TeddyShardik
Banned
That's a very late "first post" reply. Bravo. xD
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Dark Souls games have terrible design decisions that seem ignored by most of us
- Thread starter Fahzgoolin
- Start date
That's a very late "first post" reply. Bravo. xD
A lot of your points seem to focus on enemies functioning differently to the PC, I dont really see how thats an issue.
Nope, really wish this "meme" would die, go check YouTube and watch your illusions of perfect hitboxes die.
Nope, really wish this "meme" would die, go check YouTube and watch your illusions of perfect hitboxes die.
jim-jam bongs
Member
Apart from the legitimate clipping issues, everything in the OP is either a deliberate decision which serves a specific purpose, or outright incorrect. Examples of the former: boss souls are for crafting and give a relatively small amount of souls compared with the boss itself to prevent you from being able to hoard them, the bloodstains are positioned somewhere they will always be accessible. Example of the latter, enemies definitely do take damage from environmental hazards.
There are loads of legitimate issues I have with Souls games, the OP just didn't actually cover any of them. DS2, for example, has some terrible design elements; the implementation of stats feels all over the place, the gameplay outside boss fights is often harder than the boss fights themselves which just seems bizarre, there are a whole lot of locations in the game which are hot garbage (The Gutter => Black Gulch shitshow, foggy area with invisible enemies in Shaded Woods etc).
Honestly the OP just isn't a very good criticism.
There are loads of legitimate issues I have with Souls games, the OP just didn't actually cover any of them. DS2, for example, has some terrible design elements; the implementation of stats feels all over the place, the gameplay outside boss fights is often harder than the boss fights themselves which just seems bizarre, there are a whole lot of locations in the game which are hot garbage (The Gutter => Black Gulch shitshow, foggy area with invisible enemies in Shaded Woods etc).
Honestly the OP just isn't a very good criticism.
Imperfected
Member
The "grab" hitboxes in all games are pretty... "generous" in favor of AI, let's say. The main difference is that DS1 had significantly fewer grab attacks, they've generally become more common as the series has progressed. They've never been good, and they aren't really getting any better (Curse-Rotted Greatwood, the Dancer, and Stray Demon all have grabs you can use to make some goofy "Pursuer stab" gifs if you're so inclined).
The general hitboxes for weapon swings and the like were worse in DS2 than other games, probably due to it being on a different engine, but not to a huge degree; they're still better than most games by half.
That said, every game in the series has at least one enemy with some goofy-ass hitboxes. I'd probably give DS3's crown to the Sulyvahn's Beast (the big dog-things in Irythyll), which seems to treat every part of its body as being the "mouth" on several attacks, leading to weird 360 degree hitboxes on what should be a simple bite attack.
The soldering iron hitbox for Jailers is in the running, too. They seem to have wanted to use some "grab" logic for it (along with possibly cancelling iframes?), leading to just some really weird "sticky" contacts. I can kind of see what they were going for, but it just doesn't play well.
The general hitboxes for weapon swings and the like were worse in DS2 than other games, probably due to it being on a different engine, but not to a huge degree; they're still better than most games by half.
That said, every game in the series has at least one enemy with some goofy-ass hitboxes. I'd probably give DS3's crown to the Sulyvahn's Beast (the big dog-things in Irythyll), which seems to treat every part of its body as being the "mouth" on several attacks, leading to weird 360 degree hitboxes on what should be a simple bite attack.
The soldering iron hitbox for Jailers is in the running, too. They seem to have wanted to use some "grab" logic for it (along with possibly cancelling iframes?), leading to just some really weird "sticky" contacts. I can kind of see what they were going for, but it just doesn't play well.
ss_lemonade
Member
I'm still working my way through DS1 but this is still a thing with later games? Don't tell me there's some lore behind this too.
Speaking of lore, I guess that's my biggest issue with the game but that might just be my own fault of not taking that time to read stuff here and there. Because I don't though, I feel lost most of the time and just find myself moving from one area to the next.
DaciaJC
Gold Member
I think "terrible" is an exaggeration for many of your complaints, but there are some I wholeheartedly agree with, this one in particular:
Same issue for jump attacks. I'm disappointed that From have stuck with this suboptimal control scheme since the series' inception.
