Talk:Genre

From GamerWiki

Jump to: navigation, search

I believe this is the final list. It needs to be agreed on, then posted to the main page, and then we'll have to go through and change exsting games. It's important to get this sorted out, since rogue categories are already springing up. 

 * Action
 * Adventure
   * Action Adventure
   * First Person Adventure
   * Graphical Adventure (as in, point-and-click)
   * Text Adventure
 * Platform Game (not a category on its own)
   * 2D Platformer
   * 3D Platformer
 * Role Playing Game
 * Racing (not a category on its own)
   * Driving Simulation
   * Arcade Racing
 * Flying (not a category on its own)
   * Flight Simulation
   * Arcade Flying
 * Rhythm Action
 * Puzzle
 * Strategy (not a category on its own)
   * Real-Time strategy
   * Turn-Based strategy
   * Role Playing strategy
 * Miscellaneous
 * Compilation
 * Shooting (not a category on its own)
   * Horizontal Shooter
   * Vertical Shooter
   * First Person Shooter
   * Lightgun Shooter
 * Fighting (not a category on its own)
   * Scrolling Fighter
   * Versus Fighter
 * Sports

Splinter Cell would fit in the "action adventure" category, I'd think. Xevious 14:12, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Not sure where I should be contributing to this discussion but going back to RPGs, I created a Strategy RPG category for the series Fire Emblem; the Shining Force series would also fall into category. I think we should have Strategy (FE), Party (FF and Baldur's Gate) and Action (Zelda) types; that should cover all bases. With regards to the hardcore/softcore that Junglist refers too, you could just say Western vs Eastern style RPGs. Varsas 15:38, 21 Jun 2005 (GMT)

Interesting idea. I'd say Zelda is more of an adventure, myself, not a RPG. And Fire Emblem and Shining Force are turn-based strategy. Maybe it's a role playing strategy game, indeed. I think we're going to have a slight problem with the fact that nobody will ever agree on a list! I'd also like to avoid the more subjective terms like "Eastern RPG", since there's nothing to say that such can't be produced in the West! I think the description should be used to describe the game more than the category. Xevious 16:22, 22 Jul 2005 (UTC)

I would agree that Zelda is an adventure. I've not seen a Zelda game that I'd call an RPG yet. Might be a nice idea though! In terms of Fire Emblem, I'm tempted to say that it is a Strategy RPG though. There are RPG elements due to character enhancement. Turn-based strategy in its simplest form is something like Chess (OK, this would come under a Board Game genre, but you know what I mean). Terms like 'Eastern RPG' are definitely out IMO. So, if no other comments, shall we publish the list above? At least as a first crack. -- tyagi 04:59, 1 Aug 2005 (UTC)


Previous Discussion Below

I hate the terms "beat em up" and "shoot em up". Your mind's probaly made up, but can we have "fighting" and "shooter" instead? Xevious 23:00, 10 May 2005 (UTC)


The only problem with that is that "Fighter" is usually used to describe a 1 on 1 fighting game and the term "Beat em up" is genrally used to describe a scrolling fighting game Maz35

  • I don't like those terms either. I've no problem at all using different terminology. Better to decide now rather than when there's a few thousand articles to correct. We need a vote on this I guess.
  • Request for Ideas: Please suggest alternative terms to "shoot 'em up" and "beat 'em up" and others in the "* 'em up" families.

[ some old lists deleted here ] -- tyagi 01:27, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

I would suggest looking at the catagories used in Mame for some good definitions. -- Maz35

Time for something to be finalised.

I suggest: 

 * Arcade
 * Adventure
   * Action Adventure
   * First Person Adventure
   * Graphical Adventure
   * Text Adventure
 * Platform Game
   * 2D Platformer
   * 3D Platformer
 * Role Playing Game
 * Racing
   * Driving Simulation
   * Arcade Driving
 * Flying
   * Flight Simulation
   * Arcade Flying
 * Rhythm Action
 * Puzzle
 * Strategy
   * Real Time Strategy
   * Turn-based strategy -- tyagi 01:27, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Miscellaneous
 * Shooting
   * horizontal shooter
   * vertical shooter
   * first person shooter
 * Fighting
   * scrolling fighter
   * combat fighter -- tyagi 01:27, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
   * 2D fighting -- tyagi 01:27, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
   * 3D fighting -- tyagi 01:27, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Xevious 17:02, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

  • erm what about Softcore RPGs (FF, Tales of, Chrono's etc) and hardcore RPGs (BG II, Torment, morrowing etc) under RPGs section.
  • How would you define "softcore"? I think that wouldn't work. Xevious 22:28, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Well a softcore RPG is usually any console RPG, the characters are predefined, ie you have a sword fighting guy, a white (healer) magic person, a dark magic person... and these chars. Must level up and follow a SET path, which allows for little customisation outside of the chars predefined role. There are no complex char. Creation screens at the start of the game or anything. (Examples: Final Fantast Series, Chrono cross/trigger, Tales of Series)
--Junglist 09:02, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
  • A Hardcore RPG is more complex; the game usually starts with a complicated Char. Creation screen where you have much more flexibility in customising you char with in the games set rules. Many of these are based on the D&D/ADnD rule set although you have others like Morrowind, which has its own rules. Almost always the 'Battles' are on screen, by this I mean you don’t have random battles like on Final fantasy and also you don’t have a separate screen for fighting battles... its all done on the same screen (like Zelda, even though that’s softcore)
--Junglist 09:02, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
  • I can see the point of separating types of RPG, but we should aim to do this in the information contained within the game's description. We can quite easily tie ourselves in knots over the categories, so I'd rather keep it as simple as possible. -- tyagi 01:27, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Well its just you only have MMORPGs, very few RPGs actually fit into this category. You dont have to spilt RPGs into hard/soft-core ones but at least have one for just RPGs (ie not online)
--Junglist 09:02, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
  • I would agree with this. I don't think we need to have a seperate category for MMORPGs. It can be made clear in text and in the GameInfobox bit. Xevious 12:11, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
  • stratgy: RTS --Junglist 18:32, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
  • I don't think sperating fighting games into 2D and 3D is useful. There are only two types of fighting game, really - one-on-one ("combat"), and scrolling. Little changes with the move to 3D. Xevious 12:11, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
  • I can see what you mean, but most people I know do differentiate between 2D and 3D fighters. There's a great deal of difference between something like Street Fighter and Virtua Fighter. However, what you're describing as one-on-one and scrolling is the difference between Double Dragon and Street Fighter (for example). There is definitely a difference there, but I would put something like Double Dragon in the Arcade or Arcade Action or Action Adventure category, rather than the Scrolling Fighter category. Choices choices choices. -- tyagi 21:29, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • There's also a great deal of difference between Street Fighter 2 and Mortal Kombat though - but they're both 2D. A lot of '3D' games are just on a single plane anyway - are they 2D or 3D? Xevious 08:47, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Yes, you're right there. So what terminology can we use here? Are there any good examples elsewhere? I'm trying to think of something along the lines of "combat fighting" and "action/adventure fighting"... -- tyagi 12:11, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • A special genre should be made for Retro compilations, a "Sport" genre is definitely required (Tennis, Football etc and a seperate one for extreme sports like THPS). Also, where would stealth games such as Splinter Cell/MGS go? Lightgun games could do with a subcategory too - Halo 18:28, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://www.gamerwiki.com/index.php/Talk:Genre"
Personal tools