How to Fix Gaming's Broken Genre Naming Conventions

[Yopaz]

But the word genre is kinda an umbrella thing in the first place. Action movie means so much, thriller means pretty much nothing, comedy means they are trying to make jokes and drama can mean anything.

In books we have fantasy, a word that includes both Harry Potter, Lord of The Rings, The Wheel of Time, Mistborn, Avalon and the Twilight.

Genre isn't a very descriptive word, it's the one you set as a starting point. The Batman games are usually categorized as action adventure or some such. Then there's Adventure RPG for something like Zelda, first person shooter for FarCry, JRPG for Final Fantasy and so on. It doesn't say anything about the game, but it's easier to find a game with the themes you like using umbrella terms. If I am asking for someone to recommend a JRPG people will have an idea of JRPGs they enjoyed. I mention that I like turn based combat and they narrow it down to one that includes that, I don't want the main character to be a 10 year old and there's one game left to recommend (I kid because I love).

 

[Britpoint]

There are two problems with genre labels in games. Firstly they tend to focus on particular game mechanics, and secondly the way labels are applied are inconsistent. For example a 'First-Person Shooter' is a genre named for a single, particular mechanic. But 'Role Playing Game' is a genre named for a large group of mechanics.

So while on the one hand we have a genre that is too specific, we also have a genre that is too vague.

The way to get around it is to stop focusing on game mechanics and look to game dynamics instead. A dynamic is the effect on gameplay that the mechanics create. My favourite example of this so far is "Spectacle fighter", which would of course apply to things like DmC, Bayonetta, Revengeance. I think you could also group things like Bulletstorm in there, because while the mechanics between DmC and Bulletstorm may be very different (3rd person vs 1st person for example) those mechanics are still trying to accomplish the same thing: create a spectacle through combat. Hence, Spectacle Fighter.

'Stealth' is another example of a genre name done mostly right. Stealth in itself isn't a mechanic, it's an objective. A goal for the player to achieve by utilising various mechanics, and that is the correct thing to use when naming a genre. Because of this, stealth games are some of the easiest to group together. MGS, Splinter Cell, Thief, Mark of the Ninja. Lots of very different games with very different mechanics, but all with the same primary focus on 'Stealth', and so can be nicely grouped together. If somebody came away from MGS and said 'Can you recommend me another Stealth game?' I could point them to any of the other games I have just mentioned and none of them would feel out of place. That's how you know your genre definition is solid.

 

[a ginger491]

The way to get around it is to stop focusing on game mechanics and look to game dynamics instead. A dynamic is the effect on gameplay that the mechanics create. My favourite example of this so far is "Spectacle fighter", which would of course apply to things like DmC, Bayonetta, Revengeance. I think you could also group things like Bulletstorm in there, because while the mechanics between DmC and Bulletstorm may be very different (3rd person vs 1st person for example) those mechanics are still trying to accomplish the same thing: create a spectacle through combat. Hence, Spectacle Fighter.

We could also combine the names as well. I think the word "spectacle" is the primary in there though, much like stealth is its own group. So you could have a spectacle shooter, brawler, fighter, etc. But which is the primary and which is the sub-genre? For instance should it be that stealth shooters, normal shooters and spectacle shooters in the same area? Or should stealth shooters, stealth brawlers, and stealth platformers share a shelf?

 

[Britpoint]

The way to get around it is to stop focusing on game mechanics and look to game dynamics instead. A dynamic is the effect on gameplay that the mechanics create. My favourite example of this so far is "Spectacle fighter", which would of course apply to things like DmC, Bayonetta, Revengeance. I think you could also group things like Bulletstorm in there, because while the mechanics between DmC and Bulletstorm may be very different (3rd person vs 1st person for example) those mechanics are still trying to accomplish the same thing: create a spectacle through combat. Hence, Spectacle Fighter.

