Ah yes, I am reminded of Max's rant about the "Best Fighting" category.
Genres are one of those constructs we use because the human brain just loves categorizing things, even when there is no obvious boundary for it. They're very fickle, and blend together more and more as time goes on.
If I heard a game coming out was a "fighting game", the first thing my brain would think of is a game with a variety of characters to choose from, each with different moves that I'd have to master on both mine and all the other characters to know what my opponent is capable of, maybe learn some combos or something.
And because that description is just so unbelievably vague, it doesn't really describe anything anyway. I've realized that even my favourite genres don't excite me anymore because there are so many different ways to make them. I almost think we'd be better off describing games as the games they're most inspired by. Like, OK you've got a "tactical RPG". But does it more closely resemble the gameplay of XCOM or Tactics Ogre? You've got a "2D platformer", but is it more like Castlevania, Mario, Sonic...? Even games like Final Fantasy XI and XIV are so different that it's harmful to give them the exact same genre label.
Yeah, even within the same genre there is a lot of nuance and unfortunately we can't really sub divide catagories too much or else there would be too much mush for people to wade through to get to their preferred catagory.
I do agree with Max's rant about Sifu being a fighting game though because I always personally fighting games should primarily revolve around the skill based PvP combat.
I do agree with Max's rant about Sifu being a fighting game though because I always personally fighting games should primarily revolve around the skill based PvP combat.
I think a good way to do it is to consider all of the overarching genres and see where it fits best. Sifu is not a fighting game because it's arguably closer to a beat-em-up, a la Final Fight.
Like, just because your first-person war shooter has level-ups and customization doesn't mean it fits under the "RPG" genre. If someone's concept of a "fighting game" is that you use hand-to-hand combat, then that disqualifies games like Soul Calibur from the genre. No, what makes a fighting game is a strategically balanced arena setting where one player/team emerges victorious after a fighting round.
By contrast, Sifu is a game where one player-controlled character wanders through levels beating up waves of enemies. That is by definition a beat-em-up.
Literally every game in existence is a "role playing game" you are playing the role of the main character. Yes.
The term "role-playing game" confused the crap out of me for a long time until I learned to accept it. It obviously just comes from the idea of tabletop RPGs wherein your character's stats develop over time. When that was adapted to video games, the name stuck, even though that doesn't at all describe the genre.
If someone else coined the definition, they'd probably just be called "level-ups" or something.
"You play that new Squaresoft level-up with graphics that look like Dragon Ball? It's so cool!"
- People from an alternate-reality 1995.
I do agree with Max's rant about Sifu being a fighting game though because I always personally fighting games should primarily revolve around the skill based PvP combat.
I think a good way to do it is to consider all of the overarching genres and see where it fits best. Sifu is not a fighting game because it's arguably closer to a beat-em-up, a la Final Fight.
Like, just because your first-person war shooter has level-ups and customization doesn't mean it fits under the "RPG" genre. If someone's concept of a "fighting game" is that you use hand-to-hand combat, then that disqualifies games like Soul Calibur from the genre. No, what makes a fighting game is a strategically balanced arena setting where one player/team emerges victorious after a fighting round.
By contrast, Sifu is a game where one player-controlled character wanders through levels beating up waves of enemies. That is by definition a beat-em-up.
Yeah, the over arching genre thing is definitely the right direction to consider a game's category and I agree with your categorization of Sifu based on the gameplay videos I've seen as I've never played the game myself.
Literally every game in existence is a "role playing game" you are playing the role of the main character. Yes.
The term "role-playing game" confused the crap out of me for a long time until I learned to accept it. It obviously just comes from the idea of tabletop RPGs wherein your character's stats develop over time. When that was adapted to video games, the name stuck, even though that doesn't at all describe the genre.
If someone else coined the definition, they'd probably just be called "level-ups" or something.
"You play that new Squaresoft level-up with graphics that look like Dragon Ball? It's so cool!"
- People from an alternate-reality 1995.
