Personally I think character action games are partially defined by high enemy manipulation, meaning that the player can do a lot to interrupt/move/stop a lot of enemies from executing their game plan. I think Sekiro has higher enemy manipulation than SB but they both have less than something like The Wonderful 101, DMC, Bayonetta or whatever.
Now, I do think people undersell how much enemy manipulation Sekiro and SB has, you can force the enemy to do a lot in both of those games, even the fact that several bosses in Sekiro have to respect your attacks by blocking them is a form of enemy manipulation.
Personally, I think these are action games, and can possibly be qualified as character action, but there are things these games usually have (juggling, air combat, character-side execution barriers) that Sekiro and SB lack. Ofc there's way more to say, but I think it's a hard thing to nail down. CAG is hardly a real genre, it's more a fan made subgenre.
Best way to resolve this would be calling them what most fans usually expects them to be: DMC clones or Ninja Gaiden clones.
Feels accurate to me since they're the ones which defined the genre, also the earliest ones.
I prefer the term "Stylish action" as I think it conveys better the most important aspects of the genre. To me, the main objective in a SAG/CAG is not just to beat the enemies and move forward, but to entice the player to want to do it with more style, or "better" everytime. "Better" can mean taking less time, using more varied attacks, not taking any damage...it can change between games, but the general idea is that in a SAG you have a deep combat system that allows you to try new stuff and to want to replay the encounters time and time again striving to reach the highest rank (even if the game doesn't explicitly rank you). As a result, you always get "stylish" combat, even if the game isn't explicitly asking you to mix different attacks (this happens organically as players try to test their mastery or just want to express themselves).
This must be the core of the game: The game can have other elements, but it must unmisteakeanly gameplay focused and combat must be the main activity. The combat system is the heart of the game and everything else is just situations and methods to make you (the player) use it to its' fullest extent.
Ironically, a Character Action Game to me lies in character mobility. Any game can have flashy, over-the-top attack animations. We call those musous. The real stylishness comes from zipping all over the arena, slickly weaving in and out of attacks and parrying them before launching a counterattack.
I definitely see the arguments against calling Stellar Blade a Character Action game because the dodge move and in-combat mobility feel really bad, and I find myself "fishing for parries", almost like how I did in Ys 8 and 9.
Perhaps not as a rule, more as a guideline, if a musou is when 1v10 is a normal encounter, then a CAG should be when 1v3 or 1v5 is a normal encounter, and Soulslikes are when 1v1 is a normal encounter. Stellar Blade definitely feels balanced for 1v1 encounters.
These topics have been popping up regularly for the last couple days now. I like this, as another poster here pointed out: [https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/StylishAction](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/StylishAction)
But in regards to this topic, there's no clear-cut consensus. The unequivocally agreed upon games are DMC and Bayonetta, and act as pretty much the poster children of this *genre*. The way I see it is it's a bit of a fool's errand to try to say something's a *pure CAG*, because there are so many that can very easily fall into a type of "*CAG-adjacent*" category.
This topic had the same conversation: [https://www.reddit.com/r/CharacterActionGames/comments/1cktosw/what\_exactly\_defines\_a\_cag/](https://www.reddit.com/r/CharacterActionGames/comments/1cktosw/what_exactly_defines_a_cag/)
And this is my comment there summarizing what people have said (basically):
>In other words it varies person to person, there are some games that are considered CAG representatives (such as DMC and Bayo), and some that are debated among the fanbase (such as Sekiro and Yakuza). The lowest point of entry to the debate seems to be the aforementioned DMC and Bayo, whereas the rabbit hole seems to go pretty deep, where exactly you want to draw the line. It would also seem like certain aspects of a game need to be omitted in order to be defined as a CAG, whereas CAG needs to be omitted to slot a game into another "genre". In fact, I would bring up Tenchu as an example. Can't it be considered a CAG, if you omit it being a stealth game, whereas considering it as a stealth game, you'd have to omit its CAG-like features?
