Now hear me out, because I know the pitchforks are already out. And yes, full disclosure I'm the guy who made one of the first threads about shlooters. I know that this genre classification wankery is tedious or exasperating to a lot of you, but I come from a background of music criticism so personally I love the way that genre tags morph and evolve. It is a fascinating way to both track the development of genre conventions and to critically think about the way that we frame the content that we consume.
There are a few concepts at play here, and I think this is the best way to frame the discussion.
I. What genre are the Souls games?
At this point in time, the conventional wisdom is that the Souls games are the progenitors of what we've come to call the "soulslike" subgenre of action-RPGs. While a lot of the tissue that binds soulslikes together is somewhat nebulous, I think most would agree that they're characterized predominantly by (a) challenging gameplay, (b) stamina-based character actions, and (c) a resource recovery system in which the resources the player dies with drop at the point at which they died, and can then be picked up again at that point on the player's next life. I personally use "soulslite" to distinguish games that follow (a) and (c), but not (b) - in other words, games like Hollow Knight which subscribe to the general soulslike formula but lack stamina-based character actions.
So, if we accept that the Souls games are indeed, axiomatically "soulslikes," then it follow that most key elements of their design will flow from this genre template. That's not the case, however - because there is one extremely critical aspect of Souls gameplay that many, if not most, of the following soulslikes lack. That aspect is the asynchronous multiplayer, specifically the collaborative player messaging that appears on the ground in the form of orange soapstone signs and warns new players of impending doom, or else conveys various other messages (sometimes of dubious use, but still). What sticks out to me in this arrangement is that, while the Souls games are often (rightfully) credited as being the advent of a new subgenre, the asynchronous multiplayer collaborative messages are NOT adopted by most following games as a core aspect of the genre. What this functionally means is that the granddaddy of the genre has an enormous, core element of its game design that is essentially a "one-off" with no genre classification. It is just a thing that the Souls games do (and, to be clear, some other games as well, though never in a genre-codified way). So...if this is such a core component of Souls games, and it's not a core component of the soulslike genre as a whole, then what exactly is it? What do we call it?
II. Enter Hideo Kojima.
I can't speak for Kojima himself (obviously) but I feel part of his ambition in creating Death Stranding was to finally codify a genre-less convention - namely, asynchronous collaborative multiplayer - and finally give it a name - a "strand game." A game in which not the players themselves, but rather strands of them intersect and collaborate with one another passively (on a side note, this is what distinguishes a "strand game" from a conventional co-op multiplayer game). Kojima has proven time and time again to be a savvy marketer, and I think that he's already seen the seeds of this burgeoning genre (in many isolated games at this point, but most notably in the Souls franchise) and wishes to codify it on his own terms. To take it from a vague, conceptual set of gameplay mechanics that some games randomly share as a function of their core game design, and instead turn it into a genre convention in which strand games are a cognizable, quantifiable thing which is discussed as fluidly and candidly as any other genre of games. Death Stranding is about to release, and Kojima's vision will soon be in all our hands: a game which, while it arguably doesn't do anything new, nevertheless gives the things it does do a new and important context which will serve as a building block, a touchstone and design language, for games to come. THIS, I believe, is the core of Kojima's message regarding the creation of a new genre, and I believe that THIS will be Death Stranding's legacy. We will, indeed, have strand games, and they will be called and understood as such.
III. Circling back around - where does this leave the Souls games?
And now we come to the great question: if we accept (and I understand that people will disagree; but for the sake of the argument, we accept) that Kojima has indeed codified asynchronous, passive, collaborative multiplayer as strand games, then what do we make of the genre classification of the Souls series? It's always hard to classify genre pieces that exist before the genre itself is codified. They are self-reflexively soulslikes, and while the asynchronous passive multiplayer components are an integral part of their game design, they're not the focus per se. In the same sense that we ascribe a lesser genre designation to games such as roguelites, should we also frame the Souls games from this point forward as strandlites? Strand games that, while abiding by the genre conventions established by Death Stranding, nevertheless utilize it in a diminished capacity relative to Kojima's own seminal work? As ridiculous as it might sound at first, I think there is indeed a sound argument here that the Souls games are soulslike strandlites, and it matters (yes, it matters) because it distinguishes them from the other soulslikes that borrowed many of their conventions but did not adopt their brand of asynchronous passive multiplayer collaboration. It matters because, if Kojima is successful, then moving forward we will refer to games adopting these conventions as strand games, and for the purposes of critical discussion we need to understand where the Souls games fall in relation to both Death Stranding and whatever else may come after.
Apologies for the OP length, but when it comes to discussing genre (which gaming enthusiasts are far less wont to do than music fans) I've found that a lot of times the discourse turns dismissive, and I wanted to make sure most of my argument was fully and clearly conveyed. That being said - what do you think? Even if you don't agree with my assessment, how do you feel the Souls games stand in relation to Death Stranding? If you made it this far, thank you for reading.
