Dark Souls is Not an Action RPG.
Home » Articles » Game Articles » Opinion » Dark Souls is Not an Action RPG.

Dark Souls is Not an Action RPG.

The following post is this author’s opinion and does not reflect the thoughts and feelings of Fextralife as a whole nor the individual content creators associated with the site. Any link that goes outside of Fextralife are owned by their respective authors. This is the first of a three-part series of articles analyzing the Dark Souls games. Part II will analyze the soulsian genre and part III will discuss the philosophy of Dark Souls. You can check out the author’s profile to find them.


A lot has been said about the “Dark Souls” design and I’ll try my best not to rehash arguments that have already been presented. I’ll analyze each component under a broader lens, regarding the series as a whole. I’ll compare its entries to each other, regarding each individual component. And then, once we have a clear picture of what makes Dark Souls tick, we’ll take a look at how these games fit within its action RPG genre.

So, without further ado…

Level Design (Designing with Intent)

Every design decision in Dark Souls seems to have been done very deliberately, and level design is no exception. Despite first impressions, from a gameplay perspective, you rarely feel lost. First, yes, you don’t always know exactly where any given path will take you and, quite frankly, that’s the whole point of exploration but you always have at dark-souls-not-an-action-rpgleast one clear path to follow. You’re never stuck with nowhere to go.

Second, you often get glimpses of your objective in the distance giving you a general sense of direction. We all have heard that Dark Souls “level design” being praised by its use of verticality, but I think that’s a bit shallow, in that it makes it sound like a novelty for novelty’s sake when, in fact, it’s so much more. It’s cool, yes, but it’s also a major factor for this overall sense of direction. The maze-like maps bend over themselves, intertwining paths and interconnecting areas, which makes it very difficult to tell which way is which, at times, but up is always up and down is always down. And finally, it usually does a very good job of letting you know you’re on the right path or signaling that there might be something else over there.

Moving past pure gameplay, one of the hallmarks of good level design is the ability to integrate narrative. FromSoftware leverages this ability quite brilliantly and in more than just a few occasions. Item placement is often used to connect characters, locations, and timelines. Verticality is used to convey feelings as we traverse the world and also to imply the power structure between factions. Nothing feels out of place and when it does, it’s always on purpose.

Dark Souls 1 makes the best use of level design, in my opinion. From the get-go, it does a better job than its counterparts, by starting in a prison, since a clear goal is set right from the beginning: escape. That not only sets the immediate goal of escaping from the asylum but it also provides a strong incentive to pursue the long-term end-goal by connecting it to the fable of the chosen undead. There’s the sense of empowerment when you ring the first bell, the oppressive dread as you descend into the depths to ring the second one, the soul lifting relieve of the ascension back to the surface, and the paranoid desperation when you realize that your precious safe-place has been desecrated…

You’re never thrown into an alienating world without a proper transition. Darkroot Garden would be an exception to this but that area is meant to represent a pocket of reality lost in time so, I believe it was deliberate.

The Depths is the only place where it’s easy to feel lost, but that is a place where greedy men lose themselves. If you can overcome the urge to loot and explore, it’s actually quite easy to go from beginning to end.

Sen’s Fortress can sometimes give a similar feeling but you’re never really lost in there. You always know where you have to go, it’s only a matter of finding the path to it. The house of traps is a puzzle waiting to be unlocked. Every door, lever, and elevator in The Duke’s Archives feel like a well-kept secret. Anor Londo’s revelation is breathtaking, it really feels like you have reached the city of the gods. And you go dark-souls-not-an-action-rpgaround Anor Londo just as much as you go through it, almost like a thief, as an indication that you simply do not belong. Both true dragons are magical and otherworldly. Nito is a threat waiting in the dark. Priscilla lingers in a place of overwhelming sadness…

Every level design decision is intent on guiding both our feelings and understanding of the world. And they all speak to each other, weaving a truly coherent world that would otherwise just feel broken. Even Izalith, which is often bashed by arguments of poor level design, is representative of this factor. Lack of verticality is due to the fact that they are literally and figuratively at the bottom of the world. That along with the overtly open and simplistic design, I believe, is meant to infer a hidden utopia. Inside their society, they are all equal and free to come and go as they please.