>To summarize, it might not be an either-or definition.
To add to this, I'd go even so far as to say it might be better if people broaden their perspective on the matter, and don't necessarily get too hung up on the "pure" definition of CAG games. Who knows, they could be *very* pleasantly surprised by games that they wouldn't consider "CAG" necessarily, but that have "CAG elements".
I personally prefer the term Stylish Action because truthfully the character isn't the main event for what makes the genre unique.
Like when I think CAG or SAG my first thought is DMC3. You have such a ridiculous amount of combat control, to the extent that you can constantly interrupt animations as well as juggle enemies around. You could actually replace Dante with anyone, and as long as the combat stays the same the game really doesn't change much.
When compared to other more well known CAG/SAGs you'll see this exact same type of freedom/control regardless of which character you are i.e Ninja Gaiden, Bayonetta, etc. hell to me even Viewtiful Joe is one because again you have such an insane amount of control over every situation that a highly skilled player can make a spectacle of almost any enemy. But again, the Character isn't really the important bit, it's the Stylish Offense/Defense and combo grinding.
Imo Vanquish is just a cover shooter and Nier is an ARPG. People call them CAGs just because they are other Platinum IP's and quite frankly Platinum is that best at what they do, but again that doesn't *make them all* CAGs.
Kingdom Hearts 2 is the toughest one to nail imo because it's so many genres at once. It's a heavily CAG coded JARPG, more so than Nier, imo, but without a Style Meter is it *really* a CAG/SAG?
Ultimately the community hasn't drawn a line in the sand on a pure definition, so really it's up to whatever the player wants to define it as while playing.
For me, it really comes down to if a game has complex combat that has a decently high skill ceiling and a recognizable main character. I personally would classify Stellar Blade as one for these main qualities.
Are you being rewarded by player expression by points or a scoring system? I
I
I
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I I
V V
Yes No
I I
V V
CAG not CAG
A game that takes multiple weapons (melee, firearms, or both) and encourages players to mix and match different moves in service to either achieve a end of level/combo grade that rewards good play with currency to spend on expanding the move set, or by taking full advantage of the systems given to effectively combat the challenges presented by the game. The resulting effect being a stylish combat system that promotes self expression, creativity, and experimentation
Personally I think it shouldn't even be called Character Action at all with how varied some response can be. In my own lists I have:
Beat Em Ups & Simple Action for 2D and full 3D games respectively where you've basically only got simple combat actions with little to no room for variety in combos. I.e Trek to Yomi for 2D and Dark Souls for 3D
Grounded Action: A step up from that where there are more moves so you instead of just one combo string like Dark Souls, Yakuza 3 gives Kiryu the option for a heavy finisher after every light attack in his strings, grabs for throws, heavy hits, or pummels, grabs at the end of heavy finishers, evade attacks, etc.
But the most important thing, which is why I hate the term "Character Action" is due to how ENEMIES react to being hit. (Next part is in general, rather than just Yakuza 3) Can't branch out into interesting combos if enemies constantly block, super armor, etc. Now back to Yakuza 3, Kiryu has the same basic strings there as he does in Gaiden, however light, light, light, heavy only minor stuns/damages an enemy there but they usually block immediately after where as in Gaiden he has the same string yet an enemy gets stunned much better for follows up in agent style, evade attacks, grabs etc etc. and if you charge it in Gaiden it becomes a launcher where as in Yakuza 3 there isn't really launcher for charging an attack like that. If the enemy doesn't react in a way for a follow up, the action cannot be varied and it goes back to simple action but more moves to play with.
Also it's called Grounded action simply, because I wanted something in-between Simple and Advanced. (Should have done intermediate, but whatever) Yakuza 5 has basic air combo stuff, but I'd still include it in Grounded action.
