level up, the characters don't look like 12 year old girls and (most of the time) you don't carry weapons that are 3 times as big as you are.

 

[LeonLethality]

I would also warrant that many people who call Zelda an rpg aren't fan of the serise.

I am a huge fan of the Zelda series and did you read the first reply on this thread? yeah I think of it as an ARPG and I know quite a few others who think of it as an ARPG so you might want to revise that.

 

[Quaidis]

Zelda is an action-adventure game. The large fact that keeps it from being an rpg (at least in classic terms) is that you're constantly on the move and... adventuring. With action! With rpgs you need some form of strategy in battles than, "shoot it with an arrow, slash it with a sword!" Rpgs tend to have a group and a turn-based (or in today's world 'semi-turn based') attack plan opposed to a single person doing everything. That's what separates FinalFantasy from Zelda, Mario Galaxy (action) from Paper Mario (rpg).


Only recently have people actually been confused over the differences. This is primarily due to the fact that everyone has more recently been mudding the genes of the game genres. Oh no, we can't have rpgs with turns! Screw turn-based. Let's do Live action.. where the characters.. well.. they take turns... But it's active! Screw first person shoots and rpgs! Let's do an fps rpg! Now people are confused on which is which. To make it easier to distinguish, don't look at names, look at how they were played in the 1980's - 90's. There are considerable difference in gameplay and structure.

 

[Velocity Eleven]

amidoinitrite?

the website got it wrong, either that or they purposefully put it in the wrong section in order to target the general misinformed audience

 

[Ridonculous_Ninja]

Only Zelda 2 was an RPG, my friend pissed me off by saying the whole series was made up of RPGs, and then saying it was because friends he has in the games industry who obviously know more about classifying games than me said so.

Stats and levelling = RPG

Also on the note of Heart Containers constituting levelling, Heart Containers are ITEMS. As such they are not levelling, they are still collecting which is definitely part of an adventure game. Same goes for the Quiver/Bomb Bag/Wallet upgrades.

 

[ray=out]

I suppose slapping an rpg tag on it aswell as its action-adventure (even puzzle) tags helps is become more visable to a wider market? Generally speaking, most people into the RPG side of things are likely to enjoy a good Zelda, I know I sure do.

Technically: RPG by definition
In Reality: No, not really - I suppose loosely it is seeing as adventure games are now generally lackluster stories while zelda actually feels like an adventure, if you put any effort into story telling in your games now that instantly makes it an RPG for who knows what reason.

 

[Velocity Eleven]

Also on the note of Heart Containers constituting levelling, Heart Containers are ITEMS. As such they are not levelling, they are still collecting which is definitely part of an adventure game. Same goes for the Quiver/Bomb Bag/Wallet upgrades.

actually no, it can still be an RPG if it based off items, as long as the item-collecting process is a grindable feature... which in most cases it isnt, but it technically could be

 

[Tarkand]

I am a huge fan of the Zelda series and did you read the first reply on this thread? yeah I think of it as an ARPG and I know quite a few others who think of it as an ARPG so you might want to revise that.

Do you consider Metroid an rpg?

Because on a conceptual level, Zelda and Metroid are more or less the same game but with different setting - Gather power up that increase your health/ammo and give you new toy to play with as you walk around sprawling levels and solve puzzles.

Both games are really fun and really enjoyable.

Neither are rpg. They have no rpg elements.

I mean Bioshock has more rpg elemental than Zelda does, and it's still not considered an rpg.

 

[martin's a madman]

Well, in Twilight Princess Link does learn new sword techniques which are both optional and make fighting later in the game easier. The retrieval of items does have the leveling affect of making tasks simpler or even possible.

Just because the game doesn't count your levels for you or let you put skill points in so your character get's more skilled doesn't mean it can't be considered an RPG, it allows you a more realistic human tendency by giving you technologies that allow you to do things.

Any leveling is to be done by the player, you become more familiar with certain things. One point in the game you might never look on the ceiling to find a missing switch, but later on in the game you've developed the thought processing associated with Legend Of Zelda to do exactly that. Also, the heart containers are a leveling system and the "Grindable qualities" could very well be collecting the pieces of heart.

We can't fall into the trap of having a certain genre of a game being done one specific way. Common consent gave shooters regenerating health which takes away from the submersion. Leveling doesn't actually have to do with having increasing number measured levels. They can be simply having your character gradually become more able over time.

TECHNICALLY it's an RPG but i always considered it to be action/adventure. one of the things i thought separated it from 'proper' RPGs is the lack of a level up system, though the lack of the level up system is not necessarily a bad thing

collecting heart pieces is not grindable, and this has nothing to do with the quality of zelda games, just their definition

Why isn't it grindable? You do tedious tasks to increase your character's effectiveness.