283: Introducing The Escapist's Genre Wheel

[Hijax]

Fans of Civilization are now wondering why their favourite game is now an RPG according to yonder wheel.

Well, actually, y'know what?. If you pick Civ apart, you'll see it bears a lot of resemblance to a turn based RPG, albeit a slightly special one. You start with a small character(city), and you must make decisions on how to build up that character. You can add new characters to your party, and you'll have to manage the synergy between your characters. You'll meet other parties too, and you must either crush them in battle or forge alliances with them, and win through other means, like attaining a specific level first, or constructing a specific artifact.

That might sound like a pretty special RPG, but i think we can all agree it seems like an RPG. Now look at how that resembles Civ. Ok, so Civ's pretty deep compared to your average RPG, but since when is that a bad thing?

 

[irbyz]

And a Driving RPG is impossible because...?

Almost anything can be a RPG because RPG (in its broadest sense) is not part of the genre picture at all (even if there's only one player, they can invent a metaplayer). If trying to define RPG to one particular thematic concept/platform, someone else /will/ complain.
If you're restricting the definition of RPG to "computer games" in the widest sense, please say so!

Good effort, so long as it isn't just "taken as fact" (by Wiki' for example )

Cheers,
d.

 

[swimon]

It's an interesting idea and seems pretty solid (Mass effect for example doesn't really seem to fit since it blends action strategy exploration and conflict but pretty solid nonetheless). The weird part about it is that I have a sort of hard time fitting in myself in it. I usually like RPGs Adventure Platforming and survival horror (to a lesser extent), I'm clearly more of an exploration gamer but I hate simulation, puzzle and music games and I don't really care for construction either. I guess this could be explained as "I like exploration based games but there has to be some conflict" but I have also been known to like some turn based strategy games even though I don't really like anything else in the conflict side.

So instead of being constrained to one band as you'd expect my tastes seem to occupy two bands and one point, which is a bit weird.

 

[Ancientgamer]

I notice that under this classification most modern "rpgs" would be considered ACEs. Was it deliberate to exclude games like Mass Effect, The Elder Scrolls, KotOR, or (the new) Fallouts from the RPG genre and put them into action adventure?

 

[irbyz]

> I notice that under this classification most modern "rpgs" would be considered ACEs. Was it deliberate to exclude games like Mass Effect, The Elder Scrolls, KotOR, or (the new) Fallouts from the RPG genre and put them into action adventure?

This is one reason why "If a genre helps you get your head around what a game may bring to the table, then they're a GOOD THING" is demonstrably false since it may force unrealistic mental speciation and loss of potential to think outwith those boxes. Genres are still useful tags, though, even if they do not/cannot form boundaries as given on the wheel.
RPGs in their broadest sense are an expression of a universal "roleplaying contract"; it's just that that /may/ be hidden to a greater degree in some "games"/"productions" than others.

 

[warrenEBB]

Cool.
Design wise, I'd suggest moving the "Exploration|Conflict" ring outside of the genre titles. (so that the titles are trapped between "Action|Strategy" and "Exploration|Conflict")

When I saw "AE" and "ASE" at the start of the article, I didn't get it. I assumed these were some kind of third level of classification.

p.s. I love data porn TO DEATH. and admit that my suggestion here may be lame.

 

[Electrogecko]

Wow. I guess my tastes in gaming are very varied. I love music games much more than most people (expert guitar, drums, and vocals in Rock Band) as well as platformers and brawlers. (well...at least Brawl) But at the same time, I get great satisfaction from games that test my intellect. I like puzzle games like Tetris, Picross,....even Sudoku, (go die Bejeweled) but I don't think there's any room for these such time killers on my best of all time list. I mean games like Zelda, Limbo, Paper Mario,....even Half-Life.....I guess games that involve abstract puzzle solving in real time. I don't think the same satisfaction can be obtained in a turn based game as in one where you see your actions come to life and watch as the solution unfolds before your eyes. These are the games that require true level design prowess from developers.

But at the same time.....the Phonix Wright series is one of my favorites too.....hmmmm....

 

[nebtheslayer95]

Great article. However, it makes me sad because I know realize how limited my gaming experience is (only shooters and sports). Now I feel the urge to go and buy another ten games of varying genres. Damn you escapist!

 

[Dastardly]

Introducing The Escapist's Genre Wheel

The Escapist breaks games down to their basics and devises a genre classification system that covers all (ok, almost all) of the bases.

Read Full Article

Very well designed. Kudos to you all.

I think it proves one big point very nicely--the only way to make genre useful is to encourage cooperation and communication between people with differing opinions, values, and expectations. That means even rival game studios/publishers/etc. have to come to center and agree on what exactly "RPG elements" constitutes, or other such labels.

I also like how you engage genre. Too many folks confuse it with "setting." There are plenty of great stories (and games) whose genre doesn't match the setting. A story might be set in space, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's science fiction. Genre isn't about how the room is furnished--it's about what you're doing in that room. The rest is just the style of the decor.