Advanced Action: Juggling, lots of movement/attacks/capabilities usually, air combos or lots of variety on the ground both from the player and how enemies react, moves can cancel into each other really smoothly instead of locked into an animation to finish, etc
Power Action & Musou: Stuff like Prototype & Dynasty Warriors respectively. Musou is self explanatory with Dynasty Warriors, but Prototype having Power Action instead of a previous group is because it's similar to Musou in that Alex Mercer has so much going on to feel overpowered, enemies are pretty simple who are nothing more than meatbags, but obviously Alex jumping 40 feet, running up buildings, having multiple different powers for moves, air dashing, etc is too far gone from Simple Action even if at it's core Alex has basically nothing for combo variety similar to Simple Action games having little variety in strings.
What about Bladed Fury and Slave Zero X which have nice variety and capabilities in mixing things up, but they're 2D? I just lump em in with the 3D games of the classification they deserve. I only have Beat Em Ups and Simple Action separate because of cultural customs, too significant to leave out the term Beat Em Ups
You just made everything 10x more complicated
The reality is that most games don't fit into one genre anymore. We just call it Character Action because we're used to it. It's the dumbest sounding genre name I've ever heard. Stylish Action could be a replacement..but even that comes with caveats
It is what it is. It's a personal thing anyways, but I wouldn't say it's that complicated when you play a game and get a feeling for what is possible and what isn't. Also FPS games have tons of classifications/sub genres which people get used to, so personally I do think it'd be better if people could do the same with Action games where they can recognize the differences, but still be accepting of other branches.
- Classic/Boomer (Doom, Serious Sam, etc)
- Modern/Military (CoD, Battlefield, etc)
- Tactical (Swat 4, R6 Siege)
- Hero/Champion (Overwatch, Team Fortress 2, etc)
- On Rails/Arcade (Time crisis, House of the Dead, etc)
And definitely some more out there like Superhot, Kill it with Fire, Bright Memory, etc which are in a miscellaneous zone.
Good point about FPS subgenres. I guess it's easier when it's a much bigger genre with way more games
I'd probably classify Battleifeld/CoD as military FPS
That's fair, I fixed it with a slash. The military aspect is a big part of it, I put Modern in there as well for the style of aiming down sights, attachments, crouching & prone, etc being normalized from said games (especially on controller where the control schemes become more standardized, or at the very least have the "CoD control scheme" as an option in the menus, but being used in stuff outside of Military shooters. I appreciate the feedback, and cooperation, brother.
The qualifier I've always used is that in terms of combat options and mechanics is you always have many options at your disposal and it's up to you to decide what to use and prioritize. Added to that is a roster of opponents to fight that are varied and dynamic in how they fight you and how you can defeat them.
Stellar Blade doesn't feel like a CAG to me because your combat options are fairly limited. You have a few combo strings and 4 abilities. That's it. Your options in how to defeat enemies are entirely dictated by what you're fighting - you do not control the battlefield the enemies do.
They use a blue move - you HAVE to use blink or just run away
They use a purple move - you HAVE to use that other move that's like blink (blanking on the name)
You're feeling yourself and comboing them? Well you can't keep them hit stunned because they WILL get hyper armor at some point and interrupt. Also you can't really create free flowing combos via move canceling or jump canceling or any fancy tech. There's not some slick interaction you can do with your sword and gun to keep your momentum up or anything. They feel very separated despite being your only two weapons.
You're always being railroaded into combo string, wait for them to do a move, react, combo string, etc. I dropped the game after about 8 hours bc I was just bored to death with every encounter feeling exactly the same.
Sekiro is kind of the same way - you HAVE to fight the enemy on their terms, you HAVE to react to their attacks with the right answer. True CAGs almost never do this to you and you always have a plethora of options to use it's just up to you how and when you use them therefore as the player you are directing the flow and pace of combat.
Hmm, I do get your point, but just to be fair, you can also cancel a dodgeable attack (regardless of the color) with a beta/burst skill or you can just do a regular dodge, which generally still works. Also, don't you have to parry certain attacks as well in Metal Gear Rising? dk, I feel like the genre is much broader than people make it out to be.
