| sc94597 said:
@WereKitten Instead of 1 common ancestor they have multiple, which I noted in the macro-genres. Even then, you could argue that most Taxonomies that aren't relevant to Biology are not truly taxonomies. What about mathematical ones? They don't share a common ancestry. All you really need is a Macro and Micro structure. |
My point was that the cladistic approach in biology maps to a one-parent superset-subset taxonomy exactly because there's a single common ancestor for every couple of items.
You can have taxonomies with multiple inheritance, but it goes against what you seemed to want by what you were saying earlier. Thus you can't really follow biology in its cladistic approach.
If you allow multiple inheritance then everything is different, and frankly more appropriate.
Going back to the original theme of the thread: no, RPG as meant today is not a genre. It's basically a label that has been slapped on anything that allowed customization and stat/skill progress of human-like figures.
You could say it's a trait that you can apply to adventure-based games (and you get e.g. the most traditional RPGs), to action-based games (you get e.g.dungeon crawlers ) etc. But basically I think the same can be said of all your proposed "macro-genres".
