ARPG aka Action Role Playing Game.
tl;dr - Diablo or Dark Souls?
Both Diablo-likes and Souls-likes are called Action RPGs. In one, you create a “build” using gear and skills, and generally grind for hours on end looking for the perfect drop to make your build a teeny bit better. In the other, your success is based off of twitch reflexes and learning move-sets of the enemies. Gear and loot is pretty downplayed and the enjoyment comes from the elusive “git gud”.
I’m not here to argue that one or the other isn’t an ARPG. I’m just curious why a new designation hasn’t sprouted up for one or the other to make things less confusing. It’s getting even worse now that Diablo-like games aren’t limited to isometric POV (they haven’t been for a while but…) and now people are making souls-iike games in isometric POV. It’s only natural that this would happen. But again, why is there still the confusing naming convention?
IMHO, worthless though it is, I don’t get why Diablo-likes are called ARPG’s. They have lots of A and no RP. (They are Gs tho.) Souls-like feel a lot more like what I would consider an ARPG. But again, my opinion is completely worthless so it’s pointless to even attempt to argue about it.
My point is we should riot with pitchforks and torches at the headquarters of… the people who name genres of games… and demand they split ARPG from ARPG so we all know what we’re getting into.
Like, someone went ahead and invented “bullet heaven” as a genre name since “bullet hell” didn’t quite fit when you were the one with the bullets. I love that! Maybe we can do something similar like call Diablo-likes Action Grinding Games (AGG) or Loot and Build Games (LBG). I’m sure someone can think of something better while we are marching.
IMHO, worthless though it is, I don’t get why Diablo-likes are called ARPG’s. They have lots of A and no RP. (They are Gs tho.)
Because in 1996 experience points, leveling up, character attributes, and magical loot were all closely associated with RPGs. Over the intervening roughly 30 years those mechanics have been adopted by games all over the spectrum. However the genre-name for Diablo-like games stuck due to convention.
Also Diablo being called an ARPG predates Dark Souls by 10 to 15 years.
ARPG = Action Role Playing Game.
The themes, camera angle, and method of delivering rewards (loot) don’t really affect something being an action RPG or not. The focus on action over storytelling does.
The Elder Scrolls is also an ARPG.
TES definitely focuses on story over action. Those games have much better lore than combat
On the other hand, each game progressively drops more RPG features and adds more action features.
I haven’t played Morrowind, but I hear that you can connect to an enemy with a hit, and then a die roll determines whether that actually happens. It seems to me that while such a feature would be good for making a character with their own unique strengths, it would be damaging to the immersion required to inhabit that character. Thus, immersion building features that make the character do what the player does, can easily be considered roleplaying features.
I don’t get why Diablo-likes are called ARPG’s.
We used to call them “Hack 'n Slays”. I guess studios didn’t think that term marketing friendly.
I think ARPG is just broader than that. Bethesda games are also described as action RPGs, yet they are neither really about builds or gitting good, it’s more of an exploration / virtual theme park thing.
I think the definition of an ARPG is “an RPG where the player’s skill in controlling the character in an action-game like fashion has a major role in gameplay, as opposed to games where the character stats or strategy is solely decisive”, like in Divinity or most older RPGs.
It’s like when people describe both Doom and Six Days in Fallujah as an FPS, yet they are nothing alike.
I actually didn’t encounter anyone saying Dark Souls and like games being an ARPG. Dark Souls like games are usually called Souls like. The problem is, that the term RPG and Action are not a distinct genres. This is a long standing issue in gaming, long before 2000s even. When I was a teenager, some people called Zelda an RPG, others said Action RPG, some people (me included) said its an Action Adventure. Genres and terms that are vague and broad will always clash with others. Don’t let me begin what Secret of Mana (SNES) actually is.
Look at Racing games. There are Mario Kart and Gran Turismo, two very different kind of racing games and both still are. What about motorcycle racing or classic racing games like Rock’n Roll Racing (someone remember? this is what Blizzard did before they became Blizzard!).
OK, so you see it’s a mess of terms. Diablo isn’t a new game, it evolved from previous games that were similar and mixed in from other genres. How do you classify such a game in an already existing set of genre terms? It’s kind of an Action RPG that existed before, so its natural to put it into such a category. Look at all those RPG games, they are all RPG but still vastly different. BTW I never heard of bullet heaven, but that sounds really funny. It sounds like an anti name for jokes. And being the one with the bullets might even fit into the category funny and fitting name.
If have a new name for Diable like games, it will clash with other genres again. You put generic terms like Loot or Build into it and so on. What if a Diablo like game isn’t that grindy? Or does not focus much on Loot. We have been through this with various other genres. Therefore I would not even try to invent something and not take genres too seriously. It’s a mess. You can’t getting it right by adding more mess to it.
Yeah I’d be more likely to label dark souls as a 3d metroidvania than as an ARPG. Yeah, it has RPG elements, but what AAA game doesn’t?
Exactly. Nowadays almost any game becomes and RPG. The terms are fluid. BTW I wouldn’t myself call Dark Souls anything like a Metroidvania, because my personal understanding is that the focus of Dark Souls is not quite on the backtracking and learning new abilities. I mean our discussion here shows again why game genres aren’t useful anymore.
We nowadays use the tagging system, which allows us to give any number of “genres” and combine them individually for each game. Even though we don’t agree on all terms, it’s still better having a single genre like ARPG associated with a game.
If Zelda is an RPG then so is Halo. Master Chief and Link both have exactly the same number of thoughts in their heads. I would argue Halo ODST is more of an RPG than any Zelda game.