Dark Souls II tried a slightly different system. Rather than projectiles lazily arcing towards you, they traveled faster through the air in a straighter trajectory, and annoyingly, enemy archers would track you until the moment they loosed their arrow/bolt. This combined with the Agility/i-frames issue made for some pretty frustrating situations. I think the way they've done it in DeS/DaS/DaSIII is a decent compromise.
Dark Souls II and III have the same option for jumping, though, L3. I find it far better than mapping it to Circle, which causes issues when you're sprinting and want to roll through an enemy's attack but your character jumps instead.
Same issue for jump attacks. I'm disappointed that From have stuck with this suboptimal control scheme since the series' inception.
Dark Souls II tried a slightly different system. Rather than projectiles lazily arcing towards you, they traveled faster through the air in a straighter trajectory, and annoyingly, enemy archers would track you until the moment they loosed their arrow/bolt. This combined with the Agility/i-frames issue made for some pretty frustrating situations. I think the way they've done it in DeS/DaS/DaSIII is a decent compromise.
Dark Souls II and III have the same option for jumping, though, L3. I find it far better than mapping it to Circle, which causes issues when you're sprinting and want to roll through an enemy's attack but your character jumps instead.
Kai Dracon
Writing a dinosaur space opera symphony
Some of the OPs points are just game design conceits and not flaws. Boss souls, for example, are not supposed to be a source of income. They're a crafting mat. The only reason you can use them for at least some soul currency is for clearing inventory when you've crafted everything possible with them.
Otherwise, sure, the games have more rough edges than the more polished AAA titles which provide a smooth, frustration-free experience for the player. On the other hand, most super polished big budget games aren't actually very hard, and don't push the player to the limits of character manipulation in 3D environments. Many of the criticisms of the Souls games sound similar to criticisms of the stylish action game genre. Ninja Gaiden, DMC, or Bayonetta. Those games can also suffer from camera issues, hitbox antics, and so forth. To a degree, such issues may come with the territory when dealing with the complexity of 3D interactions compared to a 2D game.
Otherwise, sure, the games have more rough edges than the more polished AAA titles which provide a smooth, frustration-free experience for the player. On the other hand, most super polished big budget games aren't actually very hard, and don't push the player to the limits of character manipulation in 3D environments. Many of the criticisms of the Souls games sound similar to criticisms of the stylish action game genre. Ninja Gaiden, DMC, or Bayonetta. Those games can also suffer from camera issues, hitbox antics, and so forth. To a degree, such issues may come with the territory when dealing with the complexity of 3D interactions compared to a 2D game.
Imperfected
Member
It's still a thing, there's no lore to explain it.
I'm curious, actually: are there even other localized dubs of the game, or do they all use the English voice tracks with alternate subs? Any Spanish/French gamers that can chime in?
You could come up with a laundry list of faults and quirks and issues for nearly any game series, and to say these are 'ignored' in the Souls series is dubious at best. You'll find plenty of people complaining about the numerous issues the game has.
It's not made into a big deal because the fans of the series don't see it as a big deal. The amount of content there and the quality of the content is so high that it's easy to look past the faults.
But honestly a large amount of the 'bad design' decisions people claim are actually more 'design that doesn't appeal to me'. Because there is a difference, people usually just don't realize that.
A perfect example is Dark Souls 2. I personally greatly dislike the way that game is designed from the way it plays to the way it's structured to the game world to pretty much every thing about it. Others may enjoy the way it's designed though, so for me to just say it's badly designed wouldn't be a fair critique.
It's not made into a big deal because the fans of the series don't see it as a big deal. The amount of content there and the quality of the content is so high that it's easy to look past the faults.
But honestly a large amount of the 'bad design' decisions people claim are actually more 'design that doesn't appeal to me'. Because there is a difference, people usually just don't realize that.
A perfect example is Dark Souls 2. I personally greatly dislike the way that game is designed from the way it plays to the way it's structured to the game world to pretty much every thing about it. Others may enjoy the way it's designed though, so for me to just say it's badly designed wouldn't be a fair critique.
Most of the points you made are because fromsoftware is fromsoftware. They don't aim for some perfect design. The dead end with an item or no item is their bread and butter. Go back to kings field. They put dead ends with no items on purpose because they dont give a shit about you.
