Rogue-like, Metroidvania and Souls-like genres

[beefbowl]

I don't get the infatuation with renaming already established concepts. We didn't name those subgenres around some random games, they are the pioneers of their subgenre. King's Field has nothing to do with Dark Souls. Demon's Souls existed before it but the gameplay style popularized with Dark Souls, that's why people call it a Soulslike or Dark Souls of something. Those games established the general concepts around that subgenres. You can't call Hollow Knight an exploration platformer while it follows the footsteps of Super Metroid.

 

[fake-kun]

I don't get the infatuation with renaming already established concepts. We didn't name those subgenres around some random games, they are the pioneers of their subgenre. King's Field has nothing to do with Dark Souls. Demon's Souls existed before it but the gameplay style popularized with Dark Souls, that's why people call it a Soulslike or Dark Souls of something. Those games established the general concepts around that subgenres. You can't call Hollow Knight an exploration platformer while it follows the footsteps of Super Metroid.

You get it.

 

[Nidoking's iconNidoking]

At least with 'Souls-like', the term is a lot more specific than Action RPG. They have specific focuses on death as a punishment AND a learning tool, and usually have a benefit for reaching the place you died. Among other things.

 

[kokonatsu17234]

I just tend to not really care, especially given how certain old genres are named after obscure games (Rogue like/lite)
I think there's room for more honestly, cause if for example the style of SMT ever took off "2D/3D Dungeon Crawler, possibly Monster Collecting JRPG that may or may not have an emphasis on buffing and debuffing" ain't gonna do it for people, they'll just call it an SMT-like or a MegaTen-like

Post automatically merged: Feb 17, 2025

I agree, in fact hot take, Action RPG is in the same boat because when you think about it, what even IS an action RPG?

old Ys games are ARPG
Yakuza is an ARPG
Tales is an ARPG
Custom Robo is an ARPG
Vanillaware's older games are ARPG

and yet

Zelda isn't an ARPG
MadWorld isn't an ARPG
old Final Fantasy (meaning 1-6) aren't ARPGs
Armored Core isn't an ARPG
Mega Man Zero isn't an ARPG

Anything can be considered an ARPG, that's how vague the definition is. Racing Lagoon is an Action RPG

i think what makes an action rpg an action rpg is that it has to be a game where you character is able to move around anywhere you like unlike the traditional rpg where you take turns attacking.
theres also the ability to freely make your own build with the various equipment's you find in the game or the introduction of the stats system which is a key aspect of an rpg game.
i agree with a zelda, madworld, old final fantasy games, and mega man zero
but it does make me wonder why armored core isnt an ARPG since it got all the elements of what makes an ARPG an ARPG, you got the stats, the interchangeable equipment's and everything.
and yeah racing lagoon is an ARPG because it got stats and interchangeable equipments you get from various racer you beat during combat(race).
but this is just my opinion so it doesn't matter much since at the end of it, the term ARPG is just a sub genre of RPG to clearly identify or I guess put a difference in gameplay between games.
but what makes me wonder is what makes a game an adventure game? i mean technically if we're talking about story wise every game is an adventure at the end of it

 

[M.G]

I've been thinking a bit and I'm still wondering why we're naming genres about pre-existing games or between two existing franchises?

Especially when Souls-like are still fundamentally Action RPG (with a stamina bar management) and Castlevania stopped being a Metroidvania for a decade at least.

I think that they could fade out like the term Doom-like/Quake-like and even GTA-like to a lesser extent. Crime Simulation sounds better.

Maybe Platformer/Exploration would work for the Metroidvania genre? As for SoulBorne/Soulslike ARPG with stamina or dark souls influenced would be more apt.

Personally, the purpose of game genres is to help developers explain in simple terms what their games are about, what you as a player will be doing in that game.

In this sense, genres named after games are the most useful and well-defined.

Like, what is action? What is adventure? Any game can contain action or adventure, but that doesn't help you understand what the game is about.

What is racing? What is fighting? What is pinball? Now, these are based on "pre-existing games" (sports are games after all), so I can imagine games in these genres following similar rules to the sports they are based on, and therefore have a good idea of what to expect.

Metroidvania, Souls-like and Rogue-like follow the same philosophy, a game that is part of these genres basically says that the game follows a similar set of rules, it gives a good idea of how these games work, the difference is that instead of being based on a real world game, they are based on an existing video game.

Let's take Metroidvania as an example...

Both Metroid and Castlevania SoTN (which was nicknamed Metroidvania) were based on the classic 2D Zeldas, but people used to call them RPGs because of their top-down view and the series is also not consistent in its rules with the 2D Zeldas being the only "by the book" Metroidvanias, so calling the genre Metroidvania to define its ruleset around Super Metroid and SoTN is fine (that said, among friends I call them Zeldroidvanias).

Calling a metroidvania a platformer/exploration game says nothing about the rules of the genre.

SoTN, despite having platforming, falling doesn't damage or kill you, so you could say that having platforming skills isn't critical for it (the PS2 games barely have any platforming, for example).

Resident Evil has a lot of "metroidvania like exploration", but it's not a Metroidvania, why?
One of the rules of Metroidvania is to have the "key-lock" mechanic, where the key is part of your combat or movement moveset and the lock is an obstacle that can be overcome somehow by "this key".
This is what makes things like sequence breaking possible, because you can often overcome the obstacle in other ways, like instead of getting the "hi-jump boots", you can use the wall jump to get over the same obstacle sooner.