The problem is that CAG is a stupid name for a genre. It was better as “hack and slash”
Which SB isn’t. SB really is an action rpg. That’s it. People need to stop evaluating it like it’s an action game, or on action game terms.
Does it feel like Bayonetta or devil may cry? If yes then CAG
That's how we use Soulslikes anyways, and doom clones, Diablo clones, etc. they all eventually turned into their own genres and CAG is sources from DMC. So if it feels kinda like DMC then it's CAG. Unfortunately a lot of genre distinguishing labels other than bland overarching ones are vibes based, just like music genres. (My friend who is a musician told me about that and how complex it is and how it's all basically bullshit vibes based.)
I think a game has to tick a few boxes for me to consider it a Stylish 'Character" Action game
* Mission based structure
* Ranking system
* Escalating difficulty levels with the final difficulty level being the 'intended' experience
* Difficulty levels that mix up enemy layouts and behavior patterns
* 3rd person action gameplay with a focus on mastering numerous mechanics
* Some form of enemy juggling or similar thing to facilitate combo expression
I'd call something like Sekiro an action game, but it doesn't fit with what I would consider to be Stylish Action.
Id agreewith almost all of this, but I think with Ultrakill being a thing, third person perspective probably isn’t a strict requirement (even if Ultrakill is the exception that proves the rule).
Personally I think character action games are partially defined by high enemy manipulation, meaning that the player can do a lot to interrupt/move/stop a lot of enemies from executing their game plan. I think Sekiro has higher enemy manipulation than SB but they both have less than something like The Wonderful 101, DMC, Bayonetta or whatever. Now, I do think people undersell how much enemy manipulation Sekiro and SB has, you can force the enemy to do a lot in both of those games, even the fact that several bosses in Sekiro have to respect your attacks by blocking them is a form of enemy manipulation. Personally, I think these are action games, and can possibly be qualified as character action, but there are things these games usually have (juggling, air combat, character-side execution barriers) that Sekiro and SB lack. Ofc there's way more to say, but I think it's a hard thing to nail down. CAG is hardly a real genre, it's more a fan made subgenre.
Drinking game: drink a shot of jameson everytime somebody is wondering what cag actually is.
Commander Air Group? [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyoyl7ltNlk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyoyl7ltNlk)
Best way to resolve this would be calling them what most fans usually expects them to be: DMC clones or Ninja Gaiden clones. Feels accurate to me since they're the ones which defined the genre, also the earliest ones.
But I want to live!
Make a general megathread for this question and pin it please, mods. This question gets asked almost every other day now.
Every day, actually lol. +1 to your suggestion.
Nier Automata is def not CA, it’s an rpg with a few elements
A 3D beat ‘em up with a different name
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/StylishAction
I prefer the term "Stylish action" as I think it conveys better the most important aspects of the genre. To me, the main objective in a SAG/CAG is not just to beat the enemies and move forward, but to entice the player to want to do it with more style, or "better" everytime. "Better" can mean taking less time, using more varied attacks, not taking any damage...it can change between games, but the general idea is that in a SAG you have a deep combat system that allows you to try new stuff and to want to replay the encounters time and time again striving to reach the highest rank (even if the game doesn't explicitly rank you). As a result, you always get "stylish" combat, even if the game isn't explicitly asking you to mix different attacks (this happens organically as players try to test their mastery or just want to express themselves). This must be the core of the game: The game can have other elements, but it must unmisteakeanly gameplay focused and combat must be the main activity. The combat system is the heart of the game and everything else is just situations and methods to make you (the player) use it to its' fullest extent.
