> And this game is also a blobber, including by that definition. Your party happens to have one member.
If a game does not have you control a party of multiple members it is not a blobber, there is no "it just happens to have one member". That makes as much sense as Apple claiming that a tap is a zero length swipe back in the day and it'd basically mean all games are party based (hey, Quake is a party based game because you control a party of one - and Solitaire is a party based game because you control a party of zero).
> You can do the same thing in Wizardry, it's just a bad idea.
Wizardry is a blobber because you can have multiple party members even if you decide not to. The linked game is not a blobber because you cannot have multiple party members even if you want to.
> By your definition, though, it would appear that virtually all JRPGs are "blobbers", which seems wrong to me.
Only JRPGs that treat the entire party as a single "blob". And yes, blobbers are very popular in Japan and have influenced other games made there too.
If a game does not have you control a party of multiple members it is not a blobber, there is no "it just happens to have one member". That makes as much sense as Apple claiming that a tap is a zero length swipe back in the day and it'd basically mean all games are party based (hey, Quake is a party based game because you control a party of one - and Solitaire is a party based game because you control a party of zero).
> You can do the same thing in Wizardry, it's just a bad idea.
Wizardry is a blobber because you can have multiple party members even if you decide not to. The linked game is not a blobber because you cannot have multiple party members even if you want to.
> By your definition, though, it would appear that virtually all JRPGs are "blobbers", which seems wrong to me.
Only JRPGs that treat the entire party as a single "blob". And yes, blobbers are very popular in Japan and have influenced other games made there too.