All this ingenuity, unfortunately, would not be seen again.

Dark Souls 2 has some good set pieces. Coming upon the Dragon Aerie, in particular, stands out above the rest. The fog area in Shaded Woods was really interesting and so was the trail of breadcrumbs left by Vendrick, as he locked away the Throne of Want and fled his own castle. But that’s as much praise as I can give it. Compared to its predecessor, the level design is filled with branching dead ends and disjointed worlds. There’s a good experience to be had in each of these areas but they all feel really self-contained. Also, it sometimes feels like you’re moving forward in a corridor, without even knowing where it is that you’re supposed to be going. It feels like you’re just stumbling through the game.

Dark Souls 3‘s level design seems to have taken a backseat to the lore. The game feels rather small and linear, the layout seems more pragmatic than inventive, and like Dark Souls 2, it feels fragmented as well. But even though I think the game is somewhat diminished by it, I also believe that these decisions were taken based on its lore. As we have seen at the end of the age of fire, the world really is getting smaller, made of fragments that are coming together. And unlike before, the protagonist isn’t searching for a goal, he was created specifically for one particular goal. He is driven by it and driven towards it. We are unkindled.

As you can see, level design suffered a dent in these last two entries of the series. Dark Souls 3 also has way too many bonfires and one trade that clearly didn’t pay off was the ability to warp around. They have given us a very convenient tool but lost a very important tool themselves. This feels particularly detrimental to Dark Souls 3, considering that the alternative of waiting to get the ability to warp around, wouldn’t feel so harsh, given its smaller scope. It would fit the lore of the unkindled moving forward to reach its goal. And they already have a mechanic in place to bring us back, by having Emma teleport us to Lothric once we’ve gathered the cinders of all the Lords.

Storytelling (Plot is Overrated)

Tom Abernathy once said at GDC, “plot is highly overrated.” His quote has been taken out of context before and I strongly recommend you watch the whole talk here if you have the time. But for what it’s worth, he might have been describing Dark Souls when he said that. And that’s not to say that plot isn’t important or that Dark Souls doesn’t have a plot, quite the contrary, but they have moved the plot out of the way of gameplay. By giving us room to enjoy the game without actively trying to work out the plot as we play it, they have also given us the opportunity to take in a much larger story than they would otherwise have been able to tell and at our own pace. They understand that no cutscene could ever match our imagination and that those “aha!” moments of discovery will stick with us, long after we have put our controllers down.

Some staples of Dark Souls’ storytelling include the fabled item descriptions, NPC arcs, and environmental storytelling. Combined, they were able to weave a sprawling, intricate story that extends through millennia. Dark Souls isn’t the first nor the only one to play by these rules. Rules that represent an evolution of the old adages of “convey, don’t describe” and “show, don’t tell,” now, “play, don’t show.” Unfortunately, most of the industry doesn’t seem to realize that by fighting this, they are fighting the strengths of their own medium. And like I said, Dark Souls ain’t the first, and it ain’t the only one, but if it can’t be the father, then it sure as hell is the godfather of environmental storytelling. Which is also a part of the level design but is being covered separately, given its very specific application.

In all these techniques, Dark Souls 2 seems more simplistic and straightforward, suffering from the same problems as before, crafting individual stories that don’t necessarily play off of each other. Story through level design is lacking, NPCs feel one dimensional and without agency, and I feel like they did a good job of crafting the lore for various kingdoms but, again, they all feel very cut off.

The first Dark Souls, on the other hand, was very proficient at it. NPCs feel alive, the world guides our feelings and tells its own tale, and all the many parts of its story feel connected, one way or another. The only complaint that I would make is that it felt like something was just… missing from the story. I know that all the important bits and pieces were there, really, but I believe that at the time, they simply hadn’t perfected their methods yet.

Which brings us to Dark Souls 3. And storytelling is where this entry really shines. Some NPCs go through their own arcs in its entirety. Actively acting upon the resolution of their own fates; Eygon, Hawkwood, Anri… And Gael! The components used to tell Gaels’ story are very minimalistic. We hardly have any interactions with him and still, they were able to construct a story that is powerful, moving, and complete. Partly due to the fact that it mirrors our own, and we are able to project our own story into it. In this entry, they truly have perfected environmental storytelling. The world is full of details and every single one of them is a thread in the lore. You see a bookcase and I see lore. A broken coiled sword, doggy Frampt statue? It’s lore. You see a shield-in-a-box (Spirit Tree Crest Shield)? I see ingenious item placement. That is goddamn lore.