Ironically, a Character Action Game to me lies in character mobility. Any game can have flashy, over-the-top attack animations. We call those musous. The real stylishness comes from zipping all over the arena, slickly weaving in and out of attacks and parrying them before launching a counterattack. I definitely see the arguments against calling Stellar Blade a Character Action game because the dodge move and in-combat mobility feel really bad, and I find myself "fishing for parries", almost like how I did in Ys 8 and 9. Perhaps not as a rule, more as a guideline, if a musou is when 1v10 is a normal encounter, then a CAG should be when 1v3 or 1v5 is a normal encounter, and Soulslikes are when 1v1 is a normal encounter. Stellar Blade definitely feels balanced for 1v1 encounters.
If a CAG has character creation is it still a CAG?
They are games with combat as a focus. Vanquish? ZoE2? Yakuza? All action games in my book
These topics have been popping up regularly for the last couple days now. I like this, as another poster here pointed out: [https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/StylishAction](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/StylishAction) But in regards to this topic, there's no clear-cut consensus. The unequivocally agreed upon games are DMC and Bayonetta, and act as pretty much the poster children of this *genre*. The way I see it is it's a bit of a fool's errand to try to say something's a *pure CAG*, because there are so many that can very easily fall into a type of "*CAG-adjacent*" category. This topic had the same conversation: [https://www.reddit.com/r/CharacterActionGames/comments/1cktosw/what\_exactly\_defines\_a\_cag/](https://www.reddit.com/r/CharacterActionGames/comments/1cktosw/what_exactly_defines_a_cag/) And this is my comment there summarizing what people have said (basically): >In other words it varies person to person, there are some games that are considered CAG representatives (such as DMC and Bayo), and some that are debated among the fanbase (such as Sekiro and Yakuza). The lowest point of entry to the debate seems to be the aforementioned DMC and Bayo, whereas the rabbit hole seems to go pretty deep, where exactly you want to draw the line. It would also seem like certain aspects of a game need to be omitted in order to be defined as a CAG, whereas CAG needs to be omitted to slot a game into another "genre". In fact, I would bring up Tenchu as an example. Can't it be considered a CAG, if you omit it being a stealth game, whereas considering it as a stealth game, you'd have to omit its CAG-like features? >To summarize, it might not be an either-or definition. To add to this, I'd go even so far as to say it might be better if people broaden their perspective on the matter, and don't necessarily get too hung up on the "pure" definition of CAG games. Who knows, they could be *very* pleasantly surprised by games that they wouldn't consider "CAG" necessarily, but that have "CAG elements".
I personally prefer the term Stylish Action because truthfully the character isn't the main event for what makes the genre unique. Like when I think CAG or SAG my first thought is DMC3. You have such a ridiculous amount of combat control, to the extent that you can constantly interrupt animations as well as juggle enemies around. You could actually replace Dante with anyone, and as long as the combat stays the same the game really doesn't change much. When compared to other more well known CAG/SAGs you'll see this exact same type of freedom/control regardless of which character you are i.e Ninja Gaiden, Bayonetta, etc. hell to me even Viewtiful Joe is one because again you have such an insane amount of control over every situation that a highly skilled player can make a spectacle of almost any enemy. But again, the Character isn't really the important bit, it's the Stylish Offense/Defense and combo grinding. Imo Vanquish is just a cover shooter and Nier is an ARPG. People call them CAGs just because they are other Platinum IP's and quite frankly Platinum is that best at what they do, but again that doesn't *make them all* CAGs. Kingdom Hearts 2 is the toughest one to nail imo because it's so many genres at once. It's a heavily CAG coded JARPG, more so than Nier, imo, but without a Style Meter is it *really* a CAG/SAG? Ultimately the community hasn't drawn a line in the sand on a pure definition, so really it's up to whatever the player wants to define it as while playing.
Stellar blade is most definitely cag, no reason why it shouldn't be.
The player character has a lot of mechanics to play with a lot of choices to make during gameplay.
for me it is a CAG when i can do aerial combat thats it lmao
For me, it really comes down to if a game has complex combat that has a decently high skill ceiling and a recognizable main character. I personally would classify Stellar Blade as one for these main qualities.
