Action Standards

These five games are what I would use to set a standard in action games*.


Each game is distinct from one another that they give an excellent overview of the genre.

Seems everyone here has their picks of favorite games and/or setting non-negotiable features that disqualify a good action game. Any of you have 5 games in mind to point to that you feel represent the genre well? I don't think top 10 lists cut it. More importantly: how about a singular game applied to each rating in a 5-point rating scale for action games?

I always liked how in the PS2 era games were still 'searching' for what worked. These days elements like a jump-button have found a button they could all agree on, but back then as you note in that image, every game was different.

I find it hard to just note 5 games that I feel encapsulate the hobby of Action games well. If I had to give a complete stranger 5 games to give them an idea of the genre I'd probably give them DMC3, God of War 1, Shinobi, NG2 and Astral Chain, so a pretty similar list to yours.

No idea. I just like what I like.

My standard might not mean shit to someone else and we'll just end up listing our favorites.

One thing I like to see is when I rotate the left stick I can smoothly spin the character on the spot. Able to just flick it and 180 turn. No turn commands. Though not saying they ruin the game because I do like God Hand and RE4.

Another would be varying jump heights. Tap for a short hop, harder for full height. Opens up options for low jumping attacks.

These aren't set in stone standards but they're definitely what I really like to see.

Royta/Raeng wrote:I always liked how in the PS2 era games were still 'searching' for what worked. These days elements like a jump-button have found a button they could all agree on, but back then as you note in that image, every game was different.

I find it hard to just note 5 games that I feel encapsulate the hobby of Action games well. If I had to give a complete stranger 5 games to give them an idea of the genre I'd probably give them DMC3, God of War 1, Shinobi, NG2 and Astral Chain, so a pretty similar list to yours.

I think that encapsulating the genre to 5 games isn't necessarily to "set things in stone" as Birdman talks about below your response, nor is it to tell people what to think -- there are handfuls of multiple action standards each person could set up (e.g. pre-DMC, 6th gen standard, co-op standard, verb-type [shooting-oriented, melee-oriented], etc) --  but I do think the situation outside this circle is concerning how people are reviewing things like it's the only game (or that some typical average game is somehow incomparable to other games) and if they do mention another game it's more in a name-drop fashion than a real comparison, or against a genre "standard" comprised of the last game they played (i.e. one from the current generation of games).

And think of what could have been done to help out the sales of God Hand, for example, if one of us scored the game at IGN (i.e. if we set the standard instead of blaming them). I suppose now the help is towards the sales of "the next God Hand".

Birdman wrote:No idea. I just like what I like.

Hm. A "Pass/Fail standard"?

My standard might not mean shit to someone else and we'll just end up listing our favorites.

True, but it doesn't have to be that way. I see a lot recommendation threads online but I've never really seen people dabble in a recommend + don't recommend thread; this is a new-thread idea I had where someone lists a game they like and the respondent(s) must list with reasons mentioned a game from the same genre they like better and a game they dislike more -- and continuing the process seeing a gained ascendancy and "descendancy" for each response. Maybe that'll lead to a more refined take on the +1, -1 upvote/downvote online culture.

One thing I like to see is when I rotate the left stick I can smoothly spin the character on the spot. Able to just flick it and 180 turn. No turn commands. Though not saying they ruin the game because I do like God Hand and RE4.

Another would be varying jump heights. Tap for a short hop, harder for full height. Opens up options for low jumping attacks.

I dig doing the spin test too -- especially in Shinobi.

>Hm. A "Pass/Fail standard"?
I suppose. I just don't care about this stuff anymore. If I like it, it's all that matters. Done trying to convince anyone.

>people dabble in a recommend + don't recommend thread
For what reason? Recommendations based on a list of their preferences or just what someone thinks they should try?

I only see 4 games, am I crazy.

> I always liked how in the PS2 era games were still 'searching' for what worked.
This is partially why it’s my favorite gen. There were no conventions and giant trends to follow. Almost every good PS2 action game was different. Now everything is Arkham or Mordor shit, or a bad Souls clone. No originality. And this is when I would get told by some that execution is more important than creativity, but if I feel like I’ve played every fucking game before and they’re not doing anything to improve it, I don’t care if the game is technically sound. I’ve been playing games for 25 years, I need something interesting at this point.

Rant over.

>done trying to convince people
Same. I only have a couple real life friends who still play games. Neither ever take my suggestions. No one on forums listens, they just plug their ears and continue to be stupid. So I don’t really care anymore.

> only see 4 games
Probably a cropping issue, the most right one is Astral Chain.

> PS2 era was experimental
I always love these 'eras' in every artform. After the Renaissance, where 'perfection' was reached, the next generation basically went bonkers with all sorts of funky stuff which made for some great art, it's called Manierism era, fantastic stuff.

But yeah some things I wouldn't mind becoming staples i.e. higher difficulties changing things up etc. But that said the whole generation was just super fresh. I don't buy a lot of modern games for this reason too, since most of it feels like a blur of similar looking games. Those that are unique tend to either die out or become so big it becomes over saturated (I cannot stand playing another Yakuza game for a while now).

