The latest offender is gaming website 1UP, which earlier this month published an article titled "Why Zelda still Rules the Action RPG." In paragraph three there is a very patronizing passage:
"...the simple fact is that Zelda still rules the action-RPG genre... or whatever genre you want to call it, if you're the sort of person who gets bent out of shape when someone describes a game without overt stats as an RPG. That genre where you go on a huge, story-driven adventure equipped with a full arsenal of weapons and gear, exploring dungeons and fighting bosses and performing mundane tasks for idiot villagers in order to procure all manner of extra tools and perks. You know it? Whatever you call that style of game, Zelda is still top dog more than a quarter of a century after inventing it."Well, I AM the sort of person who gets bent out of shape when someone describes a non-RPG as an RPG, especially when the franchise in question is the best ever, and the most important action-adventure series of all time. That's right, Zelda is an action-adventure game, not an RPG. And here's why.
Everyone has their own definition of role-playing game, but the one I go by is this: an RPG is a game that features 1) a set of tangible, appreciable statistics that directly correspond to intangible qualities like strength, charisma, and wisdom, 2) the ability to modify those statistics by earning experience points by defeating enemies and completing quests, and 3) the electronic simulation of die-rolling mechanics from pen-and-paper RPGs like Dungeons & Dragons to determine success and failure.
 |
| Electronic RPGs are based on Dungeons & Dragons, first released in 1974. |
Action-adventure games, on the other hand, are, unsurprisingly, a mixture of elements from action and adventure games. They feature 1) action elements that require quick reflexes and good hand-eye coordination like real-time combat and physical challenges, 2) adventure elements like exploration, puzzle-solving, inventory systems, dialogue, and story, and, consequently, 3) a combination of violent and non-violent trials to overcome.
Which sounds more like The Legend of Zelda? 1UP describes the action RPG as a genre with a "huge, story-driven adventure equipped with a full arsenal of weapons and gear, exploring dungeons and fighting bosses and performing mundane tasks for idiot villagers in order to procure all manner of extra tools and perks." These are simply the trappings of a role-playing game or, in some instances, simply the trappings of modern video games. Story-driven adventure with a full arsenal of weapons and gear? Is Halo a role-playing game? Performing mundane tasks for idiot villagers? Is Mortal Kombat: Deception a role-playing game?
I understand action-adventure is a somewhat amorphous and imprecise genre that includes a huge number of games. But in the case of The Legend of Zelda, no other classification comes close. It's not a role-playing game, or even an action role-playing game, which is really just a traditional RPG with real-time combat, e.g., Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance. Certainly Zelda has role-playing elements, but so do a lot of great games that are never called RPG: BioShock, Resident Evil 4, Batman: Arkham Asylum. I don't know where the myth of "Zelda as RPG" started, but shame on 1UP for keeping alive the lie.
 |
| Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance -- a true action RPG |
Calling Zelda an RPG does nothing to diminish its greatness. But it's inaccurate, and does a disservice to action-adventure games, which have evolved tremendously because of Zelda's innovations. Let the role-playing genre have the games it deserves -- Final Fantasy, The Elder Scrolls, Mass Effect -- and let action-adventure have its own -- Tomb Raider, Grand Theft Auto, and, yes, The Legend of Zelda.
As someone who is still very much a video game newb, even I can distinguish the difference between an RPG, and Zelda. Not only does Evan's definition of an RPG, which in my opinion is accurate and precise, preclude Zelda from being an RPG on the basis that none of the criteria are fulfilled, but also those people are just WRONG. My only guess is, they've never played it.
ReplyDeleteHear hear. Very well written argument. I think this is an important nuance to discuss because it further generalizes video games at large. There seems to be this attitude that outsiders (non-gamers) have that games are just games. Many non-gamers would quickly classify Dr. Mario and Rez into the same genre, but that's like saying that Hop on Pop and Atlas Shrugged belong in the same category because they're both books. This is why the medium often gets dismissed as a hobby, rather than perceived as legitimate art (in cases where the game truly is a work of art).
ReplyDeleteI would classify games like Fallout 3 or Mass Effect as action-RPG's. They both have tangible numerical statistics that affect intangible concepts such as charisma, and either can be played in a way that is sort of turn-based, but the outcome of many fights relies partly on the accuracy and skill of the player, partly on strategy/item management, and partly on "dice rolls". It's the combination of those elements that make them action-RPG's rather than strictly action games or RPG games. Zelda does not fit into this category.
I think that the problem here is that you're defining the term "RPG" based on your RPG experience, rather than on it's actual meaning. In the Zelda series of Games, you Play the Role of Link, going on an adventure. Thus it is an RPG.
ReplyDelete