Resident Evil is almost a Metroidvania, but since it uses actual keys and locks, it doesn't qualify.
Like, you can only open the red door with the red keycard, and the keycard doesn't expand your movement or combat options in any way. You can turn Resident Evil into a Metroidvania simply by replacing all the key-locks for things like a rocket launcher to blow up cracked walls, Molotov cocktails to burn away spider webs, "mechanical leg armor" to run faster and get past traps, etc...

 

[Ikagura]

I couldn't disagree more. I believe Action/Adventure is a useless term because it gets applied to pretty much every game that doesn't fit into any other genre, rendering it meaningless. Thus, labeling a game "Action/Adventure" communicates far less about the experience it delivers compared to "Zelda-like."

Zelda didn't even invent the genre it was.

Sure, it redefined game design but top down games with exploration existed prior (Gauntlet, dragon slayer, Tower of Druaga all inspired Zelda 1) and even when Ocarina of Time redefined 3D video games Tomb Raider also had some aspects that Zelda would have (like activating levers or solving puzzles to advance in the level).

I agree, in fact hot take, Action RPG is in the same boat because when you think about it, what even IS an action RPG?

old Ys games are ARPG
Yakuza is an ARPG
Tales is an ARPG
Custom Robo is an ARPG
Vanillaware's older games are ARPG

and yet

Zelda isn't an ARPG
MadWorld isn't an ARPG
old Final Fantasy (meaning 1-6) aren't ARPGs
Armored Core isn't an ARPG
Mega Man Zero isn't an ARPG

Anything can be considered an ARPG, that's how vague the definition is. Racing Lagoon is an Action RPG

Why old Ys? The newer entries are also ARPGs...

Now the issue is when your AAA implements RPG elements so that the term becomes vague (and games like Kingdom Hearts being so much more action that the RPG element is merely present).

 

[beefbowl]

Zelda didn't even invent the genre it was.

Zelda did invent and popularize its game structure and gameplay formula. Series perfected the gameplay loop with OoT, which is the specific game when we call something "Zelda-like", not the first or second Zelda.

 

[Evaccaneer Doom]

Why old Ys? The newer entries are also ARPGs...

Cause the combat was different and more akin to Zelda combat than the newer games that have a lot more actions and input that you would definitely look at and say "yeah, ARPG"

Though in writing this, I realise I should've said that I specifically compared it to top down Zelda games like the original, LttP, Minish Cap, FS, whatnot

 

[Ikagura]

Cause the combat was different and more akin to Zelda combat than the newer games that have a lot more actions and input that you would definitely look at and say "yeah, ARPG"

I disagree, the bump system is completely different from Zelda's "press A to swing the sword" approach.

In Ys games there are also levels, stats and more than two sword upgrades.

 

[DZero]

I've been thinking a bit and I'm still wondering why we're naming genres about pre-existing games or between two existing franchises?

Especially when Souls-like are still fundamentally Action RPG (with a stamina bar management) and Castlevania stopped being a Metroidvania for a decade at least.

I think that they could fade out like the term Doom-like/Quake-like and even GTA-like to a lesser extent. Crime Simulation sounds better.

Maybe Platformer/Exploration would work for the Metroidvania genre? As for SoulBorne/Soulslike ARPG with stamina or dark souls influenced would be more apt.

i think that it's bc it was something new at the time and easy to understand what they meant by that terms and also good for marketing purposes.
Game genres are weird, sometimes is difficult to tag a game correctly specially if a game is new and does something different or unique.
Technically speaking, Ys games (Action RPG) are top-down metroidvanias.

 

[M.G]

Zelda didn't even invent the genre it was.

Sure, it redefined game design but top down games with exploration existed prior (Gauntlet, dragon slayer, Tower of Druaga all inspired Zelda 1) and even when Ocarina of Time redefined 3D video games Tomb Raider also had some aspects that Zelda would have (like activating levers or solving puzzles to advance in the level).

Like I said before, Zelda is considered the actual creator of the Metroidvania genre, a lot of the genre rules like the whole "upgrades as keys for leveldesign locks" used in Super Metroid and SoTN came from it and creators from both games were inspired by it.
Zelda isn't considered a Metroidvania because for the Zelda developers, they were making an action/adventure/RPG game.

They didn't even realize how important and unique some of these elements were and over time made the games more linear and puzzle-oriented... then after Skyward Sword's poor reception they decided to go back to their roots, except that since you get all the runes at the beginning of the game, the entire Metroidvania design thing went down the drain, which is why many old fans don't like the newer games.

Despite being very different, all three types of Zelda games fit into the action/adventure/RPG genre because it is so broad.

If you're a Metroidvania fan and want a Zelda recommendation, I'd recommend Oracle of Seasons, Link's Awakening, A Link to the Past, and Ocarina of Time.

If you're a fan of open-world sandbox games, I'd recommend Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom.

But if you love puzzles and want a more linear experience, I'd recommend Twilight Princess and Minish Cap.

 

[King Koopa's iconKing Koopa]

I remember the days of games being called Doom clones or Diablo clones so there's a chance they will find a better name for the genre but then again Metroidvania never changed.