Talk:Tactical role-playing game
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Suggested Merger
I think that the "RPG" label is diluted enough as it is, and it is only spreading the confusion to spread the label across more and more game genres that, while containing some of the same elements as individual games in the RPG genre, nevertheless do not contain any actual role playing. It's fine to continue to use this term if that's what people know it as, but we should merge it under a more appropriate genre (i.e., turn-based tactics) that is a more accurate and less confusing classification. --The Yar 16:48, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
- Tactical RPG is the term that people that people who actually play these games use to describe the genre. I think it would just confuse things if it was merged into turn-based tactics. You say Tactical RPG and fans of the genre instantly know what you're talking about (games like Final Fantasy Tactics, Disgaea, Shining Force, Super Robot Wars, Summon Night, etc.) whereas turn-based tactics is a really vague term.
-
- Tactical RPGs contain just as much roleplaying as a traditional console RPGs. You may argue that console RPGs aren't really role-playing, but that's highly debatable. In any case, it's the term that is used for the genre whether you like it or not. --RDespair, June 16th 2006
-
-
- I merged turn based tactical into this article a few days ago. No point in keeping a term only few people use vs. one that most people recognize, including the gaming press. Danorux 15:02, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- The article states: "It is generally accepted that Nintendo released the first tactical RPG, Fire Emblem for the Famicom (NES), created by Intelligent Systems." but Pool of Radiance was first released in 1988. It was a story-driven RPG with a tactical, turn-based combat system that shares similar game mechanics to the later console SRPGs. Is there a reason why the gold box SSI RPGs would not count as Tactical role-playing games? -- Biclops, August 28 2006
-
-
-
-
-
-
- I think it's simply the fact that you will not find any gaming press or web page that classifies the game as such. Tactical RPGs are essentially only console games -- this definition may not be entirely satisfactory but the Wikipedia article should describe how the term is actually used by gamers, not an ideal.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Anyone want to second the endorsement of Pool of Radiance? If so, I will add it to the category page. SharkD 04:28, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- I know it's way too late, but there are games that do fit in the turn-based tactics genre but not the T/RPG genre. SharkD 04:30, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
- There are also some real-time games that could be considered T/RPGs. SharkD 18:33, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Strategy RPG
I have never heard the term "tactical RPG" used outside of this article, only "strategy RPG". Just look at the hits for each term on Google:
"strategy rpg"- 19,200,000
"tactical rpg"- 3,320,000
"Strategy RPG" is by far the more oft-used term. So what's going on here? Phediuk 20:12, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
- I agree. Strategy RPG is the norm.
-
- In all honesty, I'd rather have the entire article merged into turn-based strategy, but strategy RPG is by far more acceptable than 'tactical rpg' which probably wasn't created until Final Fantasy Tactics. --Yayza 20:24, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Agreed. Switch the name to Strategy RPG. Don't merge, however. --GlitchBob dbug 20:31, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- I have to disagree. I think that "Tactics RPG" and "Strategy RPG" are synonymous. I do think that "Startegy RPG is a bit more common, though. -SharkD 19:14, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- A strategy is a long term plan of action designed to achieve a particular goal, as differentiated from tactics or immediate actions with resources at hand. By that definition, Disgaea is a tactical RPG, while Ogre Battle may be considered a strategy RPG. So basically we need two articles. That said, do we really need to be reminded that multiple games in the genre are self-declared tactics games? FF Tactics, La Pucelle Tactics, Tactics Ogre, Suikoden Tactics... Danorux 05:40, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
[edit] Added a few links
I added a few additional links to PC tactics games, as I thought the platform was a bit under-represented. -SharkD 19:12, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Lords of Chaos
Would Lords of Chaos (video game) be an example of this genre?--Malcohol 12:16, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not sure. But, the game Incubation certainly is. -SharkD 07:55, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Questions:
There has been a push to try and develop multiplayer games of this genre, and section on that would be nice.
- Could you provide some examples? The only ones I can think of are Jagged Alliance: Deadly Games, MegaMek and UFO 2000. -SharkD 21:31, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Invalid comparisons
I believe some of the comparisons made with turn-based strategy are invalid. Namely, the second and third comparisons. The reason I state this is because, in some T/RPGs, characters are allocated an Action Point pool which can be expended on any number of actions as long as the total points do not exceed the limit. Also, in some T/RPGs, turns are not split into clearly demarcated "enemy" and "player" phases. Rather, each character proceeds with its turn based on a separate "initiative" score, like in D&D. -SharkD 22:05, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Phase-based games
I'm wondering if phase-based ("WeGo") tactics games such as Laser Squad Nemesis and Combat Mission should also be listed. Personally, I think they shouldn't be; but, they have nowhere else to go. -SharkD 09:29, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
famicom wars came before fire emblem and isn't this game an srpg
[edit] Dofus: notable?
I think that Dofus is a notable game, being that it is the only MMOTRPG that I know of. However, I haven't personally played it long enough to determine whether it is notable for other reasons, as well. SharkD 22:18, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- Personally, I've never heard of it. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 02:37, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- It's a somewhat-played online tactical RPG. It's unique, but I don't think it's that notable within the genre, even though it's sort of nifty. Voretus 15:42, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Dofus IS noticeable...
I would like to disagree on the fact that Dofus IS a noticeable game. 2 million players beg to differ with your opinions, and I also need to highlight that there is no other tactical (turn-based) game out there that is browser based and an MMORPG in its own right at the same time. And if you can find another game tht is "MANGA"-based please let me know.