We could also combine the names as well. I think the word "spectacle" is the primary in there though, much like stealth is its own group. So you could have a spectacle shooter, brawler, fighter, etc. But which is the primary and which is the sub-genre? For instance should it be that stealth shooters, normal shooters and spectacle shooters in the same area? Or should stealth shooters, stealth brawlers, and stealth platformers share a shelf?

This is a good point. Although this system is pretty fluid and makes it easier to describe to your friends or look up on amazon, it isn't quite like going into the book store and going to the CRIME section. I think with games you can probably pick out one or two primary dynamics in order to establish the label and then pick the most fitting one to decide where to group it.

Is Mark of the Ninja's primary dynamic stealth or platforming (or maybe a broader term like 'Exploration')? If the focus is on Stealth, then we put it on the shelves next to MGS. If it's on Platforming, we put it next to Super Meat Boy. I think there are very very few games where you won't be able to make that decision, and on the few that make it tough it doesn't really matter where you put them as they'll fit in anywhere.

 

[a ginger491]

This is a good point. Although this system is pretty fluid and makes it easier to describe to your friends or look up on amazon, it isn't quite like going into the book store and going to the CRIME section. I think with games you can probably pick out one or two primary dynamics in order to establish the label and then pick the most fitting one to decide where to group it.

Is Mark of the Ninja's primary dynamic stealth or platforming (or maybe a broader term like 'Exploration')? If the focus is on Stealth, then we put it on the shelves next to MGS. If it's on Platforming, we put it next to Super Meat Boy. I think there are very very few games where you won't be able to make that decision, and on the few that make it tough it doesn't really matter where you put them as they'll fit in anywhere.

So we would have say Dishonored, Assassin's Creed, Mark of the Ninja, Thief, and MGS (primary stealth)in one section and Titanfall, Bioshock, Bulletstorm, Halo, and Mass Effect (primary shooters) in another? Or were you thinking something different?

 

[Caliostro]

Honestly? I don't think you can. Nor do I think you should... I honestly think genres are mostly useless...

If you look at most "genre" definitions It's easy to realize that they're usually inadequate as definitions - at best. They don't really mean anything. They're simply unwritten blurry lines we, as a community, have sort of adopted.

"Shooter"? What's that? A game in which you shoot? Well, even if you only include guns (and shooting can go beyond traditional weaponry-based shooting) welcome to about 80% of games these days. Call of Duty is obviously a shooter, I shoot things... But what if I tell you you can do a lot of shooting in Guild Wars 2 as well? You have shooting in the latest Mount & Blade game, the one that introduces firearms. You can shoot shit in every Assassin's Creed so far since ACII ffs! You have shooting in Magicka, but good luck convincing anyone that's a shooter.

"RPG". Role Playing Game. A game in which you roleplay. Surely that's the potential of any well crafted game? No game inherently guarantees role playing - that's something the player themselves must do. I can roleplay in Fallout 3, but I can also roleplay in TF2. I can always pretend I'm the person/thing on screen, but no amount of "slider plastic surgery" or "put a name of your choice here" is going to guarantee my role playing.

Oh yeah, and who can forget "Stealth". A few years ago a word that pretty much defined Metal Gear Solid or Splinter Cell, now can easily define just about any action-based game, as almost all of them will, at least, attempt to awkwardly crowbar in stealth. Hell, even the disastrous new Rambo game features "Stealth sections".

I dare you to find an adequate tag that perfectly encompasses just about any game these days. Even the simpler ones. Let alone games like Assassin's Creed or GTA that feature everything from walking around shooting people to sky diving, driving, swimming, watching TV...

So yeah, I don't think "genres" really matter. They're just very loose lazy word-guide lines we use. Like saying someone is tall, short, good or bad. They don't really mean anything specific, but they help you give a slightly better idea of what you're talking about in few words.

 

[Britpoint]

So we would have say Dishonored, Assassin's Creed, Mark of the Ninja, Thief, and MGS (primary stealth)in one section and Titanfall, Bioshock, Bulletstorm, Halo, and Mass Effect (primary shooters) in another? Or were you thinking something different?

