Gaming

IMHO, worthless though it is, I don't get why Diablo-likes are called ARPG's. They have lots of A and no RP. (They are Gs tho.)

Because in 1996 experience points, leveling up, character attributes, and magical loot were all closely associated with RPGs. Over the intervening roughly 30 years those mechanics have been adopted by games all over the spectrum. However the genre-name for Diablo-like games stuck due to convention.

Also Diablo being called an ARPG predates Dark Souls by 10 to 15 years.

ARPG = Action Role Playing Game.

The themes, camera angle, and method of delivering rewards (loot) don't really affect something being an action RPG or not. The focus on action over storytelling does.

The Elder Scrolls is also an ARPG.

I don't get why Diablo-likes are called ARPG's.

We used to call them "Hack 'n Slash". I guess studios didn't think that term marketing friendly.

I think ARPG is just broader than that. Bethesda games are also described as action RPGs, yet they are neither really about builds or gitting good, it's more of an exploration / virtual theme park thing.

I think the definition of an ARPG is "an RPG where the player's skill in controlling the character in an action-game like fashion has a major role in gameplay, as opposed to games where the character stats or strategy is solely decisive", like in Divinity or most older RPGs.

It's like when people describe both Doom and Six Days in Fallujah as an FPS, yet they are nothing alike.

I actually didn't encounter anyone saying Dark Souls and like games being an ARPG. Dark Souls like games are usually called Souls like. The problem is, that the term RPG and Action are not a distinct genres. This is a long standing issue in gaming, long before 2000s even. When I was a teenager, some people called Zelda an RPG, others said Action RPG, some people (me included) said its an Action Adventure. Genres and terms that are vague and broad will always clash with others. Don't let me begin what Secret of Mana (SNES) actually is.

Look at Racing games. There are Mario Kart and Gran Turismo, two very different kind of racing games and both still are. What about motorcycle racing or classic racing games like Rock'n Roll Racing (someone remember? this is what Blizzard did before they became Blizzard!).

OK, so you see it's a mess of terms. Diablo isn't a new game, it evolved from previous games that were similar and mixed in from other genres. How do you classify such a game in an already existing set of genre terms? It's kind of an Action RPG that existed before, so its natural to put it into such a category. Look at all those RPG games, they are all RPG but still vastly different. BTW I never heard of bullet heaven, but that sounds really funny. It sounds like an anti name for jokes. And being the one with the bullets might even fit into the category funny and fitting name.

If have a new name for Diable like games, it will clash with other genres again. You put generic terms like Loot or Build into it and so on. What if a Diablo like game isn't that grindy? Or does not focus much on Loot. We have been through this with various other genres. Therefore I would not even try to invent something and not take genres too seriously. It's a mess. You can't getting it right by adding more mess to it.

I'm just curious why a new designation hasn't sprouted up for one or the other to make things less confusing.

There is for one of them: you mentioned it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soulslike

A Soulslike (also spelled Souls-like) is a subgenre of action role-playing games known for high levels of difficulty and emphasis on environmental storytelling, typically in a dark fantasy setting. It had its origin in Demon's Souls and the Dark Souls series by FromSoftware, the themes and mechanics of which directly inspired several other games. Soulslike games developed by FromSoftware themselves have been specifically referred to as Soulsborne games, a portmanteau of Souls and Bloodborne.

Back in my days we called games like Diablo hack n slash RPGs

It's the same with "hack and slash". Originally also referred to games like Diablo, but now we all use it to refer to stuff like DMC, pre-2018 God of War, Bayonetta, etc.

I've spent a lot of time in RPGs, and the last time I RPed in a G was around the time George Bush's dad was president.

ARPGs should be the Diablo-likes. Half the time, Souls-likes are barely even RPGs.

Diablo-likes have skill trees, classes, leveling... You know, the player-customizable "role" part of Role-playing.

Souls-likes often are just action games of dodging and equipment stats, without any ability to change the intrinsic role of a character.

I'm an IT dork, and if I pick up a wrench I don't suddenly become a plumber or mechanic.

Dark Souls has more in common with Castlevania than with anything "RPG".

As for Diablo type games, I personally call them "looter RPGs" as a retroactive term. Because the "looter shooter" genre that popped up about a decade after diablo is literally just Diablo but FPS.

Genre names are wack anyway. The "[other game]-like" moniker will always be more descriptive and clear, plus being a reminder that every new thing in video games is a refreshed take on some pre existing thing.

I too would like more on-point classifications.

Like, we got 3 big classifications ARPG, CRPG and JRPG. And I guess that's nice. But a bit of subclassification would go a long way, imo.

Now if only publishers would use these labels. But to them everything is just an RPG, because that's an umbella everything fits under.

Diablo isn’t an ARPG, it’s an inventory management simulator with light action elements.

None of these actually have any role-playing in them though.

I always referred to Diablo as an isometric RPG. At the end of the day, language is weird, and as long as we're able to clearly get our point across to another person and have them understand, I think that's all that matters. But it's fun to think about

I think the defining factor here would be the real time combat, vs a traditional rpg which is turn based.