In Demon's souls i figured that the mouths didn't move because of the fact that everybody is dead, but all of the games have same thing so at this point i think that it's just their thing of not animating mouths.
One thing that i found very odd was that in Demon's souls you had an item on your belt which explained the faint glow your player character emitted, can't remember the name of it but when Dark souls came out your character still had the glow but they removed the item, i never understood why because that was a nice way of explaining it.
DaciaJC
Gold Member
Yes! That was such a nice touch to DeS, not sure why they removed it in subsequent games. In Dark Souls, I reasoned that the player's Darksign, the small ring of flame, emits a dim aura of light around the character, but that's a half-assed explanation at best.
Moon_frogger
Member
came in here to be all combative and defend my precious souls games but you actually made some good points. A few of them have been discussed at length but some of these are things I never noticed or perhaps they just never bothered me enough to bring it up. Good post tho.
Robert at Zeboyd Games
Banned
That's one of the cheapest moments in DS1. There are a few hints (you can hear the dragon coming, plus the game teased the dragon earlier in the stage), but yeah, most people die to that if they're not warned ahead of time. On the plus side, a shortcut back to the bonfire is right there if you manage to not die.
Honestly, I kind of think they meant for everyone to die there to teach the lesson - just 'cause you beat a boss, don't get cocky. You beat a boss, you use a Homeward Bone or find some way to spend those souls ASAP.
Freaking Limit
Member
I don't know how unfair it is. Last I checked you can totally survive the fire breath at base level (from full hp). Now, there may be some classes that can't, but I don't remember. I think they assumed that players would die there, and it does re-enforce the point earlier that nowhere and nothing is safe. It isn't teaching you to run to safety once you complete a boss fight, its teaching you to not let your guard down/stay alert. If you are taking away that you should run to safety after each boss, I don't think the intent was transferred properly. I mean, that is my opinion, but that is what I always got from this.
~~~ (Brace for wall-o-text with my response to the thread in general)
I wonder at what point we go from "I don't like this decision" to "bad design". Most of the complaints in the OP are disagreeing with decision made rather than them being outright bad. I'll say this now, but I assume many battle related mechanics exist to provide the player a fair challenge. Given that is the case, its only a bad design decision if the player isn't being given a fair challenge. I don't believe many of the things on the OP's list are unfair, though I do see some that I am willing to question, such as the forward+R1 attack (kick for most weapons) being as it is. The decision to include it isn't bad (hence not a bad design decision), but how it was done may be (bad implementation).
A lot of balancing has enemies be made more able (read: operate on different, though similar rules) in order to deal with players, since the AI is fairly bad. For exmaple, this accounts for your homing arrows, which would be unlikely to hit you unless they had a bit of tracking or moved extremely fast, which would probably be unfair in context with the rest of the game since most attacks are slow and telegraphed. This is why enemies will rarely have their attacks interrupted (by walls or stagger) and why they have fast attacks. The player has all the tools to beat them, and while players and AI have different tool sets, it doesn't make it a bad design decision or unfair. Enemies not being affected by some environmental hazards may not make sense in game (not immersive) but it isn't a bad design choice just because of that. They are intentionally not affected because it may make fighting them too easy. While you may disagree with the choices, they aren't bad decisions since they do help the game reach its goal of providing a challenge.
In the same vain, its stupid to say that all hit boxes are terrible, or all of them are great. Grab attacks especially are bad, but a lot of regular weapon attacks are pretty accurate to the motion, even if they are given phantom range so they actually "feel" good. Related to this, the supposed "BS area of effect" attacks bosses have is a mechanic partially shared with the player, where large weapons have an AoE stagger to them. While giving a similar tool to the player doesn't justify giving a damaging version to a boss, I can't really find a design fault in it. If you feel like it shouldn't have hit you (read: unfair), then that is your issue, but not necessarily a problem with the game or its design. As it stands, since all of those attacks are consistent in how they hit/damage you, and they are avoidable by either different dodging or positioning, i can't find it particularly unfair. Of course, no one person can experience absolutely everything with a game, so its totally possible I haven't had a move or follow up done that I find to be unfair but someone else has.
