No more.

;-p

Genre is useful when it comes with a short and precise definition, like the following examples:
- Adventure games
- Puzzle games
- Role-playing games
- Strategy games

I don’t care if people agree or not with these definitions, it’s not the point. What is really useful here is to know that all games listed on any of these pages is going to stick to the written definition. Making genre a useful filter to find games you know you will enjoy, or on the contrary, games that you know you would rather avoid.

Pffft…enough talk! Have at you!

Even games like Tetris?

Well, yeah. You are in the role of...the player. If you are watching a videogame play itself (cpu vs cpu), It's still a role-playing game because you are in the role...of the observer. lol

Decades ago, the whole idea of game genres wasn’t really well defined, and I swear, a lot of books and magazines from the 80s used to say exactly what you’re saying. They called everything a role-playing game just because you were “playing a role” in any game, whether it was Pac-Man or whoever.

Or as said of a wise scholar: Kart, Muso/Warriors & Tactics are the only well define and understood genres. =p

So less linear game design as I mentioned, got it.

Great point, forgot about the character-driven emphasis. I found a webpage with more documentation on tropes too!

https://project-apollo.net/text/rpg.html

I'm well aware. The point of these names is to poke fun at how seemingly dissimilar games are similar, i.e. Far Cry games after 3 have progression systems and XP level ups, but no one's calling them RPGs.

Similarly, SABEOWS can also refer to any game that has tedious enough combat to simply describe it as standing around until one of you dies, i.e. Elder Scrolls melee.

I tend to define RPGs not in terms of character progression, but rather on the emphasis being on the *character's* abilities, not the player's. The player's role isn't to directly perform the actions, but rather to tell the characters what to do.

In particular, it's possible for there to be a game without a growth system that I would count as an RPG.

There's actual games I classify as RPGs but that do not have XP-based leveling. Most SaGa games, for example. From what I hear, Darklands is like that, and there's also the adventure/RPG hydrids known as the Quest for Glory series (and spiritual successors, like Heroine's Quest).


By the way, I should point out that many of the SaGa games are not linear. The first 3 are, but then the series took a direction that's not like what other JRPGs did, to the point where one could make a case for calling them WRPGs; but they're still different from typical WRPGs because they don't simulate the world to the same extent.

There's some other cases of non-linearity in JRPGs. Metal Saga (no relation to the SaGa series) could be sort of seen as linear, but without the usual barriers, allowing you to skip around. Lennus 2 has a couple parts where you have to collect some seals, but there's not many constraints about the order you collect them in. Even Final Fantasy's orbs (crystals in remakes) aren't much constrained; you have to light Earth first, but the remainder can be lit in any order. There's also games like Final Fantasy 6 and Phantasy Star which are linear up until a certain point, but then become non-linear.

Linear WRPGs also exist. Icewind Dale is an example of one of them. Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 have some non-linearity and sidequests, but the main quest is entirely linear. (While I don't count them as RPGs, the main quests of Oblivion and Skyrim are, I beliveve, linear. Arena's main quest is also linear.)

That was very droll, thanks.

Even Tetris bucks the conventions of the genre; the conventional idea of a puzzle game is that you have as long as you want to figure it out, and Tetris will not give you that time.

Tetris did spawn its own genre. complete with such games as Columns, Dr. Mario, and Panel de Pon (see Tidalis on GOG for a game similar to that last one).