Lancer

I think most people are talking about art from a broad, general perspective but I am just adding an extra consideration most haven't considered in this thread as of yet... And tying in certain works of art to literature... From this point of view, RPGs with complex stories and themes are certainly as meritorious of being considered literature as Lord of the Rings or any classic movie.

As someone stated earlier, video game-making is an art in and of itself since it entails creativity..From this sense, then yes all video games may be considered art in a very braod sense. From a more specific "literature" (which is a form of art) standpoint, however, only some games may be worthy of this distinction.

I just googled this but I believe this is as good a definition as any: Art is "the product of human creativity"

I believe that exceptional and complex story-based RPGs such as Torment and Xenogears can be judged, critiqued and debated for themes, morals, and lessons like any good classic work of literature (Iliad, The Odyssey, Shakespeare..etc). And thusly, can be held to those same standards. Defined in this sense and if one considers literature to be a form of art, then yes, some video and computer games merit being considered art.

KOTOR possibly... The days of games like Torment and Fallout (never played Baldur's Gate) are over I think. Xbox 360 has Oblivion though... though I don't find Bethesda's work all that great (in fact, I think it sucks). <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Oh.. Don't be so pessimistic! I really hope against hope that ain't true.. But who am I joking? I am not a fan of the Elder Scroll series either. Lately, I have been getting my RPG fix through www.spidweb.com They may not have top-of-the-line graphics and super high production costs, but their games are great where it matters: story and gameplay.

The Genesis had quality PC-style RPGs that rivaled those of the PC at the time. In fact, games like Warriors of the Eternal Sun and Buck Rogers were arguably of even higher calibur than the equivalent Gold Box games on the PC. When I say PC-style RPGs I mean will there be games like Baldur's Gate (not Dark Alliance!), Fallout, KOTOR, and although I'd be asking too much here.. Planescape Torment on the X-Box 360?

That's exactly the point I wanted to make in this thread before getting sidetracked.... Will the X-Box360 (or PS3) have a good lineup of quality PC-style games or not? If one of those two will have PC-style RPGS in particular, then I am getting it. If both are making nothing more than JRPGS than I don't care about either. The Genesis was the last console that catered to the PC RPG gamer crowd, and there hasn't been another console like it ever since.

It sure is!

It doesn't really matter, is the point. The term "RPG" is so darn difficult to define and even as we argue right here (and hi-jacking the original thread) this very SAME topic over and over and over again we can't ever reach a consensus on what an RPG really is. Although, I might think JRPGs really aren't RPGs,you might turn around and say they are... As someone has stated on an earlier thread, What an RPG is, depends on the eye of the beholder (no pun intended).

I know you do.. Let's put it this way: Pirates! has more RPG elements than Diablo or most JRPGs that are marketed as RPGs. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Wait a minute. Maybe it's your definition of RPG elements that don't match up with the rest of the world, if two game types marketed (and branded by customers) as RPG games supposedly have less "RPG elements." I mean, if RPGs don't have much RPG elements, are the RPG elements actually RPG elements? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> There are quite a few consumers (here on this forum and all over the world)that would agree with me that Diablo is not an RPG. There are quite a few arguments that explain why JRPGS really are more like adventure games. Not RPGs. Just because a game is marketed as belonging to "x-genre" doesn't mean that it is a 100% correct placement. Marketing designations are nothing more than just convenient labels so that the consumer can get a superficial idea of what the game they are buying is roughly like. They are not meant to be 100% accurate.

I miss Ender. Anyone got a link to his column? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> This? http://enderandrew.livejournal.com/

I know you do.. Let's put it this way: Pirates! has more RPG elements than Diablo or most JRPGs that are marketed as RPGs.

Only because it is labeled as such on the PC. I would imagine that the lack of stat-based gameplay lent it to be labeled as a SIM. However, I have always thought it was more akin to an RPG than a SIM.

Pirates! can *definitely* be considered an RPG.. Unless you are of Ender's camp that profess that the defining characteristic of an RPG is stat-based gameplay.. Which I don't really agree with. Pirates! is the prime example of a game without a real stat system yet it is still an RPG.