Lothric Castle, for example, is a masterpiece! Item descriptions set the pieces, and level design places them on a chess board. Not a single line of dialogue is necessary to describe, in minute detail, its current standstill and the prior battle that took place on its grounds. It’s just… beautiful.

Fanservice is used to hide lore in plain sight. There are tales within tales, as with Farron and Gundyr. And lastly, this entry finally fully explores something that was introduced in Dark Souls 2: the synergy between its own lore and the pre-existing one. If you’ve only played this one game, then you’re like one of its characters. You understand the story of the world around you, sure. But, in fact, you really don’t. Where Dark Souls 2 was content on telling a separate story, Dark Souls 3 manages to tell a story of its own that, when combined with Dark Souls 1, changes into a completely new story. Even veteran players fall for this trap and fail to see the truth. But if you keep this in mind, you’ll see. You’ll see…

Themes (“Toolset” Mindset)

The themes explored by these games are very deeply woven into its fabric. Every other aspect of the game is consistently built upon them, and they serve to connect its many components. The more pertinent themes throughout the series are: history doesn’t repeat itself but it rhymes; we don’t matter, except we do, except we don’t; nothing is what it seems; and, of course, challenge. More than just game design, the challenge really is one of the game’s themes. Ask any non-initiated player what Dark Souls is about and they’ll more likely than not, tell you that “it’s hard.”

But more than just a theme, challenge is a tool. It’s the hook that draws in players into an action RPG, without realizing that they’re entering a very philosophical conversation with its developers. The game is hard and the world is harsh. You commit to it and as you play, you start to absorb the other themes. Its cyclical nature mirrored in the First Flame, the spiraling level design, the empires built upon each other, and the recurrent bosses and character archetypes.

The insignificance of your humble beginnings, the power creep of your inevitable growth, and the heart-wrenching realization that no matter how grand your deeds may seem, this world is ultimately indifferent… and its cycles will keep on turning.

The hollowing obsession with the “truth”, thwarted at every turn by revelations that undermine your perception of reality. And where Dark Souls really sets itself apart from the other games, is in how these themes are implemented. Just like the challenge, they are all tools. They move the plot and the conversation forward; and the game itself, I believe, is also a tool used to teach the player about its overarching philosophy. And it does that in a very efficient way since, instead of just telling us about it, it forces us to live it.

Now, Dark Souls 2, again, takes a more blunt approach to it. And in my humble opinion, they kind of actually missed the spot regarding the original philosophy of the game. They also seem to have forgotten to use the themes as tools, rather than dressing. Dark Souls 1 and 3 are on par with each other. The former establishes what the philosophy of the game should be and the latter doubles down on it. On and on, both games instill the need to ponder about these ideas and the player feels compelled, even if only on an unconscious level, to ruminate about his own life. And I’ll ask you to set this philosophy aside for now since it warrants a post of its own, and will have to be discussed on another day.

Layered Mechanics

So, those are the components that make Dark Souls what it is, but there’s one facet of Dark Souls that I’ve never seen being explicitly discussed, and that’s the fact that it seamlessly brings together an entire host of different genres. “Seamlessly” being a keyword here. Other RPGs, especially open world games, try to do the same but fall short. All their many parts feel like they were thrown together without any regard for the whole and the end result is often a basket of semi-developed, incompatible ideas. The following are the “Games” within the game:

It’s a Horror Game

dark-souls-not-an-action-rpgThe most primal fears are the unknown and death, and Dark Souls thrives on both. It’s just a game, you know you’re safe and yet, here, death has weight. There’s no effort to sugarcoat it. “You died.” These are your enemies, these are the rules. They play by the same rules as you, you can defeat them. “You died.” This is a boss, these are the rules. “You died.” You can defeat him. “You died”.

