SleepWaking on 16 July 2009
| Dodece said: The definition of role playing games is undergoing an evolution at the moment. The reality is that so many games incorporate its facets that were not specifically designed as role playing games. Thus the definition has seemingly incorporated bulk. You need to have a certain amount of the common elements, specifically a high degree of leveling depth, and a higher degree of complexity. Pokemon might meet the letter of the definition, but the definition is crude, and thus the definition is being refined and subdivided. Most gamers do not feel that Pokemon qualifies as a role playing game, and to be honest if adventure games are now having a more complex leveling aspect then Pokemon. Then Pokemon cannot possibly be a role playing game. The same thing happened with Zelda it took a number of years before it became widely accepted that it was not a role playing game. Far too much action for far too little character building. The series needs its own genre, because it is too different now. Rock, Paper, Scissors, and three levels. Well it just doesn't have the depth to qualify. You need to find or create a new genre to place it in. I do not consider it a role playing game. That is just insulting in my opinion. |
Eh what????? Have you ever played pokemon (extensively)???? Because pokemon is very complex.
