I’ve been doing some thinking about things that don’t really matter — a welcome distraction from the unpleasant things that do matter in the world today — and one of the things that has come up in my addled brain is how the genre descriptor “RPG” is woefully inadequate to describe the incredibly broad range of experiences one can have beneath that banner.
So I thought it might be interesting to do a bit of a thought experiment and see if I can come up with some convincing descriptors for the various types of RPG out there. I feel like there’s quite a lot, but establishing some form of “taxonomy” for them might be useful to… someone, I guess?
Anyway, point is, I felt like doing this, so I’m doing it. Hit the jump and we’ll start pondering!
The two types of RPG
It’s pretty common to see RPGs divided into “western RPGs” and “JRPGs” these days, but these descriptors are, and to an extent always have been, inadequate — particularly now we live in an age where developers from both sides of the “east-west divide” have made games that deliberately adopt the conventions of “the other lot”.
Instead, a more helpful distinction, if you really want to broadly categorise RPGs into two main groups, is to divide them into narrative-centric RPGs and mechanics-focused RPGs.
There’s some fuzziness here, but for our purposes today I’m defining the two terms thus:
- A narrative-centric RPG is a game where the primary focus is experiencing the game’s story. There may be strong mechanics, but everything you do is ultimately in service to experiencing as much of the story as possible.
- A mechanics-focused RPG is a game about the joy of systems. These games absolutely can (and do) have stories, but the main focus is not on seeing that story through to a conclusion; rather, it is on exploring the game’s systems, whatever they might be. Mechanics-focused RPGs often (though not always) have a strong “endgame” feature that allows you to keep playing and enjoying the game after you’ve seen the “end” of the story.
An interesting case study to look at the divide between these two approaches is to examine the early Final Fantasy games. Up until about Final Fantasy VI, the Final Fantasy series took an alternating approach to focus: I, III and V are all mechanics-focused RPGs, while II, IV and VI are all narrative-centric RPGs.
To expand on this, Final Fantasy I, III and V are all about character progression. In the case of Final Fantasy I, this is very simplistic: gain experience, gain levels, get stronger, maybe nab some new equipment. There is a story in Final Fantasy I, but it’s very weak, both in terms of its overall memorability, and in how it’s told. Essentially all the story in Final Fantasy I does is point you towards the next area you should be gaining experience from.
Final Fantasy III and V, meanwhile, both feature takes on the series’ recurring “Job” system, with the latter acting as a considerable refinement of the formula. In both of these games, you progress not only by gaining experience and levels, but also by gaining experience in specific Jobs. Both games have stories, but they’re pushed somewhat to the background by the focus on increasing the power level of your characters.
Contrast with Final Fantasy II, IV and VI, all of which are noteworthy for their approach to narrative. Final Fantasy II, while relatively weak in narrative terms by modern standards, was the first Final Fantasy game to obviously make an effort with storytelling and characterisation that went beyond “go here, kill this thing”, and Final Fantasy IV and VI are both still held up today as very good examples of narrative games really starting to find their feet.
All of these games still have mechanics to engage with — Final Fantasy II has its pre-SaGa “use it to improve it” stat system, and Final Fantasy VI has its “Espers” that allow characters who equip them to learn new skills. The relative weak link mechanically is Final Fantasy IV, which has characters with no customisation whatsoever; they just learn new abilities as they level up, and the party you have at any given moment is determined by what point you are at in the story.
However, it’s also worth noting that Final Fantasy IV is the game that first brought us the mechanical innovation that was the Active Time Battle system, which eschewed a strict turn-based structure in favour of character and enemy turns occurring as a result of (hidden by default) “time bars” filling up.
As you can see, while there will always be some blurry edges, it’s definitely possible to categories RPGs even within a single series as being either narrative-centric, or mechanics-focused. Now let’s take a closer look at each of those in tern.
The narrative-centric RPG
The narrative-centric RPG is a game that, via some means, wants you to experience its story as its primary reason for being. We can further subdivide this into a number of key categories.
For lack of a better way to describe them that doesn’t involve assuming knowledge, we will, from hereon, consider that the generic term story RPG describes narrative-centric RPGs from prior to the CD-ROM era, and those which pay homage to it such as modern “retro-style” or “pixel art” RPGs. These almost always unfold from a top-down perspective, feature a linear narrative delivered through text boxes, and little in the way of real player agency. Some feature optional sidequests, but the main point of these games is to get from A-B in narrative terms via a direct route.
