Genre-Defining Games?
Gamasutra has up responses from its frequent feature, the question of the Week. This week's question was a call for the best of the best. "For any genre of your choice, what is the game that defines that genre for you?" From the article: "For the RPG, simply Final Fantasy 6. It has the best story, greatest variety of characters, tons of different music, and added many secret areas. It was the first game to truly to define a real experience of an RPG to the player.
-Anonymous" What games would you refer to as Genre Defining?
Wouldn't a genre defining game have to be something which MADE a genre? To me, FF6 isn't even close for RPG's. Pick one of 'Wizardry' or 'Bard's Tale'. For FPS, Castle Wolfenstein. (I'd accept Doom, since that's what really made FPS 'take off'.)
A genre defining game is hardly the same as 'best game in genre'.
My UID is the product of 2 primes.
The Final Fantasy games are considered RPGs? Oh right, they're "console RPGs".
It has the best story, greatest variety of characters.
OK.
tons of different music
So? If the music is really exceptional, it might be worth noting, but quantity is different from quality.
and added many secret areas
So?
It was the first game to truly to define a real experience of an RPG to the player.
Hilarious. So prior to FF6 (released in 1999?), there were no "real RPG experiences"? What does that even mean?
And how old are these people? I'm only 19, but I'd go with Ultima VII as the genre-defining RPG.
LOAD "SIG",8,1
Gotta be Metal Gear Solid(PSX version). IMHO he was the first to truly introduce the concept of stealth play in a seductive way to the masses.
Nowadays its hard not to find an action game without at least a level or mission in which you must avoid being spotted or setting off the alarm. Stealth game play its the perfect complement to action gameplay enriching the experience.
MGS also one of the first and better aproaches to film-like videogames according to the frame of reference of mainstream movies. RPG's always have been better at storytelling but the true aproach to plots, cinematics and characteres following hollywood films was first made with games like MGS or Silent Hill.
---------
Thinking never hurt anybody --MacGyver
Most of you are probably two young to remember, but before these fancy-schmanzy E-G-A video cards and Mice, we had (mostly) text games. AND WE LIKED IT!
.sig), and influenced the humor in many games.
Zork was one of the first, and one of the best. It established some classic puns (See my
Now, go find that Grue.
94% of Repubs and 21% of Dems voted to renew the Patriot Act
I must disagree with the article. If Final Fantasy 6 defines RPGs as a genere, then I hate RPGs. Experience has shown I do not hate RPGs, just the Final Fantasy series/style. I would submit KOTOR. Or Phantasy Star 4.
I'm suprised Fallout didn't show up on that list. The game and its spiritual predecessor Wasteland were genre defining in a way - post holocaust RPGs. Granted, a very small genre but on their strength alone they should have gotten at least honorable mention.
the only genre-creating and defining game
First Person Sneakers!!!!
this sig has been discontinued.
I compare almost all strategy games I play to X-Com.
Final Fantasy defines the Console RPG, which is to real RPGs what tofu is to beef: a poor substitute that people will continue to try and insist somehow fills the niche.
Console RPGs are, without fail, really "turn based battle simulators," in that the game, such as there is, does not consist of "playing a role" but instead repeatedly fighting the same stupid battles over and over again. A console RPG is all about leveling.
Real RPGs focus on an environment and the role your character plays in it. Console RPGs focus on battles, with the story thrown in to kind of tie them together.
Think "Dragon Ball Z": a poor story drawn out far longer than necessary due to an excessive number of battles. (And a legion of fans that thing it's The Best Thing Ever! and will not stop talking about them.)
So, anyway, Final Fantasy defines the Console RPG, which is not the same thing as the RPG.
i dunno when people talk about RTS, they almost always compare it to starcraft, therefore i'd say starcraft defined what RTS should be, for now anyway.
Warcraft 2 was great but no one compares it to anything after starcraft was released. C&C was pretty overated IMO, same with TA.
FPS/RPG: System Shock 2
:(
Absolutely ground breaking game, just not accepted widely enough
Jan
Jan
Thinking back now, I can't believe how many hours I spent on various platforms organizing 6 different blocks...
I think that that game on the original Game Boy created the entire hand held gaming industry.
I think of an RPG as a game that lets me develop characters the way I choose to, as well as to decide what my characters do, and how they will respond to people in the game environment.
With that said, Diablo doesn't qualify because you can't choose if you want to accept a quest, or even how you will interact with an NPC. Games that only let you accept or reject a quest without choosing the tone also fall short.
Baldur's Gate 2 is one of the best when it comes to computer role playing games. You can pick a tone when it comes to dialog choices, and that will alter the way the dialog flows. You can also choose to be nice(good), or you can be nasty and greedy. It's up to you. The only thing that most find limiting is that you can't necessarily ally yourself with the side of evil. You can BE evil, but you can't choose to ally yourself with the person who starts as the enemy.
Wizardry 6-8(the three games are a trilogy that tells a story) is the flip side. You have your choice about which side to ally yourself with, but you don't have a lot of choices about how you interact with NPCs.
You also have the old-school dungeon crawl type games that many think of as RPGs. The original Wizardry, or Bard's Tale arn't great RPGs by the standards of today, but back in those early days they were fun games.
Then you have the old "Gold Box" games, with Pool of Radiance being the first. They used the old Dungeons and Dragons rules(none of this 3rd edition junk we have today), but added things that made the game more like a RPG, such as maps(in the manual).
The sad thing is how many games coppied Dungeons and Dragons when it came to a combat system, yet none of them really improved on it. When you go up in level, you get more hit points. The original Dungeons and Dragons system had a decent enough reason, because Hit Points also reflect your ability to avoid taking damage, and as you gain experience adventuring, your endurance will go up in theory. Other game systems that use stamina or endurance really have no good reason to award more hit points because you go up in level.