This is a good question.
Can some of you guys help out defining this game? Similarly, what would Fire Emblem: Awakening be? It's a tactical game for sure. But if you don't level up your guys you can have the best tactics in the world and be destroyed anyway.
We also still need to define Binding of Isaac.
Thoughts?
Well my inclination is that it is Strategy first same with Fire Emblem, XCOM etc, but I saw another user put it in his list so I figured if it was being counted as an RPG it would be in my top 3.
But then again I also think Borderlands is more FPS than RPG too.
Binding of Isaac imo is whatever Legend of Zelda is, either a RPG or an Action-Adventure depending on which camp you are in. Personally I'd call it an AA for simplicity sake.
like a lot of things it comes down to how you define it. These rarely is any one game that is just one thing these days.
For me I look at what the primary action the player engages with in the game most often which is usually the combat system
In Valkyria Chronicles you mainly deploy troops on a grid (albeit from a thrid person perspective) like chess pieces and win large drawn out fights to advance the narrative. There is menu driven combat once the player moves his "piece", but the game is won or lost around tactical positioning. Once in base you can level people up etc. That to me is Strategy first, RPG second.
Borderlands is a game where you shoot many many things as you explore a large open world, but also find loot and level up your character. To me that's a particular type of shooter that has heavy RPG elements but at the end of the day the combat is purely a FPS. On the wiki I think they are called Role Playing Shooters. But I don't know how accepted the definition is.
At least with Zelda I figured the main activity in the game is environmental puzzle solving combined with light combat puzzles. Binding of Isaac seems to aheva greater focus on shooting but I figure it's more similar to whatever Zelda is more than a Final Fantasy or Dragon Age.
Log in to comment