There are a few concepts at play here, and I think this is the best way to frame the discussion.
I. What genre are the Souls games?
At this point in time, the conventional wisdom is that the Souls games are the progenitors of what we've come to call the "soulslike" subgenre of action-RPGs. While a lot of the tissue that binds soulslikes together is somewhat nebulous, I think most would agree that they're characterized predominantly by (a) challenging gameplay, (b) stamina-based character actions, and (c) a resource recovery system in which the resources the player dies with drop at the point at which they died, and can then be picked up again at that point on the player's next life. I personally use "soulslite" to distinguish games that follow (a) and (c), but not (b) - in other words, games like Hollow Knight which subscribe to the general soulslike formula but lack stamina-based character actions.
So, if we accept that the Souls games are indeed, axiomatically "soulslikes," then it follow that most key elements of their design will flow from this genre template. That's not the case, however - because there is one extremely critical aspect of Souls gameplay that many, if not most, of the following soulslikes lack. That aspect is the asynchronous multiplayer, specifically the collaborative player messaging that appears on the ground in the form of orange soapstone signs and warns new players of impending doom, or else conveys various other messages (sometimes of dubious use, but still). What sticks out to me in this arrangement is that, while the Souls games are often (rightfully) credited as being the advent of a new subgenre, the asynchronous multiplayer collaborative messages are NOT adopted by most following games as a core aspect of the genre. What this functionally means is that the granddaddy of the genre has an enormous, core element of its game design that is essentially a "one-off" with no genre classification. It is just a thing that the Souls games do (and, to be clear, some other games as well, though never in a genre-codified way). So...if this is such a core component of Souls games, and it's not a core component of the soulslike genre as a whole, then what exactly is it? What do we call it?
II. Enter Hideo Kojima.
I can't speak for Kojima himself (obviously) but I feel part of his ambition in creating Death Stranding was to finally codify a genre-less convention - namely, asynchronous collaborative multiplayer - and finally give it a name - a "strand game." A game in which not the players themselves, but rather strands of them intersect and collaborate with one another passively (on a side note, this is what distinguishes a "strand game" from a conventional co-op multiplayer game). Kojima has proven time and time again to be a savvy marketer, and I think that he's already seen the seeds of this burgeoning genre (in many isolated games at this point, but most notably in the Souls franchise) and wishes to codify it on his own terms. To take it from a vague, conceptual set of gameplay mechanics that some games randomly share as a function of their core game design, and instead turn it into a genre convention in which strand games are a cognizable, quantifiable thing which is discussed as fluidly and candidly as any other genre of games. Death Stranding is about to release, and Kojima's vision will soon be in all our hands: a game which, while it arguably doesn't do anything new, nevertheless gives the things it does do a new and important context which will serve as a building block, a touchstone and design language, for games to come. THIS, I believe, is the core of Kojima's message regarding the creation of a new genre, and I believe that THIS will be Death Stranding's legacy. We will, indeed, have strand games, and they will be called and understood as such.
III. Circling back around - where does this leave the Souls games?
And now we come to the great question: if we accept (and I understand that people will disagree; but for the sake of the argument, we accept) that Kojima has indeed codified asynchronous, passive, collaborative multiplayer as strand games, then what do we make of the genre classification of the Souls series? It's always hard to classify genre pieces that exist before the genre itself is codified. They are self-reflexively soulslikes, and while the asynchronous passive multiplayer components are an integral part of their game design, they're not the focus per se. In the same sense that we ascribe a lesser genre designation to games such as roguelites, should we also frame the Souls games from this point forward as strandlites? Strand games that, while abiding by the genre conventions established by Death Stranding, nevertheless utilize it in a diminished capacity relative to Kojima's own seminal work? As ridiculous as it might sound at first, I think there is indeed a sound argument here that the Souls games are soulslike strandlites, and it matters (yes, it matters) because it distinguishes them from the other soulslikes that borrowed many of their conventions but did not adopt their brand of asynchronous passive multiplayer collaboration. It matters because, if Kojima is successful, then moving forward we will refer to games adopting these conventions as strand games, and for the purposes of critical discussion we need to understand where the Souls games fall in relation to both Death Stranding and whatever else may come after.
Apologies for the OP length, but when it comes to discussing genre (which gaming enthusiasts are far less wont to do than music fans) I've found that a lot of times the discourse turns dismissive, and I wanted to make sure most of my argument was fully and clearly conveyed. That being said - what do you think? Even if you don't agree with my assessment, how do you feel the Souls games stand in relation to Death Stranding? If you made it this far, thank you for reading.