Dark Souls is the kind of game where you either commit to it or you give the fuck up! You commit to it because they make sure to show you that you can beat the game. It’s up to you. But then you die, over and over again. You lose your progress, you lose your souls, you lose even more progress trying to retrieve your souls. You face up against that one boss and you died. You know you can do it but you died. You got his pattern but you died. And at some point, you start thinking “maybe I can’t.” And that is what you really fear.

It’s just a game, you know you’re safe and yet, in every death, there in-lies the real threat, the threat of defeat.

The unknown also plays a big role here. You feel compelled to plunge into it, with the looming dread that whatever terrible thing may have happened here, you might be next. You struggle on, grasping at straws, trying to piece everything together. Trying to make some sense. They entice you with just enough information to make it feel like you can do it, just to see it slipping through your hands. And then, one day, that’s it, you beat the game. It’s over! But you still don’t know. It’s an itch, it’s just an itch. But if you’ve committed yourself to the game then the game is definitely not over. You’ll play it in your head and that itch, that itch will make you hollow.

True RPG.

dark-souls-not-an-action-rpgWhere in most RPGs you get to play as a character that was created for you, in Dark Souls you truly play as your own character. Other games let you choose your appearance, your gameplay style, a few branching choices… but at best, it’s just a more nuanced version of choosing between paragon and renegade. The blank slate of the Dark Souls’ protagonist and the open ended nature of the limitless interpretations of its lore and themes allow you to craft an experience that is “unique to you”, and you alone. The events play out in the game but the story unfolds inside your head. And, yes, it would be great to see a game where every action is a choice and every choice translates in-game and every choice has limitless possibilities and consequences… but that just seems unreachable right now. So, until we get to that, I think Dark Souls is the closest we get to a true role playing experience.

PVP also gives you the chance to express yourself. In most other games you’re either aggressive or passive, a team player or a douche bag. In other games, you help others for the loot or the xp. When you help people in Dark Souls, there’s no loot, or skins, or banners. You can do it for ranking up in the covenant or to gain levels but those exhaust themselves pretty quickly and still, people keep doing it, just to praise the sun! There’s no leaderboard, you fight for the sake of fighting.

You can invade to kill, wreak havoc, or both. You can even change your mind after invading and decide to let them be or even help them. You can be a blunt instrument or a trickster. You can be honorable and, yes, you can be a douche bag. Dark Souls PvP can test your skills, your wits, and in true Dark Souls fashion, it will test your resolve. They are going to spam the shit out of everything that can be spammed!

“Do you have the skill to defeat them and the resolve to keep your gold?” They are going to gank you, that’s a fact. “Do you have what it takes to outsmart them!?” “The resolve to invade again?” “Do you intentionally open yourself up for invasions, so that you can challenge them?” “Can you stand your host repeatedly dying? To the same boss! Over and over again!?” “Do you give up or do you PRAISE THE SUUUN??

It’s a Social Game

Well, kind of. Even though this isn’t the focus of the game, the interactions you have with other players actually matter, they have an impact dark-soulsthat is missing from most games where interaction is possible. The usual experience has you going in blind with a random group of players to complete a raid or a co-op mission of some sort, and even though the missions and bosses and enemies are sometimes memorable, the people you take with you are not.

In Dark Souls, there’s always that one guy who kills your entire party single-handed, that one troll we couldn’t see coming or the troll who gets trolled, the sense of gratitude when one particular group of random sunbros decides to stick with you after so many had bailed, the one sunbro that saved you from three invaders… when you have this kind of interactions, you remember the people more so than you remember the game.

The Meta Game

The meta matters more in Dark Souls than in most other games. Where in most games the meta is limited to “How do I play this game?”, in Dark Souls it is incorporated by the message system (“try finger, but hole”) and extends to the need of the community for the understanding of the lore. It is also an extension of one underlying theme of the game. We’re all alone, nothing you do matters, except we’re not and yes it does.

A True Detective Game

It’s a spiral of madness. Detective games have you finding the glowing item, or following the glowing trail, or exhausting the dialogue options… If you want to know the truth about Dark Souls you’re gonna have to get out there and look for clues on your own. They won’t tell you where to look, they won’t tell you if what you found is a clue or not.

