oh you did studied into that?
Then I am actually curious because i didn't but I feel we agree on that gameplay isn't everything. I'm goign to try to tell the own definitions I made up and just want your opinion on them, I am very curious.
Like, when I was actually trying to review sticker star, i realised that the issues what that game is a bit complex to explain unless I defineed stuff. One of the definition I did was the "logistic", I defined it as how the flow of the game is organised to .....i guess be intuitive, but I mgiht change that part. basically, it's little stuff like in a zelda dungeon, to me, I think it is a good logistic to have like hearts before the boss door beccause there's a very likely chance you woudl need that, but the game simply was made so that this was there for that entire purpose: it was likely goign to be used.
Another exampel coudl be how a long rpg would manage its difficulty leve, if it has spikes or it seems consistent.
In contrast, bad logistic would be basically having not much chance to know what you would do in a linear sequence (one of the sticker star problems here).
The other one i would want your opinion, that might sound too vague, but I tried to define what is an rpg. i came with soemthign very vague being that as a role playing game, the game FOCUS on immersing the player into the role of a character and its surrounding. I said focus in caps because i realised games coudl do that without being an rpg, but if they actually try to focus on that aspect, then it seems more like an rpg. The best example is how an rpg makes you feel a sense of progression justifying why the exp system is so used. Though, undertale, that's a very special game because i realised the progression is more in the choices you do, not necessarly in doing the battles.
Woudl like your opinion because I'm not a professional for sure, but I am VERY detailed and pciky when it comes to playign games