I think I'm with Birdman on this one, I'm not sure I could pick specific games that would mark the "standard" of the genre. I'd just be listing my favourites and people would understandably disagree with them and offer their own suggestions.

> PS2 Era
Yep, echo what others have said. Since then we've had a handful of games from Capcom that have continued the spirit, and Platinum have carried it on to some extent (although they do like to reference their own work with each new game). We saw something similar when FPS games went through a period of being stale once Halo and CoD had popularised having a 2-weapon loadout, a more grounded movement speed etc. They weren't bad games, just that they were so popular that their influence on the whole genre made for some really uninspired games from other studios.

> Convincing people
I don't have many friends that share my taste in games, so I don't usually bother recommending them stuff. If they ask about a game I like, I'll always try and sell the game as best I can to try and get them into the genre.

We had a thread like this https://stinger.actieforum.com/t586-which-games-do-you-consider-were-the-peak-of-each-console-generation granted this is specialized towards action. I imagine people's standards here are more concrete than the ever-changing game industry standards. I have heavily considered doing a highly-publicized GOTY 2021 award for action games, which in doing so would set another 'standard'.

>people dabble in a recommend + don't recommend thread
For what reason? Recommendations based on a list of their preferences or just what someone thinks they should try?

Just to keep things interesting. Recommendation +1/-1 can be based on whatever as long as there is one game the +1/-1 is centered around. I think it would be a good rule for that one game to be in bold text so it's clear to people.

Test: <+1> Fighting Force [PS1] because it has good co-op and much more. <The Bouncer [PS2]>. <-1> Xena: Princess Warrior[PS2] because it is glitchy and meandering.

^Then someone either chooses to encapsulate either the -1 game or the +1 game and make that game the new game that is centered, and as ruled, bolded.

So basically what people already do? Say a game is good or shit then counter each other as to why a game isn't good or isn't shit?

No. It doesn't work if there is a back-and-forth or countering right away. It's useful to create a middle ground in discussion by literally putting a game in the middle of two other games rather than being purely divisive, which would only require two games in total. Such a discussion thread could easily create numerous 1-5 star rating scales with a game assigned to each star. Again this is more of a creative process for fun/random results, which I think would be more evident if instead of using games we used categories in games (i.e. swimming). Anyhow, I think it's worth testing out on in the 'creative corner', not here in general discussion.

Still don't understand this topic. Am I stupid or something?

I think it's about which games he felt set a new standard for other games to be judged by? I admit I'm a bit confused as well haha! Sorry!

Ok so in that image what do the rows mean? I must be stupid because I can't figure it out.
Vert, can you walk me through that image?

Is the middle row being compared to the bottom row? Is GH being matched with DC Supergirls?

Games shown are representing the genre by significance* to it.

The arrows shown represent a jump to another set (of games) standard, not as a connection point / direct comparison to one game.

There will be 5 games (currently denoted by "?" blocks) to be made into a standard for action games released before Devil May Cry [PS2]. (Maybe those games will simply be 5th generation action shooter games.)

After DMC, Shinobi, GH, NG2, AC there is a new set (of games) standard post-2020. So DCSHG is part of the standards for action games (in its case super hero action games).

Making pictures out of smaller "listings" is more appealing to me than large rankings as it lets you easily see a change in games or game taste than one simple list. Plus, you get to see what makes the "jump".


*Will vary by user

>released before Devil May Cry [PS2]
>post-2020
Let's see if I have this right.

So it's what we think are the standards per those time periods? First line must be games before DMC, last line is after 2020. So that would should how we think standards have developed since then?

If I didn't consider DMC a standard, what would I do? Would my choice have to be around the same time DMC was released?

Yes to the first two questions.

With the above written, if Devil May Cry [PS2] isn't in then I recommend only going back to the Year 2000 for selecting a starter game. The parameter would be 6th gen / Year 2000 - 8th gen / Year 2019. If a Dreamcast game met your fancy in 1998 or '99 though, that can be added since that's still 6th gen.

Every game should be displayed left to right by release date.

>(in its case super hero action games).
What's the difference between this and a non super hero action game?

> I recommend only going back to the Year 2000 for selecting a starter game.
There's still a problem if a person doesn't find/didn't play any games from that time.

Personally, I find DMC1 to definitely have set a standard back then. Would have to check dates on others.
I didn't play action games before DMC1 and Onimusha so I don't have anything to list.

Another issue is post 2020 I don't think there's anything that really changes or sets new standards. Just another set of good action games that have different mechanics.

>What's the difference between this and a non super hero action game?
I think super hero games put the combat system in 2nd place in the priorities list. B-grade action. The star power or accurate characterization is the 1st place alongside varied objective-based missions. There also is a tendency to lump heroes and a varied quality predisposing the properties to cash grab-susceptibility.

>I think super hero games put the combat system in 2nd place in the priorities list.
What about mechanically?

>B-grade action
What does this mean?