The complaints on invincibility frames seems silly honestly. Last I checked, the player is given those same frames as invincible, and all of the games had them. It seems to be more of an issue on your side than an actual problem. It helps not trivialize enemies and prevents knockdown weapons from being absolutely broken, hence retaining challenge. IFrames in general are fairly consistent, so you should know when they are occurring after seeing them a few times. If you can't hurt something during a certain animation, then you will never be able to hurt anything during that same animation. In this case, I am referring to a "getting back up" animation and not a "waking up" or "getting up for the first time" animation. It may seem like nitpicking, but it isn't. Different situations should be treated differently, but when you encounter the same situation, as long as it performs consistently to your prior experiences it wouldn't be unfair.
Some of the other complaints I have seen fall to the same issues of "I don't like this choice, and it doesn't make sense to me". Can't pause is probably the most polarizing of these, along with difficulty selection. In my opinion, both are fine. Pausing, while convenient for some, does provide a small relief that the designers didn't want to give the player. Its possible they wanted you to feel that stepping away for even a moment is a risky move. All I can say is if you disagree, then cool. Its a valid design choice to make. Difficulty is a whole other beast and an argument and discussion all its own. Simply put, Not having difficulty options isn't a bad thing as long as ways to naturally make the game easier or harder exist in the game (which I'd argue do exist in the souls series through summoning).
These games do have their own share of issues a problems, but I think a lot of the things I've read aren't issues with the game, and more something between specific players and the game. I haven't address the issues I have mainly because this post is already super long, and I felt that the discussion about what is bad design and what isn't is more on topic than my own issues.
Imperfected
Member
I honestly don't think the Hellkite Drake is so much a "teachable moment" as it is Miyazaki saying, "Remember that thing we did with in Demon's Souls? Let's do that again!" and kind of forcing it in there even though he sort of has to twist it sideways and hammer on it a bit to make it actually fit.
It's sort of like the Yhorm fight in DS3.
It's sort of like the Yhorm fight in DS3.
DaciaJC
Gold Member
I think that's another thing Demon's Souls did right that none of the other games have replicated: illusory walls that can actually be distinguished from regular walls by careful visual inspection.
And I'd someone can't continue because of the difficulty, screw 'em, right? (Or don't have time to progress) It's more important that the games not have a difficulty option.
This is the kind of narrow-mindedness that I cant. I loved bloodborne for all the madness and faults, but I almost gave up several times and was able to continue only because I had plenty of free time to invest. Not everyone has that luxury and I can't imagine depriving those people of the experience, the same experience I was deprived of when I first played demon souls and couldn't continue due to difficulty and time investment.
Yep, always been bullshit.
As can the player, so it's 50% bullshit.
If you're relying on fall damage to fell your non-PvP enemies then you're missing the point.
You're supposed to fight on the tiny islands, you can say it's annoying gameplay but it's intentional design. Enemies in swampy water guarding a treasure? Use ranged attacks or magic. Don't have ranged attacks or magic? Too bad, you're not meant to experience every part of the world on a first run.
This just isn't true at all except for maybe the swamp poison. Environmental hazards are almost essential in certain encounters.
Too bad, bad luck. You're not entitled to a reward for every victory. It's called "risk-reward" for a reason.
That's an intentional choice to urge you towards weapon transposition. The souls you gain from defeating a boss aren't meant to be the main reward for defeating them because the amount they drop when they die always exceeds their boss soul.
This can be hit or miss. In my combined 300 hours with this series, I've seen an unreachable bloodstain maybe once. Most of the time they cheat a bit and move it away from potentially unreachable areas and ledges.
Agreed 100%. Also keep in mind that buttons on a controller are already at a premium for this game so mapping a sub attack such as the kick would require more than one input to execute. You are right though.
Use cover strategically. Only one area in all the games bothered me with this (Shrine of Amana).
Hitboxes are 99.9% great in these games outside of DS2. People just notice their discrepancies because these games are so reliant on them. Other videogames are (rightfully so) not held to nearly the same standard. This is a mixed bag for sure.
Examples?
The same is true of the player's i-frames. If you could get attacked while getting up from a knockdown then people would be fucking rioting in the streets.