Information is always missing and some of it is straight out misleading. You have to build your own real-life network of informants and allies. You have to build your case from the ground up and in the end, there’s no pop-up “mission complete” message. The jury may even agree with you but all you have is a theory and a better detective can always prove you wrong.

Its “Lore” is a Game

It can be a shallow adventure, an exploration of characters, a deep commentary on fundamental philosophical questions, and a tool of introspection.

Traversing the lore of this game really is a game on its own.

Conclusion

Does Dark Souls have action RPG elements to it? Yes. Is that genre befitting of Dark Souls?

Hell no!!!

Dark Souls is quite the masterpiece, even among its peers, that it became its own genre: “Soulsian“. In linguistics, we say that “usage dictates meaning” and it’s about time we start dictating what a Dark Souls game should be called. We should not accept that Steam, Wikipedia, or any other outlet define it by anything less than what it is, …for Dark Souls, is not, an action RPG after all.

About the Author

Games

Comments

36 responses to “Dark Souls is Not an Action RPG.”


  1. Action / Adventure or more precisely Combat / Adventure. I’m waiting for AC Origins this year.

  2. Its not a game at all. Most RPGs are not games. They are activities. Players try to make a game out of it with challenge runs and PvP. But its not a game in itself.

  3. rather than give souls games their own genre, a better way to address the issue would be to give them a sub-genre. there are enough games using the “soulsborne” formula to justify this.

  4. >
    You may have noticed at the beginning of the original post that this is a three-part series. The next part will deal precisely with my definition of the soulsian genre.

    But in advance, yes, while difficulty is one (of many) defining features of Dark Souls, it´s hardly a defining feature of the genre. Saying that something belongs to the same genre as Dark Souls just because it´s difficult is an extremely overly simplified comparison.

  5. >

    That and so many others. Kind of my problem with the “souls” genre being defined by its kind of difficulty, like it was the first to do it.

  6. Crash Bandicoot was already a difficult game, back when it was first released. Crash is like the hipster Souls game.

  7. >

    Sounds a lot like how people were saying Crash Bandicoot has become Dark Souls. That just because a game is difficult and possesses the same/similar design as older style games makes it “Soulsian”.

  8. >

    That’s a skill. Memorisation of an enemy, and learning to predict/react with proper timing is the basic skill you have to learn. If it wasn’t a skill, you wouldn’t have to learn it.

    >

    Completely agree. It’s a path, with a couple branches (Cathedral or Carthus) that come back together immediately. (You need the Doll to enter IotBV, then you’re done with that branch.) Extremely linear, especially compared with other games in the series.

    >

    This is basic Dunning Kruger. It’s never my fault, the bad connection is always “He’s lagging.” No matter how many frames you drop, you focus on that Phantom Vanellope glitching, and not how much your own frames drop. (Partially also focus on the Enemy. You know what you’re doing)

    Also false dichotomy. It’s Always them cheating. Always the game letting you down, I never mess up! There is such a thing as luck. Chicken Wing Parry Kings pretty much depend on the stars aligning, and them getting that lucky parry. (Also other players not knowing all the wonderful ways to counter a Parry King. We count those frames too.)

    Not even close to limited to this game. Seems to afflict gamers in general, they called “Hax!” on me when I started playing Ranged/2H Hybrid in RunEscape, because the common knowledge was that Pures are the only viable builds. (Granted it was an animation cancellation glitch, and they implicitely set it up to favor a Rochameaux of Pures. I was intentionally breaking the game.)

    >

    Fun is a judgement call. I personally get immense enjoyment kiting the Abyss Watchers around with a Whip because I can. It makes the victory feel so much sweeter when i cherry tap them like that. (Ever since I dialed in on their pattern.) Why I like whips, because they do so little damage (To compensate for all their advantages) I can enjoy a long fight. I like long fights. Some people like 1HKs, and Hypermode to stack up 4 Buffs naked, and their health below the Morion Blade/Red tearstone threshold.

    Others like beating the game at SL1. Or running it in under 3 hours. Or trolling high level players in a Thrall Mask with Force and Ladders. Or Invading with 70% health in search of 3-on-1s. That’s what’s great about this game, you can do all of that. Or none of it. There’s so many ways to enjoy it. It invites Challenges, once you get over the initial Skill Hump to Git Good.

