A schoolmate of mine said there would be no Rpg games today if Legend Of Zelda never existed. Is that true...

A schoolmate of mine said there would be no Rpg games today if Legend Of Zelda never existed. Is that true? Is legend of zelda mother to all RPG games?

Attached: ladda ned (4).png (361x139, 8K)

Pretty sure Adventure for the Atari is as much of an RPGs as Zelda is

No, Ultima is.

Ultimate and Wizardry came out before Zelda

Plus DnD

Your friend is a console baby who probably thinks games started on the NES or some shit

They kinda did
Vidya before the NES was a mess

Zelda made this type of non-linear game assessable to the vast majority of gamers and depending where you lived, the NES may have been the only system around.

>assessable > accessible

Fucking fones

I actually mentioned that The Elder Scrolls was based on games like Ultima but he said games like TES is based on Zelda. He is very besserwisser and a Nintendofag so idk if there is a point in arguing with him

This.
Wizardry laid the foundations for pretty much the entire genre. Both the west and Japan loved it.
Hardcore RPG fags don't care about accessibility.

There is no single game that, had it not existed, there wouldn't be any video game RPGs today. The transition from tabletop RPGs to video game RPGs is just too much of a no-brainer for it not to occur in some form or another.

There are lots of games without which certain mechanics or tropes might not have existed, but that's a completely different thing. So if Zelda hadn't existed, I'm sure it would have caused a butterfly effect on a lot of other games, but I can guarantee we'd still have RPGs.

All Nintendo fags are morons. Zelda isn't even an RPG, it's an action game with an open world, which Ultima was the first series to do. The JRPG genre exists solely because of Ultima. Most modern RPGs all have elements directly from Ultima 1-5 (Final Fantasy), 6-7 (Elder Scrolls), Underworld (System Shock), or Online (MMOs).

You should tell your schoolmate to post his opinions on Yea Forums or /vr/.

I think the main thing that happened with the NES generation is the shift from high score-focused games to games that you can beat.

Pac-man, Space Invader, and Donkey Kong aren't really games that are about progressing through the game to get to the end. They're about doing more or less the same thing over and over to get a high score. But that started to change, and while the concepts weren't invented on the NES, it was the platform on which it sort of took over and changed the way we think about what the goal of a video game should be.

And the popularization of stuff like save games was a major thing in enabling that.

But I think it's really with the SNES/Genesis-generation that this way of making games really matured. When you look back at a lot of NES games, they're kind of awkward still. Some more so than others.

Completely inaccurate.

Again, wrong. Arcades and home PC had already established as viable gaming platforms.

>Zelda isn't even an RPG

Oh fuck off with this redundant horseshit you silly little child. In '86 NES Zelda had far more in common with traditional RPGs tropes and staples than what it didn't.

Fast forward 30 years and autistic shits like you think you have some kind of vast superior knowledge of video games.

>it-its techically not an RPG because....

Fucking KYS.

Whoah dude, be careful with that edge.

I always hate those dumb fuckers who say "well if it wasn't for this old game you wouldn't have this new game" its total bullshit. If someone wasn't the first to do something, someone else would just come and do it.

Legend of Zelda wouldn't exist without ripping off Falcom. early Zelda games are literally Dragon Slayer/Ys clones but with the RPG elements stripped away.

The JRPG genre wouldn't exist without Falcom. Zelda isn't an RPG, the only main Zelda game that has RPG elements is Zelda 2.

>In '86 NES Zelda had far more in common with traditional RPGs tropes and staples than what it didn't.
Nah.
Consider suicide.

fucking nintoddIers

Attached: Ultima_1_box.jpg (220x311, 20K)

Well, that depends. In the case of RPGs, I agree completely. It would have been done, because it really is just about translating table top RPG concepts to video game form. Someone would definitely have done that.

But I wouldn't say that's always the case. Some specific design choices made today, like using WASD to move, can be traced to something specific, without which a completely different solution to the problem might have been popularized instead.

Not him, but yeah, it did. Run around collecting things in levels to save a damsel in distress.

Ironic.

Wizardry/Ultima in the West and Dragon Quest/Phantasy Star in Japan. Zelda had little to no impact on the genre whatsoever.

Ur friends retarded

Also not him, but back in the 80's, "RPG" would have most likely meant something like DnD, which comes with stuff like an experience/levelling system. I don't think a game needs to have those things to be an RPG necessarily, but I think it's a big part of what people consider to be RPGs, and I think that was the case back then too.

And I don't think it's that useful to define "RPG" with story tropes. RPG is more about how you interact with the story rather than the contents of the story itself.

Not the same guy, m8.

More like no rpgs without games like this coming first since like 99% drew their concepts and game mechanics from D&D.

Attached: s-l1600.jpg (1600x1600, 296K)

While Western RPGs drew their influence from tabletops, it is important to note that for the nips Wizardry was their introduction, and hence their ideal to RPGs. This explains why CRPGs have always evolved (towards attaining the ideal of the tabletop), while JRPG is a very stagnant genre (the ideal has already been attained).

He's using the modern definition of RPG to refer to Zelda, yeah I know it wasn't really called one back then but at this point its just habit. The point hes making is Zelda isn't all that different from everything else out there at the time.

Y’all motherfuckers never even heard of Zork, have you?

Sheeit

Attached: B0133171-720C-4D02-A49C-F360241B63AC.jpg (1080x1059, 116K)

Tropes and staples don't make a game a different genre

It was an easter egg in a Call of Duty game.

Zelda is an rpg. Zelda 2 is an rpg. Zelda 3 is an rpg. It goes on and on. Good luck in school today, timmy.

>besserwisser
Ist that actually a legit loan word like schadenfreude?

I thought Zelda was more of an adventure game than an RPG

But would you call Zelda an RPG today? I wouldn't. I'd call pretty much all Zelda games except Zelda II stuff like open-world adventure games or puzzle-adventure games.

Kek, implying I'm a child when you're defending a children's game. Have you ever heard of DnD before?

Not even an RPG honestly. You're not only not playing the role of anyone, Link isn't a character in the first few games, but there's no stats besides hearts.

I'll never understand why it's ever considered one.

Attached: nani.jpg (190x278, 59K)

The prototypical fantasy Action Adventure game in Japan is the Namco arcade classic The Tower of Druaga (June 1984) which is cited as having an influence on other landmark games such as Nihon Falcom's Dragon Slayer (September 1984), damn, dev cycles were short back then T&E Soft's Hydlide (December 13, 1984), and even The Legend of Zelda (February 21, 1986)

Meanwhile, turnbased videogame RPGs out of both the East and West all have their roots in either Ultima (June 1981) or Wizardy (Sept 1981)

No idea. We use it in Sweden sometimes

I googled it, and it seems to be used in Finnish and Swedish, but not English.

dnd, pedit5, moria, temple of apshai, ...

For all the five people who could buy them

Semantics, thats not the argument. It's about Zelda not being a first for anything, and if it was, it doesn't matter because someone else would have done it later