Your wheel removes all (or most) considerations of the setting, relegating it to its proper place--costumes and furniture. These can change the flavor of a game, but they don't (or at least shouldn't) define it. Plants vs. Zombies is not "survival horror."

The big "but"...
I think the only place that's problematic is setting "Conflict" and "Exploration" games in diametric opposition. I really think it's just a terminology problem--your explanation works fine, but the terms are a little... eh. Conflict, as you've explained it, seems more about direct opposition--enemies actively working to prevent you from reaching a goal. "Exploration" seems more about indirect or environmental opposition--obstacles block your path, or enemies working to beat you to a goal (but not specifically to stop you).

That would explain why racing is on the opposite side from sports. I think phrasing it in terms of "direct" and "indirect" opposition might make this clearer.

 

[Steve Butts]

The issue with forcing games to occupy points on the edge of a circle is that in order to make the A/S distinction more extreme, you are forced to make the E/C distinction less so, and vice versa. For example, this makes the Action RPG impossible to classify. Allowing games to occupy any point on a "genre plane" would make the system more expressive (albeit more complicated). Perhaps a simpler alternative would be to keep the 8 categories, but also add "ASCE" which resides in the centre of the wheel.

(I'm also not sure why you put music games where you did. Take Guitar Hero - ignoring Star Power, it's entirely devoid of strategy. The game literally tells you what the optimum set of input is.)

That said, I definitely agree that classifying games based on external form is far too simplistic and not particularly useful.

Yes, the idea is not that games only exist on the outer edge of the wheel. That's just where the distinctions are most easily quantified. It's true that there are shades of difference in the various hybrids, but the AS axis isn't necessarily meant to be more meaningful, but it does address the "how" of games, while the CE axis merely addresses the "what." I considered the usefulness of an ASCE category, but ultimately, I felt it was a cop-out. If the point is to say games trend towards one of the four points of compass here (either A,S,C, or E), then saying that a game is a perfect blend of them all makes the whole point of classification moot.

To your point about action-RPGs, that was one of the trickier genres to incorporate. We eventually just decided that, while those games exist along the seam between conflict and exploration, you could clearly tell in nearly every case whether a game was action (reflex-based) or strategy (stat-based). For instance, Diablo and Fallout 3 seem more like RPGs to me, while Borderlands and BioShock are more like shooters. Again, this is not to say shooters and RPGs aren't mixing together in interesting ways, but I think it's usually clear whether a game is a shooter with RPG elements or an RPG with shooter elements.

As far as music games go, I think you must have just misread things. The wheel classes them as action/exploration. In this case, the exploration is not the dimension of space, but the dimension of time.

 

[Dastardly]

Introducing The Escapist's Genre Wheel

The Escapist breaks games down to their basics and devises a genre classification system that covers all (ok, almost all) of the bases.

Read Full Article

Also, I foresee a lot of resistance from people that see games as being "cross-genre" examples. Again, it's going to come back to a differing belief in what defines genre.

Someone might say, "Well, this FPS has RPG elements, so where is it on your circle?" But we've got to make sure to differentiate "RPG elements" from "Plays like an RPG." Having a branching tree of selectable upgrades earned through experience doesn't change the fundamental mode of gameplay. It simply gives the game a miniscule shift around toward "strategy."

The game's mechanics aren't the primary concern. Genre should be (and, in your chart, is) defined by what is expected of the player. The ways the game provides for the player to interact with the world (action/strategy), and the reasons the player is asked to interact (indirect/direct conflict) set the principle genre. Other game mechanics (like these nebulous "rpg elements" or other bastardizations of terminology) are simply seasoning that lightly shifts the flavor of the entrée in one direction or another. Not defining features.

So, when faced with a "cross-genre" game, simply ask players to define the game in terms of what the player is expected to do the majority of the time. One will always rise to the surface as the clear winner.

 

[irbyz]

> That means even rival game studios/publishers/etc. have to come to center and agree on what exactly "RPG elements" constitutes, or other such labels.

Good try using "(with) RPG elements" rather than "RPG" as such. The two are not the same, of course. Trying to choose which "islands" are visible with the sea of RPGishness that surrounds everything is a matter of taste even within one media (computer, tabletop, theatre, etc.). Further classification is possible, of course.

 

[Dorkmaster Flek]

Very interesting indeed! I like the basic breakdown. If you think of it as a two-axis Cartesian coordinate system, the origin would be a perfect blend of all four elements. You could plot every game as a dot somewhere on the graph based on how much it tends towards each element. I like logical and mathematical breakdowns of complex art forms!

 

[Dastardly]

The issue with forcing games to occupy points on the edge of a circle is that in order to make the A/S distinction more extreme, you are forced to make the E/C distinction less so, and vice versa. For example, this makes the Action RPG impossible to classify. Allowing games to occupy any point on a "genre plane" would make the system more expressive (albeit more complicated). Perhaps a simpler alternative would be to keep the 8 categories, but also add "ASCE" which resides in the centre of the wheel.

(I'm also not sure why you put music games where you did. Take Guitar Hero - ignoring Star Power, it's entirely devoid of strategy. The game literally tells you what the optimum set of input is.)