  9. Besides the genre ambiguity, there are a couple of misconceptions ( in my opinion ) about this game that seem to be so widely agreed upon that it boggles my mind…..some that immediately spring to mind ( and are burned into my memory till this day ) are in no particular order:

    1) THIS GAME TAKES SKILL!!! Ummmmm no…no it doesn’t…what you need for this game is a very good memory ( for remembering exact enemy positions and attack patterns ) and to employ a previously rather hated game mechanic called trial and error ( because there is usually a 3 second window in boss fights to attempt some form of action before “oh fuck that didn’t work and now I’m dead again” ). The fact that the enemies do EXACTLY the same thing EVERY time also helps with the memorising bit.

    Heaven forbid that they actually deviated from the script and you had to react and adapt because THAT
    would require skill. Unfortunately for that to even be possible you would need controls that are
    responsive enough, but since your attack and defense are permanently welded to arguably the two most
    unresponsive buttons on the controller, it would be a bit tricky. And let’s not even mention the unwieldy
    lock-on via RS click that not only sucks donkey balls, but at times makes it sound like you’re trying
    to send a message in fucking morse code.

    2) IT’S OPEN WORLD!!! Nope, take a look around……it’s actually a bunch of interconnected levels in a pretty damn linear way. They just don’t have loading screens between them.

    3) WHEN YOU DIE IT’S NEVER CHEAP. IT’S YOUR OWN FAULT!!! Oh ok then. It…it wasn’t you Dark Souls…..it was me. I even remember a few of the times my obvious lack of skill and mental retardation caused my downfall. There were a several times I was killed through a wall/door/floor because I was too thick to realise they were wielding those special weapons that actually disrupt the atoms in matter allowing them to pass right through solid objects. Then there were these annoying assassins that liked to hide around corners and buildings along the street and then jump out when you go past so they can slit your throat. But there again I should have smelled their farts because I was downwind after all. And who can forget the time I walked through one of the bright portals to hell only to find myself in a quaint little courtyard. A courtyard so small that it could barely hold myself, the two mongrel bastard dogs that were already within touching distance or the boss-man who was having trouble finding the space to swing his ginormous fucking weapon.

    Once again my skills just weren’t up to par and…….no FUCK this!! It’s YOU Dark Souls. It’s the way every
    enemy turns into an olympic sprinter all headed in your direction the moment an Estus Flask touches your lips because they can all just sense you’re in the shit. It’s the way that you even hide campfires, the
    only points of recovery and progress saving, in the shittiest levels. It’s the way that 50% of the time I
    find myself near some form of fatal drop surrounded by enemies all intent on introducing me to it. It’s
    the sound of my sword clanging merrily against the wall in a narrow passage/on a narrow staircase while
    being hacked to death by an enemy with no such problems.

    There are many more examples, bu t I’ve blocked them out in an attempt to keep some of my sanity. Almost every aspect of this game was designed to not be fun and piss you off and I think they they went overboard, plain and simple. Like the whole level of Blightown, whose designers should develop a pestilence in their nether regions.

  10. https://goo.gl/images/kc7ayx” rel=”nofollow

    the french video game website “gamekult” has been referring to the current trend of making video games more old school, harder etc as “darksoulisation” of video games ever since Dark souls started being emulated.
    it has become its own genre in my opinion, and therefore does not really fit the ARPG no more than any other genre. It is the “souls” genre now.

  11. >

    Hence why I say, assuming they’re true. the biggest problem with having humans tagging the game genre, you know they’re going to do it stupid just to be an @$$. Like how they labled Dark Souls “kawaii” and “easy”

    “Chosen undead senpai, please no! I-I love you, but it’s too fast! We haven’t even engaged in jolly co-operation yet. *Anime moans*”

  12. Yeah the problem with steam is so many people throw up random genre and mechanic tags sometimes it’s hard to know if the that’s what a game really is. I went look for a RTS game i saw awhile back to see if it had come out yet (tooth and tail) couldn’t remember the name but remembered it was a strategy game. Holy hell half the games under the strategy category were not strategy games just games with choices or a pizza making simulator it was honestly infuriating to go through them.