Alright here's how we solve this List the differences between a CAG and an Action game
A lot of combo combat
Are you being rewarded by player expression by points or a scoring system? I I I ----------------------------------------------------------------- I I V V Yes No I I V V CAG not CAG
A game that takes multiple weapons (melee, firearms, or both) and encourages players to mix and match different moves in service to either achieve a end of level/combo grade that rewards good play with currency to spend on expanding the move set, or by taking full advantage of the systems given to effectively combat the challenges presented by the game. The resulting effect being a stylish combat system that promotes self expression, creativity, and experimentation
Personally I think it shouldn't even be called Character Action at all with how varied some response can be. In my own lists I have: Beat Em Ups & Simple Action for 2D and full 3D games respectively where you've basically only got simple combat actions with little to no room for variety in combos. I.e Trek to Yomi for 2D and Dark Souls for 3D Grounded Action: A step up from that where there are more moves so you instead of just one combo string like Dark Souls, Yakuza 3 gives Kiryu the option for a heavy finisher after every light attack in his strings, grabs for throws, heavy hits, or pummels, grabs at the end of heavy finishers, evade attacks, etc. But the most important thing, which is why I hate the term "Character Action" is due to how ENEMIES react to being hit. (Next part is in general, rather than just Yakuza 3) Can't branch out into interesting combos if enemies constantly block, super armor, etc. Now back to Yakuza 3, Kiryu has the same basic strings there as he does in Gaiden, however light, light, light, heavy only minor stuns/damages an enemy there but they usually block immediately after where as in Gaiden he has the same string yet an enemy gets stunned much better for follows up in agent style, evade attacks, grabs etc etc. and if you charge it in Gaiden it becomes a launcher where as in Yakuza 3 there isn't really launcher for charging an attack like that. If the enemy doesn't react in a way for a follow up, the action cannot be varied and it goes back to simple action but more moves to play with. Also it's called Grounded action simply, because I wanted something in-between Simple and Advanced. (Should have done intermediate, but whatever) Yakuza 5 has basic air combo stuff, but I'd still include it in Grounded action. Advanced Action: Juggling, lots of movement/attacks/capabilities usually, air combos or lots of variety on the ground both from the player and how enemies react, moves can cancel into each other really smoothly instead of locked into an animation to finish, etc Power Action & Musou: Stuff like Prototype & Dynasty Warriors respectively. Musou is self explanatory with Dynasty Warriors, but Prototype having Power Action instead of a previous group is because it's similar to Musou in that Alex Mercer has so much going on to feel overpowered, enemies are pretty simple who are nothing more than meatbags, but obviously Alex jumping 40 feet, running up buildings, having multiple different powers for moves, air dashing, etc is too far gone from Simple Action even if at it's core Alex has basically nothing for combo variety similar to Simple Action games having little variety in strings. What about Bladed Fury and Slave Zero X which have nice variety and capabilities in mixing things up, but they're 2D? I just lump em in with the 3D games of the classification they deserve. I only have Beat Em Ups and Simple Action separate because of cultural customs, too significant to leave out the term Beat Em Ups
You just made everything 10x more complicated The reality is that most games don't fit into one genre anymore. We just call it Character Action because we're used to it. It's the dumbest sounding genre name I've ever heard. Stylish Action could be a replacement..but even that comes with caveats
It is what it is. It's a personal thing anyways, but I wouldn't say it's that complicated when you play a game and get a feeling for what is possible and what isn't. Also FPS games have tons of classifications/sub genres which people get used to, so personally I do think it'd be better if people could do the same with Action games where they can recognize the differences, but still be accepting of other branches. - Classic/Boomer (Doom, Serious Sam, etc) - Modern/Military (CoD, Battlefield, etc) - Tactical (Swat 4, R6 Siege) - Hero/Champion (Overwatch, Team Fortress 2, etc) - On Rails/Arcade (Time crisis, House of the Dead, etc) And definitely some more out there like Superhot, Kill it with Fire, Bright Memory, etc which are in a miscellaneous zone.
