By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
LordTheNightKnight said:
Kasz216 said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
Kasz216 said:
Seriously... why are action RPGs and Regular RPGS and Strategy RPGS lumped together on this site?

Action RPGS have more in common with Zelda games then they do "normal" RPGs.

It's the stats and number crunching that groups them together, as they all have roots in tabletop games, while Zelda has roots in playing around in backyards.


World of Warcraft's roots are a bunch of Real Time Strategy games. World of Warcraft is still an MMORPG not a Real Time Strategy game.

Games should be grouped by their gameplay.


The stats are at the root of the gameplay. That's the common element that links the RPG subgenres. And the gameplay of WoW makes it an RPG, not the gameplay of the rest of the franchise. 


The stats are at the route of all sports games as well.  Which go up and down in the main modes of sports games.  Action RPGs really shouldn't be an RPG sub Genre and should be it's own thing because the gameplay is far more active then any other. 

For example.  Future Tactics last generation was a turn based 3rd person shooter.  There were no stats from what i remember.  No leveling up.  Not much upgrading aside from picking up upgrade packs.  Yet that's treated as a strategy game instead of a FPS/TPS shooter, because it plays like a turn based game.

The reason being... strategy fans are much more likely to enjoy it then FPS fans.

Just how action straight adventure fans are actually more likely to enjoy Action RPGS then straight RPG fans.