A small interjection.. You don't need a "class system" or even "levels" to be an RPG. There are a lot of class-less , level-less RPGs out there.

But Pirates! is not a SIM in the same way that "Civilization" or even "The SIMS" was. Pirates! had very heavy RPG elements. You can interact with NPCs and get quests, it had a main storyline along with non-linear side quests, you can assume different roles and positions and go up in rank... Your actions determined the morale of your fellow pirates and affected the flow of the game and the actions of those around you..you can even get married..It even had some basic choices in character creation about the same amount given in PS:T. The only thing missing was that it didn't have visible stats (i.e. HP or Levels). Although it had most of the other elements that would make an RPG, I agree that the designation is a bit blurry although I could definitely see the argument for the game being considered an RPG or a SIM... Or even as Plano stated: an adventure game with heavy RPG elements. And if you do a google search many, many sites label the SEGA version of Pirates! as an RPG. Not a SIM or even an adventure game.

Pirates! is an odd apple. On the PC it can be labeled a SIM. But since you didn't technically have SIMS on consoles, it would be labeled as an RPG (or what not) on a console.

How awesome PS:T is :D <{POST_SNAPBACK}> PS:T is the best infinity game hands down <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Ya better don't talk of this with Gabrielle <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Oh well... Not everyone has good taste

Shadowrun was also on the SNES but in "name" only. The two versions were COMPLETEY different like night and day. The SNES version felt like a JRPG. The Genesis version was better BTW and truer to PnP. Pirates! is an RPG and it was marketed as such. It can also be considered a SIM. However, since you take on the role of a pirate, and it has quite a few RPG elements the designation can get a bit blurry. EDIT: It is a shame that console gamers that played JRPGS totally missed out on the PC-style gems on the Genesis. People have always said that SNES RPGS were better than those on the SEGA, but those people were only talking strictly about JRPGs. They didn't factor PC-style RPGs into the equation. The Genesis *owned* the SNES when it came to PC-style RPGS. Anyhow, back on topic....

Lots.... Warriors of the Eternal Sun, Shadowrun, Buck Rogers, Pirates!, and even Sword of Vermillion and Super Hydlide are better than the Ultima 7 SNES port. A very good strategy RPG on the Genesis is Warsong. That is one friggin awesome game. EDIT: Probably Rings of Power too.. I have heard good stuff about it but never played it.

Easily, the "real" Ultima 7. The SNES Ultima 7 port was horrible and only superficially resembled the real thing. Much of the non-linearity and large gameworld that made the PC version famous had been cut out.

The first RTS ever was Dune 2 by Westwood... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No. Dune 2 was the first PC RTS game. Herzog Zwei beat it to the punch by a year or two.

Nope. I simply liked the Genesis better because I thought it had overall better games (Streets of Rage, Golden Axe, Target Earth, Hellfire, Strider,Revenge of Shinobi, Sonic the Hedgehog, Dune, Herzog Zwei, Evander Holyfield Boxing, the better MK ports, the better sports games...etc) ..And out of those better games the fact that the Genny had quality PC-style RPGs was another plus in favor of it. As for most people agreeing that SNES was the "king" of the 16bit generation, that is actually very debatable: http://www.gamingw.net/articles/91 One thing is for sure, SEGA knocked off Nintendo from having the majority market share (perhaps forever) and paved the way for Sony's dominance. Not to mention that Herzog Zwei, was the "forefather" to all those PC RTS games PC gamers take for granted. SEGA effectively launched an entirely new genre all by itself. Its contributions during the 16bit era were enormous.

How awesome PS:T is :D <{POST_SNAPBACK}> PS:T is the best infinity game hands down

Right on. The SNES was a technically superior system than the Genesis (graphically, although the Genny had the much faster processor) yet the Genesis had arguably the better games and many more quality PC-style RPGs Sega Saturn was technically superior to PS1, but PS1 kicked its butt. What *I* care about is which of these two systems will have a good collection of PC-style RPGs?