It was originally named that way because RPGs started out as actual role playing games, i.e. you were handed a blank slate that you had to develop and build into a character all by yourself. Having a set of constructed characters didn't exist until later on when series like Dragon Quest and Final Fantasy started designing casts of characters that you merely puppeteer through an established on-rails plot. Some games still keep to the original spirit (like Elder Scrolls, as an easy example).
As to why they didn't make a branch off genre for the more guided examples of RPGs, it probably comes down to recognition and not wanting to either stir the pot or confuse people. The general character development part of RPGs became the focus rather than the Role Playing itself (i.e. leveling up, building your skills and spells, etc.) and this is apparent when a game comes out and calls itself an RPG, but reviews cite the game having "minimal RPG elements".
Weird, I find myself playing three houses again. After I last stopped playing I was sure I'm never playing it again. But as I was listening to Fodlan Winds for the umphteenth time, it just hit me: I like the game mechanics. It's a fun game to play.
And so I picked up where I left, meme playthrough on normal/casual. It was just too easy and felt like a chore to finish which is why I stopped playing. Finished that and hopped onto maddening. I also feel like doing a silver path run on hard... which is probably happening soon, there's no way my maddening campaign lives much longer :D
I loved Three Houses. I played the absolute ***out of it. Got Maddening playthroughs done on Crimson Flower and Azure Moon. (Neither had NG+ bonuses to characters, though CF did have professor rank from NG+).
I basically played it till I got sick of it. The only real downside it has is that the map design is kinda meh. But why design super specific/awesome maps, when you can just circumvent them with your whole squad as Wyvern Lords? hehe.
I started to watch Wild Arms, but im not sure why this game is that praised…
The after watching 1/4 of this game, i cant help but feel like this game is extremelly shallow.
Both the characters and the plot seems to be extremelly bland.
Unless there is a turning point, i guess i will just skip this one
/slap /slap /slap /slap /slap /slap /slap /slap
Wild Arms is a lot of fun. The FP system lets you have a bit more to the fights than other standard RPGs, and the storyline has a few twists and turns.
Its characters are really well fleshed out, and they're central to the game as well. One has survivor guilt. Another is a chosen one. And the last one seems to just be a drifter (but boy howdy, you wait until the Metal Demon Zeikfriend wraps the chain on him boy).
You glue your eyes to that screen, and you watch the rest of that game! Unless it's one of its weird remake/reboots. Then I wouldn't bother.
It is, but the first one has been remade a bit and the remake (Alter Code: F) isn't quite as tight. More playable characters, etc. I liked the simplicity of the original better.
WA3 is still the best in the series and has the best soundtrack BY FAR.
At least, the opening scene from the original was way better than the 3 prequels from alter code F.
The original intro at least left in the air that there was “something” going on behind the scenes, while alter code, so far, seems like “hey, there is some evil force we need to prevent to ressurge by collecting X item, fighting Y evil guys, save the world”
It is, but the first one has been remade a bit and the remake (Alter Code: F) isn't quite as tight. More playable characters, etc. I liked the simplicity of the original better.
WA3 is still the best in the series and has the best soundtrack BY FAR.
It is, but the first one has been remade a bit and the remake (Alter Code: F) isn't quite as tight. More playable characters, etc. I liked the simplicity of the original better.
WA3 is still the best in the series and has the best soundtrack BY FAR.
I have no idea what this game you are talking about is but that sounds RAD.
Low res image but here you go.
Wild Arms has traversal tools you use to solve puzzles in the game. This particular tool though, it just used to summon big baddies to fight against and is used to get some optional super bosses too.
This is a thread that I found on another website I post at. It can be really really interesting. I thought it deserved a place here.
Post your random thoughts for the day here, or anything else that intrigues you.
For starters, is it possible to give constructive critism to someone who doesn't have a neck? I totally just walked by a girl who didn't. Someone isn't getting a necklace for Valentines day!
And who decided black and white can't be colors? I want to say a racist. I really do.