Well personally I don't think I'd have 'Shooter' in there at all, as shooting is a mechanic rather than a dynamic. Lots of games feature shooting very heavily that are nothing like each other, take Far Cry 3 and CoD for instance. But definitely something along those lines - that 'Stealth' group seems pretty good. Then maybe CoD, Battlefield, Halo, Gears of War under 'Warfare' or something?

I don't think it's too difficult to sensibly group similar games together, even if they have very different mechanics, as we see in your Stealth examples up there. The hard part is coming up with a fitting term for each group.

 

[a ginger491]

Well personally I don't think I'd have 'Shooter' in there at all, as shooting is a mechanic rather than a dynamic. Lots of games feature shooting very heavily that are nothing like each other, take Far Cry 3 and CoD for instance. But definitely something along those lines - that 'Stealth' group seems pretty good. Then maybe CoD, Battlefield, Halo, Gears of War under 'Warfare' or something?

I don't think it's too difficult to sensibly group similar games together, even if they have very different mechanics, as we see in your Stealth examples up there. The hard part is coming up with a fitting term for each group.

I think that mechanics have their place in genre names in games. If we do what you are implying, why wouldn't C&C or Starcraft also go in this "warfare" category? It has to be done in a way where games of similar objectives or mechanics are present. With both Far Cry and CoD the shooter aspect is the most important part of that. Yes one is linear and the other is open world and has stealth elements, but they both heavily feature an aspect that is similar, which is being a god damned killing machine and mowing down everything in your way.

 

[George Learmonth]

I have a theory that games as we know them are actually a few different types of interactive entertainment each with sub-genres and crossovers...

1. Games: These are strictly multiplayer games with set objectives in which players compete against and interact with each other either solo or in teams. i.e Dota, Counter strike, CoD, starcraft, DayZ...

2. Interactive narratives: These are Typically interactive linear stories where the player interacts with/participates in the story and can change its course in some cases. i.e Bioshock, half-life, Brothers:TOTS, Grim fandango, the witcher, mass effect.

3. Arcade: Similar to games, except players do not directly interact with each other, instead competing for a high score. i.e Super hexagon, flappy bird, Contra.

4. Toys: These have no set goal and are made so you can employ your creativity to create your own experiences in them. i.e minecraft, garrys mod, Arma 3 Zeus (to an extent), space engineers.

5. Sandbox: Like toys, but also employing elements from interactive narratives in that there is lore/story to go with it as well as some potential objectives. i.e, skyrim, fallout, morrowind, dark souls (maybe, lots of crossover here), civilisation, total war.

I think that pretty much sums it up. Now there are crossovers of these definitions (dark souls, oh god), but these define the type of general experiences you get from a game, however in terms of gameplay there needs to be a more focused definition within the genre of the game.

 

[yamy]

You know, was actually talking about this with my Creative Writing tutor a couple days ago. Genre is one of those things that's always hard to nail down, especially due to the sheer amount of variance you can have in a genre itself - like in writing, for example, you can have genres like Novel, Novella, Short Story and Poetry, followed by the sub-genres of things like Adventure, Linear Narrative, 1st Person, 3rd Person, Sci-Fi, Haiku, Spoken Word, 2nd Person, Drama, Comedy, romance, Fantasy, Dark, Horror, Non-Linear Narrative, Multiple-Perspective Narrator, Epic...

And one thing can be multiple versions of the above AND have variances on them all. For the layman (and the specialist) it can get a bit much, so it's easier to narrow things down to 'Sci-Fi Adventure' or 'Romantic Comedy' even if the work does things differently to other 'Sci-Fi Adventures' or 'Romantic Comedies', otherwise it gets to be a bit of a clusterfuck as you make up a sub-subgenre for everything different one work does compared to others.

