Onyxmeth said:
If you really look at many of these Turn-Based Strategy RPGs, you'd have to still stretch the definition to make them fit. I would say that Advance Wars, especially Dual Strike is much closer to Fire Emblem than Fire Emblem is to Final Fantasy. Neither has an overworld, both offer some leveling up aspect, both offer in many ways very similiar combat, among other things. The only thing that seems to seperate Strategy games from Strategy RPGs are disposable units and a leveling up system, but Advance Wars Dual Strike lets you level up your CO and Disgaea has disposable units like the Prinnies. In fact most strategy RPGs are merely just another type of strategy game and lend themselves more to fans of Civilization than Dragon Quest.
|
It's true that AW:DS incorporates some RPG elements, like leveling COs and skill learning, but it lacks two things that I consider defining for an RPG: individual unit growth (that is, every unit progresses and levels up on its own, and is different to the others) and unit continuity (the units after a battle stay with you with the experience they've gained). Of course, it'all about opinion, and I agree FE really stretches the definition of an RPG. And I think the second FE for the GBA has an overworld, but I may be mistaken. And the prinnies aren't really disposable, I mean, you can throw them, and they explode, but you don't lose them forever, it's just like a kamikaze attack the Bombs from Final Fantasy have