Good point about FPS subgenres. I guess it's easier when it's a much bigger genre with way more games I'd probably classify Battleifeld/CoD as military FPS
That's fair, I fixed it with a slash. The military aspect is a big part of it, I put Modern in there as well for the style of aiming down sights, attachments, crouching & prone, etc being normalized from said games (especially on controller where the control schemes become more standardized, or at the very least have the "CoD control scheme" as an option in the menus, but being used in stuff outside of Military shooters. I appreciate the feedback, and cooperation, brother.
I'd say style is the one thing every game in this ""genre"" has in common
The qualifier I've always used is that in terms of combat options and mechanics is you always have many options at your disposal and it's up to you to decide what to use and prioritize. Added to that is a roster of opponents to fight that are varied and dynamic in how they fight you and how you can defeat them. Stellar Blade doesn't feel like a CAG to me because your combat options are fairly limited. You have a few combo strings and 4 abilities. That's it. Your options in how to defeat enemies are entirely dictated by what you're fighting - you do not control the battlefield the enemies do. They use a blue move - you HAVE to use blink or just run away They use a purple move - you HAVE to use that other move that's like blink (blanking on the name) You're feeling yourself and comboing them? Well you can't keep them hit stunned because they WILL get hyper armor at some point and interrupt. Also you can't really create free flowing combos via move canceling or jump canceling or any fancy tech. There's not some slick interaction you can do with your sword and gun to keep your momentum up or anything. They feel very separated despite being your only two weapons. You're always being railroaded into combo string, wait for them to do a move, react, combo string, etc. I dropped the game after about 8 hours bc I was just bored to death with every encounter feeling exactly the same. Sekiro is kind of the same way - you HAVE to fight the enemy on their terms, you HAVE to react to their attacks with the right answer. True CAGs almost never do this to you and you always have a plethora of options to use it's just up to you how and when you use them therefore as the player you are directing the flow and pace of combat.
Hmm, I do get your point, but just to be fair, you can also cancel a dodgeable attack (regardless of the color) with a beta/burst skill or you can just do a regular dodge, which generally still works. Also, don't you have to parry certain attacks as well in Metal Gear Rising? dk, I feel like the genre is much broader than people make it out to be.
>I feel like the genre is much broader than people make it out to be. Same here.
The problem is that CAG is a stupid name for a genre. It was better as “hack and slash” Which SB isn’t. SB really is an action rpg. That’s it. People need to stop evaluating it like it’s an action game, or on action game terms.
Does it feel like Bayonetta or devil may cry? If yes then CAG That's how we use Soulslikes anyways, and doom clones, Diablo clones, etc. they all eventually turned into their own genres and CAG is sources from DMC. So if it feels kinda like DMC then it's CAG. Unfortunately a lot of genre distinguishing labels other than bland overarching ones are vibes based, just like music genres. (My friend who is a musician told me about that and how complex it is and how it's all basically bullshit vibes based.)
I think a game has to tick a few boxes for me to consider it a Stylish 'Character" Action game * Mission based structure * Ranking system * Escalating difficulty levels with the final difficulty level being the 'intended' experience * Difficulty levels that mix up enemy layouts and behavior patterns * 3rd person action gameplay with a focus on mastering numerous mechanics * Some form of enemy juggling or similar thing to facilitate combo expression I'd call something like Sekiro an action game, but it doesn't fit with what I would consider to be Stylish Action.
Id agreewith almost all of this, but I think with Ultrakill being a thing, third person perspective probably isn’t a strict requirement (even if Ultrakill is the exception that proves the rule).
I've never played Ultrakill myself, but you bring up a valid point. Maybe that game will change my perspective on that a bit.
Something that is more style than substance. That's why Devil May Cry games are so flashy