Forums > Game Forums > The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess > Genre Correction
Mark Picard (1) on 7/8/2013 3:30 PM · Permalink · Report
This game should also be categorized as adventure, in addition to action (the latter of which it is already categorized as). This is because it has elements characteristic of an adventure game (talking with NPCs, puzzle-solving, items required to get past certain areas). The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time is already categorized this way. I am posting this on the forum because I was told to when I submitted it as a correction.
Unicorn Lynx (181775) on 7/8/2013 4:20 PM · Permalink · Report
We categorize action-adventure games as Action + Puzzle-solving. Please don't submit any such corrections because they will ruin the consistency on this site.
I don't know how Ocarina of Time got its Adventure back. It was removed long time ago.
I'll request to remove it again.
Indra was here (20755) on 7/8/2013 10:14 PM · Permalink · Report
Ugh. Don't start. Gamers already made the mistake of naming genres based without first defining what the dang definitions mean in the first place. A mistake they will continue to make since they're using terms from the marketing industry and 14 year olds. This confusion is not and never will be solvable.
Indra was here (20755) on 7/8/2013 11:49 PM · Permalink · Report
Just wait till they start wondering what the genre is when action adventure games start having character development options. Oh, wait. It's already starting.
Yeah, good luck with that.
Indra was here (20755) on 7/8/2013 11:55 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
Additionally, someone needs to explain to me what the difference is between action-adventure with action+adventure with action+adventure+puzzle solving with adventure+puzzle solving with action+puzzle solving.
Someone obviously did not think this through. Though based on our genre system, action-adventure is simply action+puzzle solving.
Daniel Saner (3503) on 7/9/2013 12:07 AM · Permalink · Report
Instead of cleaning up the existing genre system by defining and describing and differentiating already-existing and generally used terms, would it be more promising to burn it all to the ground and start thinking fresh from a clean slate? If there were some good ideas on where that would need to start, I'd love trying it out in my database, if just as a thought experiment.
chirinea (47495) on 7/9/2013 2:00 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Daniel Saner wrote--]Instead of cleaning up the existing genre system by defining and describing and differentiating already-existing and generally used terms, would it be more promising to burn it all to the ground and start thinking fresh from a clean slate? If there were some good ideas on where that would need to start, I'd love trying it out in my database, if just as a thought experiment. [/Q --end Daniel Saner wrote--]This was already done, but it is yet to be implemented.
Daniel Saner (3503) on 7/9/2013 7:48 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start chirinea wrote--]This was already done, but it is yet to be implemented.[/Q --end chirinea wrote--]
I know the document; that was the "instead of" part. Wipe the board clean and begin by asking what factors should differentiate games in the first place. I think there were traces of a beginning of such a discussion somewhere around here. I still have notes somewhere. We ended up with either 2 or 3 main genres.
j.raido 【雷堂嬢太朗】 (94862) on 7/9/2013 1:46 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start leilei wrote--]Yeah, that's implying just "Action" games have no plot and character development at all. [/Q --end leilei wrote--] We have a genre for that anyway: "Arcade"