Examples of this include the aforementioned Final Fantasy II, IV and VI, plus modern titles designed in a similar mould such as Sea of Stars (above).
The cinematic RPG evolved from the story RPG and focuses on telling its tale through elaborate cutscenes and lengthy dialogue sequences. These are typically big budget affairs, and sometimes (though not always) ease off on the complexity of the mechanics and difficulty factor to ensure everyone gets a chance to see the whole story. After all, there’s little point making gobsmacking cutscenes if the game is too hard for anyone to ever see them, right?
Examples of this type of RPG include numerous Final Fantasy titles from VII onwards, and indeed it was the default approach for a lot of PS1 and PS2-era RPGs. These days, the budget required to create this type of experience with the graphical fidelity people expect puts it out of reach of all but the giants of the genre such as Square Enix.
The sandbox RPG focuses on allowing players to experience a world and myriad little stories within it. In a sandbox RPG, which typically unfolds in an open world, you move from place to place effectively “writing your own” adventure as you go according to the quests and events you engage with. The aim is to make the player feel like they are part of the world, and that they care about the locations and the people in it. There is often a “main” story to follow, but a key distinguishing feature of the sandbox RPG is the ability to completely ignore it and engage in all manner of other activities, each with their own narrative context.
The most recognisable examples of this are the Elder Scrolls and Fallout games, but titles like the Xenoblade Chronicles series also fall into this category. There’s also an argument to be made that the massively multiplayer Final Fantasy XIV can be played in this way, but that’s a bit of a special case.
The visual novel RPG tells its story, as the name suggests, via visual novel-style storytelling sequences. These games tend to be quite selective about what parts of the game are “interactive” and which are just “story”. In visual novel RPGs, you rarely wander around a town, for example; typically the mechanical emphasis is on going into dungeons and fighting bosses, and everything in between is menu-driven.
Examples of this abound from the PS3/Vita era onwards, particularly from smaller, low-budget developers such as Compile Heart. The mildly ecchi RPGs from that era tend to fall into this category, as this format lends itself well to static 2D artwork. Good examples include the Neptunia and Death end re;Quest series.
The storytelling RPG places a strong emphasis on text and choice. These games feature a lot of reading, some of which might be voice acted, and they allow the player to truly take ownership of their character and their experience in the game world by making meaningful, impactful choices. These games are arguably the closest to the tabletop roleplaying experience — or at least they provide the illusion of being that way.
This was particularly popular around the late ’90s with titles like Baldur’s Gate and Planescape: Torment, but has had something of a resurgence recently with titles like the Pathfinder games, Disco Elysium and numerous others.
Nothing precludes any of these types of narrative-centric RPG from having a strong mechanical component. Many Final Fantasy games have detailed progression and character customisation systems alongside their strong emphasis on being cinematic experiences, for example. The key thing with all of them, though, is that they can primarily be considered a means of narrative delivery; having some deep mechanics is an often welcome secondary consideration.
The mechanics-focused RPG
A mechanics-focused RPG often has a story to provide a sense of structure to the game, but more often than not this takes a back-seat to detailed mechanics and more challenging gameplay. These are games about understanding systems and mastering them; some of them also throw “player skill” into the mix, while others focus on number-crunching.
As with narrative-centric RPGs, we can subdivide mechanics-focused RPGs further:
The progression RPG covers the examples cited above of Final Fantasy, Final Fantasy III, Final Fantasy V and their ilk. These are games that have a (usually linear) story to follow, but the focus is more on powering up and customising your characters rather than racing through the narrative as fast as you can.
The dungeon crawler or DRPG usually unfolds from a first-person perspective in a grid-based maze — though exceptions such as The Temple of Apshai, which unfolds from a top-down perspective, exist. If it’s possible to leave the dungeon, any “town” or other “base” is normally represented as menus and still images rather than an actual location you can walk around.
There are two distinct approaches one can take with this type of game, and the favoured type has changed over time:
The real-time dungeon crawler has players and enemies moving around the maze-like environments at the same time without each waiting for the other to take their turn. Combat is typically abstracted as choosing an attack option then waiting for it to “cool down” before using it again. Puzzle-solving in these games often requires some creativity on the part of the player, such as using unneeded inventory items to hold down pressure plates or spotting clickable buttons hidden in the wall scenery.
Good examples of this type of game include Dungeon Master, Eye of the Beholder, Dungeon Hack and Lands of Lore. Real-time dungeon crawlers are almost exclusively western-developed, and have declined in popularity since the late ’90s in favour of turn-based takes on the genre, but a few modern examples still persist, such as Legend of Grimrock.