  13. Probably why, instead of making a catch all genre name for a specific game type, sites like Steam just give multiple genre and mechanic tags to best describe what the game is apart from visually showing it. Basic meaning tags that, when put together, paint a pretty good picture of the game’s content…..assuming they’re true.

  14. Not sure about anyone else here but untended graves scared the shit out of me. Dark souls may not be considered a horror genre but it definitely instills fear. the horror of realizing if i failed to link the flame this is what could happen was frightening.

    To say dark souls is an action rpg is an over simplification honestly. is it a action RPG yes but it’s also so much more. to truly categorize you’d need about 10-12 different genre titles which would just sound silly. but to make a new genre title would be a waste IMO because as many “souls like” games that are being released nothing is ever truly like dark souls even bloodborne was it’s own unique game similar mechanics but traits in both games that set them distinctly apart.

  15. Yeah, dark souls series is kinda special as it fits many genres, but at the same time only use very minor elements of it.

    RPG – while you can build your character however you like, you aren’t playing desired role or trying to be certain someone. You have ONE role – chosen undead. You can’t play any other roles, you don’t actually have classes or specializations, you don’t make immerse into a specific patch of good or evil.

    Action – yes, combat is action based, but that’s it. You don’t have special skills to combined in action-sequences, you don’t have quick-time events, or anything else ties to action games. Only weapon swings and dodges.

    Horror – yes, there are monsters, zombies, etc. Yes, world is grim and dark. But it is not scary, it doesn’t try to terrify you.

    Adventure – you literally have one adventure to go on. You down go through many different places and encounter many different quest. You have just one adventure to go onto (to kill all bosses) and that’s it.

    So, in my opinion, dark souls series could be called DQG (dark quest game) as it fits the genre the best and maintains everything essential with game without going into other genres.
    DQG – a game where you go into grim and dark world with a single purpose to complete a single most important quest. Everything else in this game is trivial and doesn’t really matter.

  16. Fair enough.

    I knew FF was an RPG. I was talking about the Adventure catagory, but as long as any Zelda is officially considered Adventure (OoT is still Solo, right?) then I can accept that definition.

    It’s still Action if there’s nothing to do but fight stuff. Fighting games are Action. Why they have an Action/Adventure category. Adventure is a sub-category of Action. Just like Soul is a sub-category of R&B.

  17. >

    Okay, why I started with “Call it what you will.” Personal definitions vary from player to player, because labels like “Action” and “Adventure” are vaguely defined with a lot of overlap.

    You mentioned Cloud Strife, who’s from the flagsip of Adventure games. FF, what sets Souls apart from Any adventure game is the Party. Look at any FF game, it’s about the interpersonal dynamic between the players. The main character, and his companions throughout, the love triangle between Tiva, and what’s her nuts, the summoner, that IS the story. Sephiroth is a good foil for that, but to me Adventure games are defined by the Party Dynamic. (Ever since D&D)

    Contrast that with Legend of Zelda, and Simon’s Quest. those are Action games, and it’s dangerous to go alone, take this… A sword, he didn’t come with you to provde Healing, there’s no Tank/DPS, you have to do it all yourself. In Souls, you CAN Coop, but there’s an Invasion system specifically in place to raise the difficulty/Stakes with PvP if you summon to team up on the PvE. Look at the Warriors of Sunlight. Their mandate is Coop, they’re rewarded for helping you defeat a Boss, and that’s the only Coop Covenant.

    The rest are to punish you for Summoning, and doing anything else with your party, other than stepping through the Boss Fog, finishing the level, and moving on.

    Alone.

    Adventure Games have a Party. Ever since Final Fantasy defined the Fantasy Adventure Game for Balder’s gate, and everything else. Souls actually punishes you for trying to play it as a Party.

    So no, I (Personally) wouldn’t call it an Adventure Game. But that’s just my opinion, I could be wrong.

