“Metroidvania” and Souls do have a lot of shit in common. I could easily see someone making that comparison.
Unfortunately Souls suffers the exact same problem Meteoidvanias do with the fan made Souls-Like moniker that gets applied to games that are Souls Like in generally really superficial ways.
Souls is 3D action adventure and “Metroidvanias” are 2D action adventure.
Made up terms do nothing but confuse.
Fuck kinda ranted a little anyway. Meh whatever.
I’m fine with the terms like metroidvania because it’s a subgenre and you need to deep into games to even hear that term. Presumably if you heard the term you already know what it is. Plus, it’s been used for the last 20 years. Good luck getting anyone to call it something else. That only works when shit is new.
How I always understood it. I figured that was pretty cut and dry. Then that dipshit said in the first 10 seconds of the video that darksouls is a metroidvania. Just throwing fuel on the “well actually” nerd argument fire
Naw I’ve seen plenty of people who game not know what Metroidvania means. Shit I barely know what it means because the breadth of games it applies to has grown huge and generally share little in common with Metroid or Castlevania. Just 2D and open map.
You are right that people won’t stop using it tho.
I’ll just drop the video:
I can’t stand Russ Frushtick. Guy is a walking wet tissue. But, ironically, we share pretty common tastes in games.
He’s fucking annoying tho.
Don’t think I’ve ever heard of him.
I agree with what you are saying.
But for that last question the answer is simple, pony tails and a less realistic body figure.
He’s one of the founders of polygon (I think?) and he’s on the Besties podcast.
I used to be a big fan of the McElroy brothers and Griffin McElroy’s polygon stuff. Mostly monster factory (highly recommend) and carboys.
Video already annoyed me a few minutes in when he made it sound like Metroid and Castlevania started this shit. Metroid was deffinitly at the door before most others if not first, but many many “Metroidvanias” where done long before Castlevania dipped it’s toes into that water in a way people actually gave a fuck about.
Part of why I didnt like this term is how it robs games of their position and place in history, like Metroid and CV are responsible for all when that’s not even close.
The problem is that we dont really have a better way to reffer them outside the games that codified the common rules for the game.
It is the same with the Rogue like games, lol.
Action Adventure only describes part of what makes those games what they are.
In terms of music, is like trying to talk about Iron Maiden, Death and Dream Theater.
Yes, the 3 are metal, but is the specific quirks of each bands subgenre that makes the distinction.
By saying soulsborne you inmediately know what elemens of the game are the primary focus on how you play the game.
By just saying Action Adventure it can be really anything.
Not true. They are just 2D action/adventure games. This is like calling every over head oriented game a Zelda-Like when Adventure Game has worked perfectly fine for over 30 years.
That’s what genre labels do. JRPG doesn’t tell you much either and we use it perfectly fine.
And consequently imo has made music genres hella confusing and way harder to talk about. Those sub genre names don’t really help.
How come it applies to tons of “souks-likes” that aren’t very Souls-Y at all? Like only in the most superficial and surface level ways
Like bow check points are called a “Souls” mechanic. People wouldn’t stop calling Sekiro a Spuls-Like even tho it’s almost nothing like one, and in the end did a shit load of damage to the games image because it wasn’t an Action Adventure RPG with gear. It was an action game that still got saddled with a descriptor that doesn’t match it at all just because of its director and a couple of superficial elements from his previous games. Souls-Like gets tossed around as loosely as “The Dark Souls of _______” does.
For the record I hate “Rogue-Like” as a term as well.
Just by saying RPG it could be really anything.
You haven’t convinced me at all.
Like it or not, people like to be specific about the stuff they are taking about.
It is why we organize stuff into different categories and sub categories.
It helps to communicate what we are talking about.
From your posts, it sounds more like you are more annoyed with the name convention rather than the fact that it defines a subgenre into the action adventure category.
Just by saying Action Adventure, you could be talking according to wikipedia about God of War, FarCry, Legacy of Kain series, Zelda, etc, etc
We have subegenres for a reason.
