| F0X said: The definition of "adventure game" is nebulous at best. In accordance to my personal rules of thumb for discourse on these forums, I try to assume Wikipedia definition for everything... but the "adventure game" is an oddball, because it's only defining aspect is being an interactive story. Usually they're driven by puzzle and exploration gameplay, but neither or those are unique to the genre, and there are exceptions to the rule (The Stanley Parable, Dear Esther, Thirty Flights of Loving, ect.). So, by extension, I don't think it's necessarily right to say that an action/adventure game is an action/adventure game because it has some required puzzles and exploration in addition to combat and/or platforming, which are central to the action genre. Or at least it doesn't make much sense. In fact, once upon a time I tried to make a thread detailing the sub-genres of action/adventure, with two methods of organizing action/adventure games into the sub-genres. I got pretty far but, once I realized that the adventure genre itself isn't well-defined or organized to begin with, I stopped. :P On another note, I can't say I have any fondness for terms like "JRPG/WRPG" or "Metroidvania". If they were clear, acceptable terms for a sub-genre or style of gameplay, I don't think I would see so many threads and debates over their meaning and boundaries. |
During one of my many attempts to convince others that Zelda is not an RPG series, I came up with a definition of action-adventure that works pretty well. What do you think of this?
"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."
