My god, this is such a moot point.

quote: Original post by MSW

Enough of the "game genres arn''t definitive" crap already... Genres have never been all powerful defineing tools...they are just lose associations comprised from simular common features found in comparable products...they don''t have sharp edge borders...and never have

It is not that we keep on saying that they aren''t definitive... It is just that some people don''t believe us. You have it right, RPG''s never had a strict regulation... But everybody seems to think that they do. This is why we keep ranting about it.

As for Matrix - you''re goddamn right! A couple of other movies come to mind. I don''t know where I would class "The Usual Suspects" but I think it would better fit in Drama - yet the actual content of the story would put it more akin to Action - even though there isn''t much...

Basically - GENERE''s JUST DON''T CUT THE GRADE... Which is why you need to think about games abstractly. AP had it right there about the creation of a genre, I just want people AS game designers to start looking from a new angle instead of making ''yet another <insert GREAT game genre here> game!''. IT IS TIME TO MOVE ON TO BIGGER AND BETTER THINGS PEOPLE

-Chris Bennett of Dwarfsoft - Site:"The Philosophers' Stone of Programming Alchemy" - IOL
The future of RPGs - Thanks to all the goblins over in our little Game Design Corner niche
          

This thread makes my head hurt.

Yeah, I agree

Well if genres didn''t exist then there would be be no room for genre-breaking games that seem to look innovative

I really can''t believe that people pick a genre and make a game! I mean just because I may to choose to put guns in my game doesn''t class it as a shooter. It just means that the gameplay mechanics of aiming a gun and the evisceral pleasure of depicted explosions/vioilence are fun parts of the games design! I think as for Zelda you play the role of link therefore it is an rpg, but then that would class tomb raider as an rpg (plus most games ever made) traditionally with roleplaying you create the role yourself so for example you are not just given a character to control but you are ''acting'' as that character instead of yourself. I think online rpgs have more roleplaying, whereas in zelda you are following a story - you just have a certain amount of freedom and interactivity to do it. As for the puzzles? All games have puzzles either a) to slow the games pace down b) cause they are fun/satisfying/challenging/rewarding to the player and without reward why play the game?

Genres are just a catagory so that the game can be quickly described and related to, everything in the world has a catagory! An apple is a fruit, a rose is a flower, even people are catagorised into thier lifestyle character/ you have DINK (double income no kids) all professions have thier catagories and acronims. Its human nature just accept it but just don''t let that sacrifice fresh and original gameplay.

-+GAME OVER+-

perception -> Consciousness -> life

OK... Let us not all start debating the ''true meaning'' of RPG... Let us just move on from that people

-Chris Bennett of Dwarfsoft - Site:"The Philosophers' Stone of Programming Alchemy" - IOL
The future of RPGs - Thanks to all the goblins over in our little Game Design Corner niche
          

Well sometimes this is important.

I''ve recently approached a publisher with this game of mine that''s modeled after the original Legend of Zelda. Their polite response was that Zelda is an rpg, and a precursor of Baldur''s Gate. And that there is little market for budget rpg''s as there are AAA competitors.

Well now it does matter a little more. By my argument, a Zelda game is more like Dweebs (didn''t that win shareware of the year or something?) or Blocks3, the game that recently won the gamedev.net puzzle design contest.

Puzzle games are very marketable on the budget scene. So its unfortunate that my game has a strike against it because of poorly defined genres and the irresistable urges to classify.

Oh I see what you mean, ape...that does really suck. I have noticed that budget publishers tend not to want (what they consider to be) RPGs as much. Stupid genres are messing up everything.


"All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be --Pink Floyd
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
Need help? Well, go FAQ yourself.


Edited by - Nazrix on November 6, 2000 1:46:06 PM

NOW THERE''S EVIDENCE! Genre''s are screwing up us poor developers more and more. That is what you get for Genre-lising! I am adding this EVIDENCE into the doc! ITS BLOODY OUTRAGEOUS!

-Chris Bennett of Dwarfsoft - Site:"The Philosophers'' Stone of Programming Alchemy" - IOL
The future of RPGs - Thanks to all the goblins over in our little Game Design Corner niche
          

yeah but the bad thing is that we can possibly change the minds of developers, but not publishers. They''re on the corporate side whether they want to be or not. We all know what is important on that side...money, not a bunch of idealists that want to abandon genres.

So, when a games they consider to be RPGs don''t sell as well then they''re not going to accept them as much.


"All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be --Pink Floyd
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
Need help? Well, go FAQ yourself.