  18. Nahztek-Shadowpath, thank you very much for the compliment. I guess we all appreciate things in a different way. Personally, I find the lore to be the most enjoyable part of the game. =]

    >
    I agree 100%. That’s what I had in mind. But as games push the boundaries of what games can be/do, I think there’s space -a need, even- to actually create new nomenclatures. Since I love DkS and since DkS has already established its own unofficial sub-genre, I thought it’d be a good place to start, coming to a common understanding of what it encompasses and making it “official”. DkS, for instance, could be a soulsian aRPG. (I think the process has already started, as the gaming community is collectively awakening to this concept. I have no illusions of spearheading anything but the more we talk about it, the more expedient the process will be.)

    I know all this sounds a bit silly and unnecessary, but I think art influences us just as much as we influence it. Our classification for it is an expression of how we see it and it can influence the industry, I believe. Albeit in a very small scale.

    >
    Well, I agree but I think that’s only part of a bigger problem.

  19. >

    Kind of what I conveyed with my definition of the action genre. It’s a very broad term cause sooooooooooo many video games use in a way most people understand as action gameplay in one form or another. Same goes for the catch all Action-Adventure, basically meaning an action game with a story and a point beyond the varieties of collect, kill, and go to this place, and maybe some puzzle gameplay and mini-game.

    >
    Probably because calling CoD a action-shooter would be like calling a Grey Hound a canine dog. Shooters are a part of the action genre, as are platformers, fighters, hack n slash, etc. All are sub genres of the action genre, so it’d just be redundant.

    >

    I personally consider sports and racing games action games, as long as the gameplay is action based, and not turn based like some. I think “sports” is actually more of a theme genre, like western, or sci-fi, rather than a gameplay genre, as they don’t seem to depend on the actual rules and real-life mechanics of the sport they’re supposed to be based on, like this monster football game that’s turn based like a strategy game.

    As for action-puzzle, Portal comes to mind as it used FPS and platformer gameplay for puzzle solving challenges, both being core aspect of the experience. So action-puzzle, though I think they usually just call it both action and a puzzle game, rather than action-puzzle.

    >

    And this is where we get to the difference between a game of a genre, and a game that uses a genre’s elements. Going back to action-adventure games, lets say, Ratchet and Clank, that’s primarily third person shooting and platforming, and thought of as such, with some vehicle and puzzle minigames. The puzzle minigames are a small part of the gameplay and game as a whole, and if removed, really wouldn’t change the core experience; it would just be the same game, just without puzzle minigames. On the other hand, with a game like Portal, both the action and puzzle elements are integral to the game experience, and the removal of either one would greatly alter the game and how it’s played.

    So, that’s to my understanding why they don’t apply the genre title to a game just cause it uses a parts of the genre in the game. If it’s not core to the gameplay experience,it’s often labeled as “with [insert genre] elements”, if mentioned at all.

  20. Actually, I’m starting to think the problem here is the “action” genre.

    Puzzle? Shooter? RPG? These all describe gameplay mechanics, or things the player does while going about whatever goal is laid out for them. Action? Not so much, and the concept is so vague it can be applied to virtually anything that doesn’t fit into the other categories. It’s like filing a game under “other”. Why are there no games called action-shooters, even though shooter games will have nothing but action? What about action-sports? Action-puzzle? And yet, games that do have the action label often have elements of the other genres, even when they aren’t labeled as such.

  21. >

    Oh yeah, I’m not saying that’s all Souls games should be classified as only Action-RPGs, just that, given how the genre is often defined, it’s not really easy to see it as not a part of that genre spectrum.

    Genres like Action, puzzle, shooter, and yes, RPGs, are really on the general side of genre definitions compared to, say, arcade FPS, or side-scrolling platformer. Nothing wrong with that, but more specific classification is helpful. I would say that there maybe should be multiple levels of genres when it comes to specificity, with general genres(action, puzzle, strategy, etc.) giving a basic gist of what something is about, and more detailed titles to give a specific idea as to what it exactly is.

  22. Nice article. I appreciate the effort that went into it.
    Buuut…

    The staple of Dark Souls is killing minor enemies leading up to bosses and leveling up your character.

    Yes, the lore is deep, but its ignorable.
    Yes, online can be a bonding experience, but it’s a tag-on to the main game.
    Yes, the enemies are generally horrific. But that’s common in dark fantasy games.

    At the end of the day, all you do is kill things and level up. It’s definitely an ARPG.
    Your article was good though.

Log in to leave a Comment

Latest from Fextralife