I would like to ask for permission to re-add Dofus to its list, but I will not push the matter. After all I am a simple player of Dofus, not the owner or the maker or an employee of Ankama Studios.
An independent survey has been made by MMORPG.com (after reading behaviour guidleines in wikia I will not post the link to the survey here) but Dofus is one of the few games whose player average age is not under 25. --Cordially, Abelius 18:08, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- When determining whether a game is notable or not I always consider two things only: the game's popularity and its feature set. If it's not popular or doesn't have unique gameplay then it's not notable. Art doesn't count. SharkD 10:08, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- 2 million players can't be wrong. And seeing how Dofus is pretty unique (as Abelius pointed out, it's the only MMOTRPG that's anywhere near notable), I'd say it belongs on the list. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.32.4.190 (talk • contribs).
And whoever has never heard of the term "tactical RPG", makes me think he or she lives in a cocoon, or on St. Helena Island... --Cordially, Abelius 18:14, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- It needs to be notable, not noticeable. Two million players does not make it notable on Wikipedia. For example, a game can be notable if it wins a real non-trivial award. Like, if PC Gamer gave a game with 5000 players game of the year, then the game is notable. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 02:01, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Remove comparisons?
I think that the points raised in the comparisons sections are shady at best. I'm sure it would not be too hard to find exceptions for nearly every point. SharkD 10:05, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- I've just looked through the sections and exceptions are common, not just there. I would agree with removing them unless there are some universal things that are different, and even then the relevance would be shaky. Voretus 17:59, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- I think that there were universal things. E.g. Tactical RPGs really tend to represent more massive battles. Then, in traditional comsole RPGs there is no free moving as in TRPGs. TRPGs really focused on battles. There is really a grid system in most 2D TRPGs and turn-based strategies. Really, WHY did you remove everything? I'll get everything back and you may remove what's not true. --Andrei Knight 22:42, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
- I can find an exception for every point you raise:
- Tactical RPGs appear on the PC as well.
- Many RPGs feature combat on the same screen. TOEE and SS do not use an isometric grid.
- There are real-time tactical RPGs as well. UFO: Aftermath, UFO: Afterlight, Brigade E5: Jagged Union, JAZZ: Hired Guns, NWN2 (if you stretch things a bit). I'd rather not discuss real-time games here (I'm biased against them), as they already have their own article.
- There are many RPGs that allow for great flexibility when creating a character. Fallout, Arcanum.
- In FOT, JA2 TOEE, and SS the number of actions you can take are limited by the number of APs you have.
- In TOEE there are no phases. An initiative score is calculated for each unit.
- In JA2 and SS you can attack units at unlimited range.
- JA2 and FO/FOT have no classes.
- JA2 has a strategic layer and a tactical layer.
- JA2, FOT and SS have no magic points or elemental properties.
- You can't change equipment in Battle for Wesnoth.
- Your comparisons are only valid when comparing console RPGs to console T/RPGs. Also, this article was merged with the Turn-based tactics article; so it may reflect some characteristics that may seem more like wargames. SharkD 00:27, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
- I can find an exception for every point you raise:
- I think that there were universal things. E.g. Tactical RPGs really tend to represent more massive battles. Then, in traditional comsole RPGs there is no free moving as in TRPGs. TRPGs really focused on battles. There is really a grid system in most 2D TRPGs and turn-based strategies. Really, WHY did you remove everything? I'll get everything back and you may remove what's not true. --Andrei Knight 22:42, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Is Temple of Elemental Evil a Tactical RPG?
I think it is not and I have removed it from here. Fell free to argue.--Andrei Knight 22:23, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
- "All tactical RPGs are descendents of table-top role-playing games, such as Chainmail, which were mainly tactical in their original form. Indeed the very format of a T/CRPG is like a tabletop RPG in its appearance, pacing and rule structure."
- ToEE's rules were adapted very closely from Dungeons & Dragons 3.5 Edition. If you'd read the article you'd know that pen & paper RPGs are where this genre got its gameplay characteristics from in the first place. SharkD 00:27, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Removing other games
I recently added the Avernum and Geneforge series to Category:Tactical role-playing games and was wondering if they, as well as the first two games in the Fallout series, should be removed. I'm torn as to whether they are or are not "tactical" enough. SharkD 03:56, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] New comparisons
To replace the old comparisons section, maybe we can think of some new, key points that can be used as guidelines when defining the genre. Some ideas that come to mind:
- Must have some form of character advancement.
- Terrain must play a noticable role.
- Must have control of a party.
- Must be turn-based (I'm biased)
I can already imagine games that would break these rules and still fit my conception of what a T/RPG is. ToEE, for instance, has no terrain modifiers; yet, it is very tactical in every other respect. SharkD 04:14, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
- I would imagine that all tactical RPGs are turn-based; otherwise they'd just be strategy games like StarCraft. The other things I can think of exceptions to. The Game Boy Advance game Advance Wars has no system of unit advancement, if I recall correctly. There's quite a few with no terrain modifiers. I can't think of any right off the bat, but I can recall playing a freeware tactical RPG a few years back that put you in control of only one unit with varying abilities. Voretus 15:22, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
- Real-time tactics has its own article and lists several games that might fit the genre. I still resist including them. SharkD 18:31, 30 March 2007 (UTC)