AoE moves are usually indicated by a magical blast field to let the player know where they aren't safe. The fight with the Princes and Aldrich both utilize this well. If you hang back and study their moves then none of these should catch you off guard. You're not meant to read their moves immediately, you're meant to try and fail thus facilitating learning.
Classes? Wut.
Correctomundo
Member
Sacred cows make the tastiest burgers.
Not everyone has the time and investment to play EVE Online, but you don't see players whining about EVE needing an easier, shorter, single player mode, because at that point you wouldn't be playing the same game. Yet, every Souls thread ends up with people asking for an easy mode and then calling the Souls fanbase close-minded elitists.
Not every game has to cater to everyone, and that's good. Let's say we give Dark Souls an easy mode. At that point, why are you playing Dark Souls?
For the level design? With enemies no longer being a threat, the shortcuts and interconnectedness means nothing because you'll backtrack a lot less.
For the challenge? Oh, wait, no. You said as much.
For the story? There's no story so to speak. You figure out what happens by reading item descriptions and talking to NPCs.
So why would you play Dark Souls if you don't care for the challenge? Every other aspect of the game revolves around the risk/reward gameplay and the difficulty. Remove the challenge and it's just a game about travelling places and reading item descriptions.
nkarafo
Member
These two points are the ones that bother me the most. Especially the kick. I can never do it whenever i want. I just try it and hope i get a kick instead of a weapon hit.
Or maybe i'm missing something here.
Dr. Benton Quest
Banned
My issues with Dark Souls:
1) Kicking needs a dedicated button.
2) Needs dedicated PvP servers.
The end.
1) Kicking needs a dedicated button.
2) Needs dedicated PvP servers.
The end.
Fahzgoolin
Banned
I wish there was a consumable like 'homeward bone' that you could put down and return to the nearest boss door or something. Running past enemies to get to a boss lost it's appeal real fast for me. I don't really feel like it adds to anything.
Yeah the feeling of "where the heck am I and where am I going?" is an essential feeling for Dark Souls.
Camera and lock-on/auto-center are really the only problems I have with Souls games. And it's annoying when a kick comes out instead of an attack but it's not too bad.
Anyone who complains about being lost or how obscure some locations are need to shut up.
I'm serious. Best thing about the games.
Anyone who complains about being lost or how obscure some locations are need to shut up.
I'm serious. Best thing about the games.
Crimsonclaw111
Member
Sorry to say then but not every game is for everybody. I don't want 4X games dumbed down because I don't personally have the time to get everything.
Romars202129
Member
''Dark Souls has you making a lot of choices without clear result, and also has many things happening without giving a clear cause for them. Take for example Dark Souls 3, where the developers have stated the Poise stat is working as intended, yet even now, none of the players know what it does. And there's plenty of other things in Dark Souls that require either a wiki to explain it, or trial and error (followed by suffering usually 
).''
).''The only major issue I have is something that most people don't even notice but bothers me to no end. The run and roll button are mapped to the same button, yes I know it sounds petty but hear me out. Running is done by holding the button and rolling is done by pressing and releasing. Nothing bad about that except for the fact that because of that configuration a roll is executed after you release the button and not right when you press the button. This causes some noticeable delay fron when the button is pushed to when I actually roll.
When I first starting playing I didn't know why my character would just sit there after I pressed the button. I had to teach myself not to slam the button down when I wanted to roll. Even after I learned the slight delay is still noticeable. Not a deal breaker but just something that's super annoying to me personally
When I first starting playing I didn't know why my character would just sit there after I pressed the button. I had to teach myself not to slam the button down when I wanted to roll. Even after I learned the slight delay is still noticeable. Not a deal breaker but just something that's super annoying to me personally
How about the atmopshere, the story (yes, some people like putting together the bread crumb trail), the creature and environment design, the music....hell, you COULD even include challenge in that list because just because an easy mode will be easier than the main game doesn't mean it would be entirely bereft of challenge. It makes no sense to act as if those who want an easy mode are asking for no challenge whatsoever, or else they wouldn't be into gaming at all, because every game, even the most casual ones, have some challenge pieces somewhere.
