Is that comment in reference to videogames or Dt's posts? XD

Actually, the way I see it, being story based is a characteristic of the Visual Novel game: Any game that has a large amount of cutscenes that tell a story is either a VN or a VN hybrid. (Yes, that means that games like Final Fantasy 7 are really hybrid VN/RPGs rather than pure RPGs.)

Also, your examples don't contradict my definitions: In Lemmings, there are defined rules the game follows without special cases. Meanwhile, Space Quest and ADVENT special case the solutions to puzzles, as there aren't any consistent game mechanics that hold them together.

Of course, there's Quest for Glory, which is a RPG/Adventure hybrid; there are plenty of special case puzzle solutions (Adventure), while the outcome of many actions is determined by your character's abilities (RPG). (Interesting thought; even without combat, QfG would still qualify as an RPG due to the way it handles stats and uses them to determine the success of certain actions.)

both?

the OP is mostly accurate although, very myopic and not very enlightening or interesting.

"boring games are boring"--we all know this.


"How can they be better, though?"


that inquiry deserves it's own post, however

No, because of one important factor: *The placement of those units is an important factor in the strategy.* Typically, in party-based RPGs, the emphasis is on the actions performed, not the placement of the units; in fact, many of them don't have any sense of placement outside of maybe setting the party order.

Disgaea might count as a strategy game and RPG?

Yes, I could actually count that game as a hybrid of those two genres.

Actually, Disgaea has a puzzle element as well; namely, the behavior of geo symbols and panels, particularly what happens when you destroy a geo symbol that is on a geo panel. (Also, the series has had its fair share of puzzle levels over the years.)

I've only played the first one on DS.
I should play the rest as I own a Vita.
No 5 on there but ya know.
Enough playtime. :P

Wut? I would say that party order is pretty important factor - mages will die when placed in front and fighters won't be able to fight from the back row; and outside the Wizardry style games there are many RPGs where combat takes place in non-abstract battlefield, so placement of units is even more vital.

The thing is, the party order isn't the same as managing positioning on a battlefield. In a game like Wizardry, you don't constantly enter movement commands during battle; in strategy games, you do.

Those games where "combat takes palce [sic] in non-abstract battlefield" are really strategy games, or at least hybrids of strategy with some other genre.

Does that mean that strategy games are simply more complex action games?

Generally, no. Typical strategy games resolve combat in a manner similar to RPGs or puzzle games; the result of combat is based on some combination of rules (like X beats Y, or Chess's rule that when a piece moves to a square occupied by an opponent's piece, the opponent's piece is captured), unit stats (see the Attack and Defense stats from the Civilization series, for example), and random numbers (again, see Civilization for one example).

Another thing: Strategy games are often turn-based; action games never are. (I dare somebody to come up with a strictly turn-based game that otherwise satisfies my definition of an action game.)

Yet Mount & Blade satisfies all those rules.

Challenge accepted:
Superhot is a WEGO action game. :P

Platformers - They do tend to feature larger amount of platforms.

Sports games - Most of the time they are centered around sport activity.

Racing games - Some kind of racing takes place in them as key component.

Hmmm, so some RPGs are strategy games and some aren't only because of the type of battle area? (Wizardry/blobber vs. every other type)
PS. thanks for spotting that typo.