4 ms·

I think Legend of Zelda series is considered an "action-adventure game", not an "adventure game". The former tends to occupy the "gameplay space" of an action R

I think Legend of Zelda series is considered an "action-adventure game", not an "adventure game". The former tends to occupy the "gameplay space" of an action RPG with little to no stats or loot/inventory juggling, optionally with platforming (if 3D). It's a bit tricky because the definition of "action-adventure" broadened as LoZ added more gameplay elements, and more games became "LoZ adjacent" (although it's not as muddled as the definition of "rogue-like", which got all messed up because of Spelunky being a surprise hit). Adventure games are almost always narrative driven and puzzle-oriented though, and without RPG elements (because if they had strong RPG elements they'd just be called RPGs).

lucideer 4y ago
> Adventure games are almost always narrative driven and puzzle-oriented though LoZ is highly puzzle-oriented. Not so narrative driven though so if both are required, that fits... but: > and without RPG elements (because if they had strong RPG elements they'd just be called RPGs). What are RPG elements in this context if not narrative?
- ehnto 4y ago
  Most RPG's really boil down to point accumulation and skill trees that don't affect the plot at all. Which is a shame, because roles and skills could play a huge role in narrative if developers are able to put in the time. Some games do, the Fallout series often gives you different paths through the story depending on the abilities you've acquired.
  - vanderZwan 4y ago
    You hit the nail on the head and I should have been more clear about that, thanks.
  - lucideer 4y ago
    Ah this is all a good point, yeah. I guess I was more thinking of the presence of/emphasis on a narrative (quantity of dialogue, cut-scenes, character personalities, etc.) rather than the direct bearing that narrative has on gameplay (you're right that it's often relatively little). I hadn't really thought of Fallout as an RPG, nor e.g. Deus Ex, I guess the FP nature makes them seem more different. Witcher is more of one, but I guess they all 3 have commonalities.
chongli 4y ago
Adventure games are almost always narrative driven and puzzle-oriented though, and without RPG elements (because if they had strong RPG elements they'd just be called RPGs). The games of the Quest for Glory series [1] are most definitely adventure games, not RPGs, despite having some RPG elements. They also happen to be my favourite adventure games due to the way most puzzles have multiple solutions (intended for the different character classes but not strictly required by them). The series is also one of the very few where you have the ability to export your character at the end of each game and import him into the next, allowing you to play all 5 games with the same character. This is made particularly interesting by the wildly different settings of each game as well as the evolving technology of the series. Not everyone likes all of the games, however. My personal favourite is the 4th game, Shadows of Darkness, which is fully voice acted and narrated by John Rhys-Davies. I think they’re all worth playing through, however, especially by taking the same character all the way. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quest_for_Glory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quest_for_Glory
- svachalek 4y ago
  You're both right, "strong RPG elements" and "some RPG elements" are not equivalent phrases.
BlargMcLarg 4y ago
By those standards, it feels like the author blindsided themselves immensely. Not only did the genre evolve to be more, the old style was picked up by indies. RPG maker games in particular (ironically not RPGs most of the time). Simultaneously, narrative became far more important in the other genres. Bing-bing-wahoo expanded beyond a cake invitation. All of these were true prior to 2004, and other genres evolved too.
- vanderZwan 4y ago
  Most of article was written in 1989, including the headline. Which includes the date it was written. It also was written by the design lead of The Secret of Monkey Island I and II. It was made public in 2004, and the author included this statement in the article: > Some people will tell you that Adventure Games aren't really dead, they have just morphed into other forms, or that other genres have absorbed Adventure Games. If this is true, they've done a pretty bad job of it. So I don't think it's blindsighted so much as old-man-yells-at-cloud disagreeing with you on what a Real Adventure Game is. Although in Ron Gilbert's defense, he also writes: > As I read this some 15 years later, I'm not sure I agree with everything in here anymore. I learned a lot from Monkey Island 1 and 2, plus countless kids Adventure Games at Humongous Entertainment. At some point in the near future, I will do an annotated version of this article, talking about things that have changed, or were just plains wrong. But in the meantime, there is something interesting on TV right now. So still not so much blindsighted as "never elaborated upon what he really thinks of the 1989 article these days".
- grumbel 4y ago
  I wouldn't say the genre evolved, it pretty much peaked back in the early 90s and hasn't seen any serious improvements since. The pie-menus of Curse of Monkey Island were about the last lasting improvement I can think of. Everything else turned out a short lived gimmick, an outright failure (e.g. controls in MI4/Grim) or just a watering down (e.g. casual hidden-object games). And while narrative have become far more important in other genres, those style of narratives are completely different to what a point&click would offer. Action games are about action, you shoot or slash through things. You kill stuff. Narrative happens in cut-scenes without player control. It's not part of the gameplay. That's what makes point&click games special, as the there is no disconnect, the narrative is driven by the players the actions. And while there are certainly some RPGs that cross the line, not many do. The mainstream RPG is still obsessed with stats, collecting dozens of the same item and stuff like that. In a point&click almost everything is unique, there are no faceless copy&paste NPCs, no mountains of useless items to collect. If you find an item in a point&click, it's very likely part of the plot in some form.