That said, I definitely agree that classifying games based on external form is far too simplistic and not particularly useful.

Yes, the idea is not that games only exist on the outer edge of the wheel. That's just where the distinctions are most easily quantified. It's true that there are shades of difference in the various hybrids, but the AS axis isn't necessarily meant to be more meaningful, but it does address the "how" of games, while the CE axis merely addresses the "what." I considered the usefulness of an ASCE category, but ultimately, I felt it was a cop-out. If the point is to say games trend towards one of the four points of compass here (either A,S,C, or E), then saying that a game is a perfect blend of them all makes the whole point of classification moot.

To your point about action-RPGs, that was one of the trickier genres to incorporate. We eventually just decided that, while those games exist along the seam between conflict and exploration, you could clearly tell in nearly every case whether a game was action (reflex-based) or strategy (stat-based). For instance, Diablo and Fallout 3 seem more like RPGs to me, while Borderlands and BioShock are more like shooters. Again, this is not to say shooters and RPGs aren't mixing together in interesting ways, but I think it's usually clear whether a game is a shooter with RPG elements or an RPG with shooter elements.

As far as music games go, I think you must have just misread things. The wheel classes them as action/exploration. In this case, the exploration is not the dimension of space, but the dimension of time.

I think this kind of problem demands that we be very specific about what we mean by "RPG elements." If we simply mean playing the role of a character in a story, that's hardly a major change in how the character engages the gameplay. The story, sure, but not the gameplay itself.

If we mean things like branching dialogue trees, or even just the earning of selectable upgrades, then we're not talking about elements that define the game. An FPS that has a series of selectable upgrades that you unlock with experience points doesn't have "RPG elements" in any way that shifts it to a new genre. It has a strategy-oriented "subgame" within it. The core gameplay is still an FPS.

Of course, what this'll really come down to is the dreaded question--is "RPG" really a standalone genre? Or is it just a collection of ways in which games of different genres can be explored? Is there a game that is clearly an RPG, but clearly not a turn-based strategy game or clearly not an action game? The "RPG" label seems more to be a comment on presentation more than genre itself.

I think that your wheel, though it includes "RPG," actually acts to move us away from the use of RPG as a genre. And I don't think that's a bad thing at all.

 

[Steve Butts]

I think this kind of problem demands that we be very specific about what we mean by "RPG elements." If we simply mean playing the role of a character in a story, that's hardly a major change in how the character engages the gameplay. The story, sure, but not the gameplay itself.

The scheme we've got here is neutral with regard to the presentation elements you mentioned. Story and setting provide important context but are not, by definition, types of gameplay, which is what this chart hopes to define.

There's a whole other discussion to be had about what an RPG is, but one of the points of the AS distinction with regard to that label is to define whether a game focuses on the player's ability (action) or the character's ability (strategy). So in the case of RPG, we mean that success is determined more by the character than the player. In other words, Fallout 3, Borderlands and BioShock all have shooter combat, but they don't all handle it the same way. Fallout 3 is very stat based, BioShock is very action based, and Borderlands is somewhere in between.

 

[irbyz]

> If we simply mean playing the role of a character in a story, that's hardly a major change in how the character engages the gameplay.

Your role in the "story" can be that of a car. Removing "mental" attributes is no different from trying to reduce a living character to hp:18,ac:2,weapons:x,y,z, etc. The cultural space is /very/ easy lose focus on and yet we still think we're in a RPG more because the role (1:1 player-role) is that of a living character rather than a car. Anthropomorphism blurs even that difference entirely. Attach a forum and people will go on about the adventures of their car and create any cultural space required that may have been missing in the game itself.
The car lives in a city, humans live in a city. Both can be "role played". A driving game /can/ be a RPG depending on how/where the "production" approach sets the "units of progression" and suchlike.

> I think that your wheel, though it includes "RPG," actually acts to move us away from the use of RPG as a genre. And I don't think that's a bad thing at all.

I'd personally be happier if it wasn't there. People don't tend to think and just take stuff as gospel. Sad but true.

 

[sune-ku]

I think it's an excellent premise for genre-defining! Looking at the key motivations behind games and the basic techniques they use to engage players is much better than just grouping games together off of a few similar features.

Even if this wheel isn't perfect (and of course nothing is) then the approach is much better than anything I've seen before.

Incidentally it would be nice if the colours were chosen with more meaning, but it does look pretty as it is!

 

[warrenEBB]

After reading Dastardly and Russ Pitts, it occurs to me I probably wasn't thinking deeply enough.

But, I spent an hour messing around in illustrator and photoshop, sooo, here's a quick example of the design tweak I was babbling about above: http://www.warrenblyth.com/remote/EscapistGameClassification-V2_sC.jpg
(wee! wasted some time designing for no reason! oh well.)

Will meditate on design choices more.

 

[blankedboy]

Very cool. It's also purty :3

Buuut there's obviously the times when a subgenre needs to be on both sides, like an FPS/RPG or something. You can never make it perfect.

 

[H0ncho]

Where would an action-RPG like diablo be on this chart?