The turn-based dungeon crawler has everything happening a turn at a time: both movement and combat. In fact, combat typically unfolds on a separate screen rather than directly “in the dungeon” as in the real-time dungeon crawlers. These games often feature larger parties, as the turn-based combat allows greater scope for strategising and doesn’t require players to nimbly click on myriad options as quickly as possible.
Due to turn-based dungeon crawlers often placing a stronger focus on combat and restricting the actions a player can take outside of combat, puzzles in this type of game tend to be a little simpler — flip a switch, open a door. The mechanical emphasis in this type of game tends to be in growing your characters’ power levels and getting them better equipment and skills.
Examples of this type of game include the Etrian Odyssey series, Demon Gaze, Mary Skelter… pretty much any modern Asia-developed dungeon crawler, to be honest. Asian-developed examples are often showcases for impressive 2D art, sometimes with a mildly ecchi twist. There are western examples, too, though, most notably the subgenre progenitors Wizardry and Might & Magic, but also more recent titles like StarCrawlers. Western examples tend towards more realistic visuals.
The loot RPG usually unfolds from an isometric or far-off 3D viewpoint, and plays in real time, with the player usually only taking control of a single character. These games often have a linear story to work through, but this is a minor part of the whole experience: instead, continued appeal comes from replaying the game at harder difficulties, taking on randomised challenges and acquiring better and better gear for your characters, even after they reach any level cap that might be in place. These games often (though not always) have a multiplayer mode.
The main distinguishing feature of the loot RPG is that pretty much everything you kill or smash explodes into shiny things ranging from simple currency to powerful magical weapons. This type of game pioneered and is still the main exponent of loot with distinct “rarity levels” — with rarer loot also being significantly more powerful. Core to the subgenre’s appeal is the ability to customise your character with gear that complements your preferred playstyle or ability loadout; while characters start as a fixed template, two examples of the same basic class will often wildly diverge by endgame.
The textbook example of this type of game would be the Diablo series, but there are examples from both eastern and western developers. Noteworthy Japanese examples include Sega’s Shining Soul series, Marvelous’ Silent Hope and Level-5’s Snack World: The Dungeon Crawl Gold.
The action RPG is perhaps best considered separately from the loot RPG. Both unfold in real time and typically feature the player in direct control of a single character, but the distinguishing factor is in the focus. While loot RPGs are primarily focused on buffing up and customising character stats via a vast array of equipment, straight action RPGs place their emphasis on player skill. Avoiding damage is less about having good stats and more about being able to respond appropriately to enemies’ “tells” and suchlike. Straight action RPGs also tend to have fixed maps rather than the randomly generated environments more commonly seen in loot RPGs.
A good example of this type of game is Westwood’s underappreciated PC title Nox. While often described as a Diablo clone on its original release, its fixed environments and more limited equipment selection make it a distinct experience. Stranger of Paradise: Final Fantasy Origin also fits neatly in this category despite often being mischaracterised as what we’re about to talk about.
The stamina-management action RPG can be considered an offshoot of the typically more “hack and slash” action RPG. Colloquially referred to as “Soulslike”, I prefer “stamina-management action RPG” simply because it doesn’t assume knowledge. In these games, combat is still real-time but typically a little slower-paced, and dependent on finding a good rhythm of striking, dodging and blocking due to your actions being limited by a stamina bar. Equipment helps, but player skill is paramount.
Stamina-management action RPGs also tend to have more elaborately designed levels, as making effective and creative use of the environment is often a helpful means of winning combats via unconventional means, such as knocking enemies off cliffs or into traps.
The world RPG is a type of game that is almost completely extinct thanks to improvements in how we tell stories in games, but there are still a few isolated modern examples such as Dene Carter’s excellent Moonring. This type of game unfolds in a large, open world but there isn’t a strong emphasis on storytelling; instead, the world is there to be explored and engaged with as you see fit, usually by wandering from place to place beating up monsters and delving into dungeons.
Prime examples of this type of game include the earliest Ultima games, along with SSI’s Questron series. DataSoft’s pioneering Alternate Reality can also be argued to be one of these, as can the overly ambitious Legends of Valour by Synthetic Dimensions, even though both of these unfold in a city rather than a “world”.
This type of game fell out of favour as soon as we figured out how to tell more explicit stories in our games, but they still provide a distinct, mechanics-focused experience different to anything else we’ve already described above. They’re actually quite refreshing to go back to from a modern perspective, too.