The thing that makes dark souls come off as elitest is that people shouldn't have to justify to you what they want to play dark souls for. You have no authority to judge what is and is not dark souls to any other individual other than yourself. I said that before I played the Souls series, and now that I played two of them, I stand by that statement more than ever. There's a lot to like in Dark Souls, and looking down on others for having different tastes than you and gravitating to different things, and therefore wanting to minimize the aspects they might not care for (like the combat), just because their tastes don't match up with yours is elitest. Especially since the opposite players have that option. If you don't care about the story or the environemnts, you can just rush through ignoring that to kill the monsters. Why should you have the option to ignore what you don't care for, but not others?
"Why would you want to play dark souls if you don't care for the challenge?" That's a question you ask conversationally to want to get another's opinion, but I see it more often framed as a challenge. Suppose I do want a game about traveling places and reading item descriptions, and I want those places and item descriptions to be specifically what is present the Souls games. The hell are you to tell me I shouldn't?
And honestly, it feels like a disservice to the series to say that the only thing that makes the souls games worthwhile is the difficulty. There's so much effort put into the environments, story, music, weapon variety, enemy design, and to say that you may as well not be playing it if you aren't dying 10 times per level is kind of bullshit. And it's not even that challenging, imo. Sure, it's tougher than most games on normal, but I've also had way more challenge on other games if you just up the difficulty a little bit. Some parts of Uncharted 4 on crushing or Infinite Climax Mode on Bayonetta is way harder than anything in Bloodborne or Dark Souls. If you want a challenge tougher than Dark Souls, it's not hard to find it. It really mostly is just a matter of losing the 'prepare to die!' reputation to me.
Fahzgoolin
Banned
Yeah I know what you are talking about. Today I was finding myself just walking briskly away from a boss when I was trying to run away. It's a constant struggle lol
I have been playing these games for years and it's still a problem.
I will never understand how Souls fans always look down on CHOOSING your difficulty. It stems from nothing other than elitism. How does someone else playing it on Easy effect your experience?
I hate to sound like a broken record with other people, but co op is the game's easy mode. It Legit breaks all the bosses.
So no need for it. The game offers an easy solution for those that need.
Also, the fact that it has RPG mechanics means that you can grind to win. That is another reason for not needing it. In fact, do some co op with others and you will net yourself a nice amount of Souls. The fact that defense is linked with every level up means that you will eventually out level enemies ' attacks.
It's true that the lore and exploration are other reasons to progress, but the series is married to having challenge. The point of progression is that you figure out the enemies' weaknesses. They have made it easier than ever for this as well. Because in DS3, the enemies are fast, but once you find out that you can stagger 90% of everything, the game becomes a lot easier.
Basically, the RPG and co op elements are really a hidden easy mode.
It changes the enire attitude of progressing through the game. Why bother putting effort when most people can cheese through an easy mode? If devs ever put in an easy mode in a Souls game, it means they caved in and abandoned their vision.
For example, the entire game is built with the singular focus of being challenging but fair. With an easy mode, there's no need for that well crafted design. Developers would then focus on making the harder difficulty harder simply by increasing stats, which is not the way to go.
And as I said before, the game has an RPG level system. You can make it easier by design, as a player choice through leveling.
Here's what I don't understand about this argument that is kind of self contradictory:
if the game 'already has an easy mode', then how can it be said to be married to it's challenge?
And if the easy mode exists without it the souls community dispersing, how is that not proof that Dark Souls can still be dark souls with an easy mode?
Furthermore, how would the existence of an easy mode eradicate the normal mode, in which players who feel challenge is fundamental to the dark souls series can play uninteruptted? That's the real thing that I can never get a real answer on. Okay, so you feel if someone played a dark souls in easy mode, they wouldn't get the 'real dark souls experience'. So what? They'll get the experience involving the assets of dark souls they want. And you'll get the 'real' dark souls experience. How is everyone not a winner in that scenerio?
edit: and, again, what Dark Souls means to other people isn't up to you. I could definitely envision a person who has no interest whatsoever in the combat, but would love to explore the world. You can only decide what Dark Souls means to you. Anything more is being a dick. I'm a player who happens to like the gameplay, but I'd be pissed if someone told me I was playing the game wrong because I wasn't reading every item description just because that aspect is important to them.