lucideer 4y ago

> Adventure games are almost always narrative driven and puzzle-oriented though LoZ is highly puzzle-oriented. Not so narrative driven though so if both are required, that fits... but: > and without RPG elements (because if they had strong RPG elements they'd just be called RPGs). What are RPG elements in this context if not narrative?

ehnto 4y ago
Most RPG's really boil down to point accumulation and skill trees that don't affect the plot at all. Which is a shame, because roles and skills could play a huge role in narrative if developers are able to put in the time. Some games do, the Fallout series often gives you different paths through the story depending on the abilities you've acquired.
- vanderZwan 4y ago
  You hit the nail on the head and I should have been more clear about that, thanks.
- lucideer 4y ago
  Ah this is all a good point, yeah. I guess I was more thinking of the presence of/emphasis on a narrative (quantity of dialogue, cut-scenes, character personalities, etc.) rather than the direct bearing that narrative has on gameplay (you're right that it's often relatively little). I hadn't really thought of Fallout as an RPG, nor e.g. Deus Ex, I guess the FP nature makes them seem more different. Witcher is more of one, but I guess they all 3 have commonalities.

chongli 4y ago

Adventure games are almost always narrative driven and puzzle-oriented though, and without RPG elements (because if they had strong RPG elements they'd just be called RPGs). The games of the Quest for Glory series [1] are most definitely adventure games, not RPGs, despite having some RPG elements. They also happen to be my favourite adventure games due to the way most puzzles have multiple solutions (intended for the different character classes but not strictly required by them). The series is also one of the very few where you have the ability to export your character at the end of each game and import him into the next, allowing you to play all 5 games with the same character. This is made particularly interesting by the wildly different settings of each game as well as the evolving technology of the series. Not everyone likes all of the games, however. My personal favourite is the 4th game, Shadows of Darkness, which is fully voice acted and narrated by John Rhys-Davies. I think they’re all worth playing through, however, especially by taking the same character all the way. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quest_for_Glory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quest_for_Glory

svachalek 4y ago
You're both right, "strong RPG elements" and "some RPG elements" are not equivalent phrases.

BlargMcLarg 4y ago

By those standards, it feels like the author blindsided themselves immensely. Not only did the genre evolve to be more, the old style was picked up by indies. RPG maker games in particular (ironically not RPGs most of the time). Simultaneously, narrative became far more important in the other genres. Bing-bing-wahoo expanded beyond a cake invitation. All of these were true prior to 2004, and other genres evolved too.

vanderZwan 4y ago
Most of article was written in 1989, including the headline. Which includes the date it was written. It also was written by the design lead of The Secret of Monkey Island I and II. It was made public in 2004, and the author included this statement in the article: > Some people will tell you that Adventure Games aren't really dead, they have just morphed into other forms, or that other genres have absorbed Adventure Games. If this is true, they've done a pretty bad job of it. So I don't think it's blindsighted so much as old-man-yells-at-cloud disagreeing with you on what a Real Adventure Game is. Although in Ron Gilbert's defense, he also writes: > As I read this some 15 years later, I'm not sure I agree with everything in here anymore. I learned a lot from Monkey Island 1 and 2, plus countless kids Adventure Games at Humongous Entertainment. At some point in the near future, I will do an annotated version of this article, talking about things that have changed, or were just plains wrong. But in the meantime, there is something interesting on TV right now. So still not so much blindsighted as "never elaborated upon what he really thinks of the 1989 article these days".
grumbel 4y ago
I wouldn't say the genre evolved, it pretty much peaked back in the early 90s and hasn't seen any serious improvements since. The pie-menus of Curse of Monkey Island were about the last lasting improvement I can think of. Everything else turned out a short lived gimmick, an outright failure (e.g. controls in MI4/Grim) or just a watering down (e.g. casual hidden-object games). And while narrative have become far more important in other genres, those style of narratives are completely different to what a point&click would offer. Action games are about action, you shoot or slash through things. You kill stuff. Narrative happens in cut-scenes without player control. It's not part of the gameplay. That's what makes point&click games special, as the there is no disconnect, the narrative is driven by the players the actions. And while there are certainly some RPGs that cross the line, not many do. The mainstream RPG is still obsessed with stats, collecting dozens of the same item and stuff like that. In a point&click almost everything is unique, there are no faceless copy&paste NPCs, no mountains of useless items to collect. If you find an item in a point&click, it's very likely part of the plot in some form.