The puzzle RPG is not commonly seen, but there are a few different takes on this:
Puzzle battle RPGs use puzzle game mechanics — typically a variation on tile-swapping, colour-matching games — in lieu of more conventional combat systems. While character level and equipment play a role, the emphasis is on engaging with the puzzle game and successfully being able to take advantage of its more advanced techniques.
Puzzle exploration RPGs take another type of game — often the dungeon crawler — and almost entirely eschew combat and character progression in favour of some form of puzzle solving. Good examples include the PicDun games on Nintendo handhelds, which involve exploring a dungeon and dealing with its various gimmicks to create a piece of pixel art on the map screen; Puzzle Labyrinth on 3DS, where each level of the first-person dungeon has an “escape room”-style puzzle to overcome, as well as occasional turn-based combat sequences; and the Fairune series, which look like classic top-down action RPGs but are actually big traversal puzzles.
The strategy RPG often has a fairly strong story that unfolds in linear fashion, but the emphasis in gameplay is overwhelmingly on individual battle encounters that take a long time to resolve, since each unfolds in an almost “board game” style. Strategy RPGs place a strong emphasis on managing a large squad of units, not all of whom necessarily take the field for every encounter.
Simpler takes on this subgenre such as the Shining Force series have fixed progression for a large number of characters, while more complex titles such as the Final Fantasy Tactics or Disgaea series allow complete freedom in how you manage your squad when it comes to character classes, equipment and abilities learned.
Finally, the roguelike has become a somewhat bastardised term in recent years, but when applied specifically to RPGs, it covers a game that is entirely (or majority) procedurally generated, and which features “permadeath” — you die, you have to start again. Aside from that, roguelikes can and do blend with other RPG subgenres — most commonly loot RPGs and dungeon crawlers.
What about MMORPGs?
Massively multiplayer online RPGs (MMORPGs) are a strange beast in that they can be many things depending on how one prefers to play them. For example, Final Fantasy XIV can be a cinematic, narrative-centric RPG if you desire, or it can be a mechanics-focused title that focuses on multiplayer teamwork and memorisation of encounters. It can even be a mahjong or card game if you want. For most people, it’s a bit of everything.
MMORPGs have had an impact on single-player RPGs, though. For example, the sandbox-style narrative-centric RPG can be argued to have its roots in the quest-based structure of games like World of Warcraft, and many modern action RPGs have adopted similar visible telegraphs for enemy attack patterns to those seen in Final Fantasy XIV.
MMORPGs are perhaps still best considered as their own distinct thing, though, because “being into RPGs” doesn’t necessarily mean you’ll have a good time with an MMO. And, given that MMOs run the gamut from the completely freeform Ultima Online to more structured experiences like Final Fantasy XIV, there’s probably a whole other discussion to be had on how we can subdivide that genre. But we’ll leave that for another day, perhaps.
And gacha?
Most gacha games fit comfortably into one of the descriptors above — Genshin Impact is an action RPG, for example, while Granblue Fantasy is a bit of visual novel RPG, a bit of progression RPG — with the only real difference being that your equipment and/or characters come from quasi-gambling mechanics. Gacha games are typically horribly balanced in the name of getting you to pay up as much as possible, and I don’t like covering mobile games here at the best of times, so that’s all the time I’m going to give them.
Conclusion
The video game medium has reached a point where it doesn’t really benefit anyone to be vague. As we’ve seen above, commonly agreed mechanical genres are woefully inadequate to describe the sheer breadth of experiences it’s possible to have these days — and saying that you’re “into RPGs” doesn’t necessarily mean that you’ll enjoy all of the experiences described above.
It pays to be specific, and to give details about things, because every game is a little bit different, and developers are always trying to find new and interesting ways to present tried-and-true mechanics, systems and structures.
The RPG genre is thriving like never before; sure, a new RPG may not be a huge, universal “event” like it was back in the PS1 days, but honestly, if you like any variation of games that involve numbers going up, you’ve never had it so good. Long may that continue.
Want more Pete? Check my personal blog I’m Not Doctor Who, and my YouTube channel ThisIsPete. If you enjoy what you read here, please consider buying me a coffee.
Did you know you can subscribe to MoeGamer as a newsletter and get new posts delivered right to you? Just pop your email address in below and subscribe for free. Your address will not be used for anything else.
The post A new taxonomy of RPGs appeared first on MoeGamer.