Zelda 2 is more of an RPG than ODST, but the thrust of your argument is true.
I actually didn’t encounter anyone saying Dark Souls and like games being an ARPG. Dark Souls like games are usually called Souls like.
That is because everyone uses the term “Souls-like”. But if that term isn’t used, then they are all labeled as “Action Role-Playing Games”:
A Soulslike (also spelled Souls-like) is a subgenre of action role-playing games known for high levels of difficulty and emphasis on environmental storytelling, typically in a dark fantasy setting. -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soulslike
I’m just curious why a new designation hasn’t sprouted up for one or the other to make things less confusing.
There is for one of them: you mentioned it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soulslike
A Soulslike (also spelled Souls-like) is a subgenre of action role-playing games known for high levels of difficulty and emphasis on environmental storytelling, typically in a dark fantasy setting. It had its origin in Demon’s Souls and the Dark Souls series by FromSoftware, the themes and mechanics of which directly inspired several other games. Soulslike games developed by FromSoftware themselves have been specifically referred to as Soulsborne games, a portmanteau of Souls and Bloodborne.
Back in my days we called games like Diablo hack n slash RPGs
I’ve always called them dungeon crawlers
Wasn’t that more for games like wizardry or the more modern example, legend of grimrock? It sounds more related to what a dnd party would do than just fighting hordes of enemies.
It’s the same with “hack and slash”. Originally also referred to games like Diablo, but now we all use it to refer to stuff like DMC, pre-2018 God of War, Bayonetta, etc.
Why isn’t 2018 GOW hack and slash?
Because you don’t wade through hordes and hordes of individually weak enemies. (There are many but compare it to Diablo.)
That’s what hack and slash means? I thought it was a game where you hack and slash
Hack and slash through hordes of enemies, it’s kindnof the point of the game.
Because it’s a souls-like
But it’s not hard.
I’ve spent a lot of time in RPGs, and the last time I RPed in a G was around the time George Bush’s dad was president.
Gaming in the Bush Senior Years.
ARPGs should be the Diablo-likes. Half the time, Souls-likes are barely even RPGs.
Diablo-likes have skill trees, classes, leveling… You know, the player-customizable “role” part of Role-playing.
Souls-likes often are just action games of dodging and equipment stats, without any ability to change the intrinsic role of a character.
I’m an IT dork, and if I pick up a wrench I don’t suddenly become a plumber or mechanic.
Dark Souls has more in common with Castlevania than with anything “RPG”.
As for Diablo type games, I personally call them “looter RPGs” as a retroactive term. Because the “looter shooter” genre that popped up about a decade after diablo is literally just Diablo but FPS.
Genre names are wack anyway. The “[other game]-like” moniker will always be more descriptive and clear, plus being a reminder that every new thing in video games is a refreshed take on some pre existing thing.
I too would like more on-point classifications.
Like, we got 3 big classifications ARPG, CRPG and JRPG. And I guess that’s nice. But a bit of subclassification would go a long way, imo.
Now if only publishers would use these labels. But to them everything is just an RPG, because that’s an umbella everything fits under.
Maybe because those terms are confusing. Is dark souls an arpg or a jrpg? Or both? I know that jrpg is a specific genre of Japanese games, but it’s still confusing. Are final fantasy games jrpgs? Kingdom hearts? Xenoblade?
It’s just easier to say RPG and not enter in a pedantic war with the community.
In that case, why bother to label them at all?
Let every purchase be a gamble.
I’m just saying thank the gods for Screenshots, ‘Let’s Players’. because labeling everything as just “RPG” is the same as just labeling every type of meat as just “Meat” and graphics cards as just “Graphics Card” in closed packaging with only the companies names to differentiate.
I like specifications on the products I might be buying.
I agree, honestly. I also like specifications, but I don’t like the game to be inaccurately specified. I feel that it’s better if an umbrella term is used in the title instead of a more specific fake one, and then a short description describes how the game is played or what kind of experience I should expect in several words, instead of a single term. That, alongside screenshots, let’s plays, and all sort of resources are plenty help to decide if I should buy a game or not.
RPG is used for games where you take the role of a character, and it should somewhat tell the story of either the character or the world around it. That alone differentiates some games from others like rocket league or fifa, where there’s no story, you don’t take the role of nobody that matters, what matters is the gameplay.
Hack&slash was a term used for games where you killed tons of monsters with weapons, and then Diablo started using the ARPG term to say that besides killing tons of monsters, you also get to enjoy a story in a particular ambiance. Dark Souls games also fit the description where it’s more about the action than reading, but feel like a completely different genre, right? no isometric, itemisation is vastly different, the gameplay loop is completely different… This is why just reading ARPG means nothing to me nowadays, I have to dig into the description anyway.
Another example, is “Ys origins” an ARPG or a JRPG? both? It has fast paced combat where you kill tons of mobs and a story, but it has a very japanese style, however, JRPGs are being known for having to manage a party and usually turn based combat, sooo? idk, a 3 line paragraph and 3 5 second clips would be much better than just a term for me.
Sorry for the late response btw, I just forgot lol.
Diablo isn’t an ARPG, it’s an inventory management simulator with light action elements.
None of these actually have any role-playing in them though.
I think the defining factor here would be the real time combat, vs a traditional rpg which is turn based.
I always referred to Diablo as an isometric RPG. At the end of the day, language is weird, and as long as we’re able to clearly get our point across to another person and have them understand, I think that’s all that matters. But it’s fun to think about