I'll break down EVE and WoW too, just to show how they 'share' the same genre despite being different games:

EVE - Sci-Fi Space Simulator MMORPG

WoW - Fantasy Adventure MMORPG

Main Genre - MMORPG
Sub-Genre - Sci-Fi/Fantasy
Sub-Sub-Genre - Space Simulator/Adventure

They're both classified as 'MMORPG' because that's what they are without any of the content inside them - just like how Twilight and IT are both Novels, despite being nothing alike. When you actually get into the game, you just compress it down to 'Sci-Fi Space Simulator' and 'Fantasy Adventure' respectively because trying to classify EVERYTHING that they do otherwise would just be too much and too subjective to convey the right information to someone interested in playing the game.

So, in short - things get the broad brush just so it's not a massive clusterfuck for people wanting to play something. It's easier to figure you'll like something if it says 'Sci-Fi Shooter' instead of 'Epic Sci-Fi Shooter FPS TPS Dark Action Comedy Drama with Vehicle Stages and Platforming Elements'.

Or, basically what Tippy said above.

I think you're most of the way there.

The problem I think is that with game categorizations there are essentially 2 different things you want to distinguish: how the game plays(the mechanic) and the theme(or the setting) of a game.


The'type' of game denotes how a game plays.
There can also be 'sub-types' where there are game mechanics shared between games of that 'type' and can be used to distinguish game of that type (but of course can have cross overs between types). This how you get action-rpg, tactical-rpg etc.

The 'theme' of a game best resemble the idea of traditional genres in other media. These are label such as Horror, Fantasy where there are common themes to the setting or the story of the game, whether visual or textual. There can of course be elements of different themes as borrowed from genres from other media, but the dominant one is the most useful.

These are the main ways you would want to classify a game.

So, using the syntax [theme](sub-type){type} and taking examples from earlier in the thread:

Call of Duty would be a [Military](First-person){Shooter}
Battlefield would be a [Military](First-person){Shooter}
Fear would be a [Horror](First-person){Shooter}

Assassin's Creed 3 would be a [Historical](Open-world)(Third-person){Action}
Assassin's Creed 4 would be a [Pirate](Open-world)(Third-person){Action}
Arkham Asylum would be a [Superhero](Open-world)(Third-person){Action}


Skyim would be a [Fantasy](Open-word)(Action){Role-playing Game}
Dark Souls would be a [Fantasy][Open-world)(Action){Role-playing Game}
Final Fantasy V would be a [Fantasy](Open-world)(Turn-based){Role-playing Game}

Surgeon Simulator 2013 would be a [Health][Humour]{Simulator}
Football Manager 2014 would be a [Sports](Realistic){Simulator}
FIFA 2014 would be a [Sports](Realistic){Simulator}

Of course, the more indie you go the harder it gets. I was pushing it a bit with Surgeon Simulator there.

Of course you may argue that this really doesn't help to make things easier to understand but at least it solves the confusion of theme and type

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

OP, the problem is with you, if you insist on only referring to the elder scrolls and final fantasy as only rpgs, instead of western and J rpg. The classification system gamers use goes a lot deeper than one catchall name for everything in one genre.

yes I understand that. But what does JRPG mean to someone new to gaming? Which is becoming increasingly more common now that games have hit the mainstream.
I've been saying recently that it may be easier to base a genre off of the core gameplay mechanic, and subgenres based on how other things work in the game. Many JRPGs are based in turn based strategy right? so would it not be fair to call Final Fantasy 7 a TBS game with RPG elements? Or to call Skyrim a fighter/shooter with RPG elements?

Turn based combat doesn't mean the game is turn based strategy. Turn based strategy is something like Risk while JRPGs are just that JRPGs.

OT: We already have genres made and they work fine for the most part. The only genres people tend to argue about are ARPGs and JRPGs. As for new comers I don't see what is wrong with Googling RTS definition or 4x definition for finding out what a genre is.

Stuff like WRPG already gives you an idea of how the game plays mechanics and if you don't have an idea that is what wiki and Google are there to do.