Do you, as people of the general public, and as a gamer, really care about “buzzword” design tropes for games? My point being when someone says “this game is a soulslike.” I don’t really like this one-note sorta offhand denotion of a game. Do you care if an up and coming game is a “Soulslike” or “DMC style” action game? Do those keywords in articles, and sometimes even steam pages themselves, entice you to play the game more?
I have no idea what either of those things are. So yeah, anyone who doesn’t know isn’t going to be interested without more explanation.
TBH unless it’s a true tribute game, I’d rather have a true description of what it is. Saying it’s “like” another game without more context makes me wonder if it’s just a pale “cashgrab” copy of the original.
I’m actually quite surprised steam allows people to say their game is like another published game.
Buzzwords in general make me iffy on games (books, movies etc) anyway unless there’s a good reason not to doubt them. If the publisher has to tell you something is “amazing”, “incredible”, “exciting”, thrilling, unbelievable etc, my cynical little mind immediately goes to “but is it though? Why not let it speak for itself if it is that good?” It actually causes me to think it’s possibly not any of those things.
I mean… you can’t really copyright a “coin term” made by the general public. That’s why no company ever copyright claimed the word “gameplay” when it became more standardized through articles and internet forum usage.
Personally I like it. When I see a game is rogue like or souls like, I see that word and just know those games are not for me. So, for me it is great if they have it in the description so I don’t have to check out reviews to find out more of the game.
I have very limited time to game. I don’t want to play a rogue like where you play and die and start all over again with small incremental growth. Sure, they may give you 100s of hours of gameplay but I did rather have a well paced 15 hr game with a great story. A game can have great gameplay but if the story is bad I won’t stick with it.
Story and characters are always the number 1 priority for me in a game. I don’t even need gameplay if the story is fantastic. I mean I’m in an IF forum after all. I dislike games that wastes my time with meaningless bloat to extend game time. I can understand people who want more time out of our their games as they see time spent = value. It is just not for me.
So, these buzzwords are useful to me in avoiding games I know I won’t like.
At this point ‘soulslike’ is like roguelike, its a specific description of a specific type of game. Unless its an actual buzzword in journo speech like “This game is Dark Souls of Sims” soulslike is just a genre. And I may be mistaken, but DMC style game is just a… hack and slash game.
Maybe we understand the meaning of “buzzword” differently, but I don’t agree that “soulslike” is a buzzword.
Those are buzzwords.
In any case, yes, I do think descriptors like “soulslike” or “it’s like this other game but…” are useful. They’re not sufficient in themselves, but they help with initial filtering. If I’m looking for a movie on Netflix and I’m specifically in the mood for an action adventure, ignoring the genre tags is not going to help me.
Likewise, if a game is roguelike, I know it’s not for me. But if it’s soulslike, I might be interested. If I see it’s an online co-op or pvp, I immediately lose interest, even if the setting or concept art seemed interesting. If a game is described as “‘The last of Us’ but in the Joseon Dynasty”, it immediately catches my attention and makes me curious.
So yes, these are effective marketing tricks, but again, they’re not sufficient alone. The game would still have to win me over, but it does help with initial triage.
That’s the way I think about these terms: a good way to make a triage. The current video game scene has (fortunately) a huge offer, so it’s kind of inevitable that shorthands will appear in order to help buyers/reviewers/developers sort through the options to find what interest them.
Of course, unless you’re an avid fan of a genre, just knowing a game is a “soulslike” or “deckbuilder” won’t be enough, but it serves as a starting point.
See you might THINK that, but when you play DMC compared to something like Bayonetta, the principles and the way combat works, as far as enemy design and what is rewarding to pull off, the nuances become very apparent as you keep playing. Regardless of what similar mechanics is in each game.
For instance, the Yakuza games usually have style switching and a meter gauge that gives you character a super install that buffs them for a short amount of time. However, Yakuza is still very much its own thing. The way you engage with enemies, and even environment, is very different from how DMC handles its more crazier, more explosive moveset.
And yet, hack and slash is still hack and slash. Just like RPG games are so very different, and still stay in the ‘rpg’ genre.
Terminology is a great shorthand when game-makers and consumers are on the same page. It is when marketing blurs the lines (i.e. incorporating MMO terms into live service games and not really using the terms as originally intended) that they evolve into uselessness.
Many people in this community are not hardcore gamers, so the most current marketing is not sometimes understood.
That’s kinda where I stand as well. Especially if you’re somebody new to a certain genre. What is your frame of reference for another action game if you never played one before?