2d action adventure, boom. I swear for mnm’s I hate the term metroidvania. I also hate soulsbourne, soul like or roguelike. Holy fuck I hate just about every indie game that starts off describing their games with these terms.
Actually reminds me bout the convo years ago reference things that are and aren’t rpgs. Game descriptions are awful now.
Why have game descriptions in the first place? Hell most RPGs play nothing alike anymore. Game descriptions as a whole have become obsolete as games themselves have branched out far more.
Then why are they using vague as fuck terms like Metroidvania? That’s the exact opposite of specific.
Of course. The name convention bothers me because it’s hella vague and tells you nothing while pretending it’s a specific descriptor when it absolutly isnt.
Yea, those are action adventure games. Crazy when games of a specific genre get put into those genres I know.
I did say 2D tho. Not just “Action Adventure” which eliminates you God of War, FarCry, Legacy of Kain games minutes Blood Omen 1, and large chunks of the Zelda series.
So my descriptor is actually pretty specific, it already eliminates everything that is a 3D experience.
Of course we do, doesn’t mean some of them aren’t fucking dumb.
Lol, metroidvania is very specific.
Everyone know what you mean the moment you brought it up.
Is not vague at all.
Again your problem is only because it uses the names of 2 games that codified the genre, not because of what it describes.
Huh? The only thing Metroidvania says is that there might be combat, there might be platforming, and levels probably aren’t a horizontal lines but a zig zagging line. The first 2 things aren’t even guaranteed
It’s really really not. I can’t tell from something being called a Metroidvania if what kind of game it actually is. All I know is it’s 2D, and has a large map. That’s all that term tells me. It doesn’t tell me if this is a state based RPG like the CV side of the term, or if its more of an adventure game with progress based around gear like Metroid. That alone is a HUGE difference between the two types that thia so called genre term encapsulates both of. Wildly different games like Bloodstaijed getting put into the same genre convention as Hollow Knight is fucking obsurd because outside of a big open map to explore and some of Bloodstains progression locked behind some ability upgrades the games are almost nothing alike. If i finished Hollow Knight and asked for a Metroidvania and bought Bloodstaijed is be pissed because those two games are wildly different with very different gameplay goals for the player. To lump them both under the Metroidvania label inaccurately describes one or the other, and does both games a massive disservice. I already explained how with Sekiro, a lot of people disliked that game because they where mislead by the Souls-Like genre term that forced onto it when it isn’t like those games.
It’s the same with Metrpidvania. I find I have to do way more research when deciding to buy a Metroidvania because I might end up with fucking CHASM again which only gets called a Metroidvania because it superficially looks like one.
That’s honestly only part of my prpblem. If you’ve read everything I’ve said and come to the conclusion that’s my problem…thwn I’m sorry but you’re not paying attention to what I am saying.
The emphasis in RPGs is generally still on role playing, stat managment, and team building so RPG still works fine as a genre term. I know what I am probablt getting into with that moniker. You know like how Fighters are wildly different but still focus on the same core tenate of 1V1 combat between two human players. If I buy Samurai Shodown I know I’m not getting Street Fighter, but I am getting a 1v1 primarily 2 player competetive experience.
If I finish Hollow Knight and ask for more and you tell me Bloodstained I might end up pissed off because Bloodstained is designed around farming and power leveling and collecting ass loads of doodads and nick knacks. That’s not Hollow Knight at all. Hollow Knight is about deep exploration and punishing as fuck boss fights. Bloodstained revolves around stats. Hollow Knight doesn’t even have stats. Hollow Knight has more in common with Zelda then it does Bloodstained.
Only thing these two games really have in common is exploration and being 2D. They arent the same and shouldnt be lumped together under the same banner. Its a disservicd to both games and many others.
That was your mistake.
Lets agree to disagree, because otherwise we will be wasting time trying to convice each other on why we are wrong.
