Game RPGs should be called They aren't really RPGs at all except in game mechanics, and, while they show the versatility of games as the ultimate media, the reviewers and such need to start reviewing them on different terms. The emphasis on graphics, cutscenes, and story in RPGs is being applied to other games, and that's probably why most new games suck now. Think about it - didn't the phenomenon of crappy gamelay in top titles start around when RPGs became popular? Even when a game came out and hyped graphics, like Sonic and DKC, they generally made sure to make the gameplay good too. Now action games have 3D RPG envy - DK 64 was absolutely terrible, and even Sonic Adventure threw in a lot of pointless running around.

RPG gameplay stinks. I see a game RPG as a game designed to give gameplay the lowest priority so game designers can focus on all the elements that would be "bells & whistles" in any other genre. Some people will disagree with this, as I often see RPG gameplay being praised, but think about it like this. If you played a game that was built entirely around an RPG battle engine and item equipping, with no story and crappy graphics, would you like it? Yet, Pac Man is a classic. A well designed game puts gameplay at the top, while an RPG is the opposite. This doesn't make an RPG bad, but it should be acknowledged as a seperate type of game, and treated and judged differently. In game reviews, for example, they should probably use a totally different rating system. The market and especially gaming companies seem to think that gameplay is the least important element in other games too.