There's an argument to be made that easy difficulty could end up affecting game design, especially if it caught on made the developers want to cater to that crowd more. I do still think that the majority of defenses I have seen are steeped in elitism though. Funnily enough, I saw a lot less of this going around back when the GFAQs and DeS PvP boards were the big centers of the community. The games were a lot more niche and esoteric, yet the players were more open.
For the actual thread content, there are many legitimate complaints, ad there are with 100% of games released. They actually do a good job fixing most of mine with the different iterations. Most of them I wouldn't call bad design decisions, just ones that I wish were different though. My latest gripe is the absolutely horrible hit box in Bloodborne on the Defiled Watchdog's 1 shot charge attack. 3 feet away from its hind leg and it kills me, multiple times.
This is a good point. I struggle with this sometimes, getting a kick off right when I need it.
A lot of the rest of your complaints are balance-related. If enemies didn't have homing projectiles then they would be even more at the mercy of ranged damage than they are now. And if they didn't have generous iframes they would be greatly weakened.
You should be able to answer these questions yourself. From Software has imposed restrictions on co op. For example, only being able to summon when an area boss is alive. Being embered while able to summon means you can get invaded. Your summon disappears when you beat the boss or die. Also, co op is a legit game mechanic that adds to the gameplay and is tied into the story. These are mechanics that are balanced to affect the game, and make it easier whilst also giving a fun, alternate experience. Still, it makes all the bosses a joke.
That's literally how they increase the difficulty for NG+, no?? We don't hear many complaints about that of course, cuz Souls bruh.
Okay, now you're saying it's NOT an easy mode then, it just shifts the difficulty pressure from one area to another. It's a side step, not a step down. So there isn't an easy mode, according to your argument, though I may disagree...
I play the Souls games offline. Bloodborne because I didn't have PSN, but I would rather not play with other people in the first place. Partially because I dislike the idea of invasion, but I also don't like people's messages littering the landscape, helpful or not. So co-op wasn't really an option for me unless you count the single NPC co-op I used. It actually annoyed me when I started Dark Souls 1 on PC, and I can't find a way to turn off online play, so I have to disconnect steam from the internet.
Since NPC invasions are a joke, I think we can say that offline Co-op is more or less an easy mode then. It makes basically everything easier, and the only thing it makes harder is that an ineffective NPC can invade you.
Same arguement then. An easy mode exists, yet the Souls universe somehow didn't implode on itself. So why not, rather than make it a mechanic that I think most people wouldn't even think to use (I didn't know being embered is the trigger to summoning NPC's WAY late in the game), something simple to use to let the select amount of people who want to play it on easy mode play it on easy mode without having to go through all that trouble?
Stormhammer
Member
sorry op, but your first mistake was criticizing soulsbourne, the greatest metroidvania of all
Yeah, because that's an increase after you already beat the game. And it's commonly said that DS3's ng+ is disappointing because precisely that:. They didn't do anything else to spice up the gameplay.
But I see you all are set on nitpicking these minute details. The fact remains that Fromsoft's design mentality for the Souls games is to be challenging but fair. There are enough options within the game design to make gameplay easier. That is the entire point.
And we are at the point where even the game's current difficulty can be made easy by normal game exploits, like staggering, backstabbing enemies, etc. Even stat increases wouldn't be enough to make the game more difficult using the 'challenging but fair's design mentality. It would just make enemies more cheap. They have to advance the design by making enemies actually have more challenging AI.
Edit: that's not even bringing in the fact that Kay Plays proves my point. Kay, someone who is known to be bad at video games, was able to make it through Dark Souls simply by paying attention to everything and understanding the design. It is living proof that the Souls games are built to have a basic quality that is challenging, but can be overcome by just about anyone who actually learns the mechanics and pays attention.
D
Deleted member 22576
Unconfirmed Member
First item:
....
...
you dont enjoy the combat.
*drives away shaking fist*
Get a smaller sord dude or do thrust attacks.
....
dont eat everything you lay eyes upon
...
you dont enjoy the combat.
*drives away shaking fist*
DarkConfidant
Member
I agree with you greatly on the overall point.
You do, however, potentially weaken your argument by throwing some more petty complaints in there, and I'm sure people are going to only focus on those, as the slightest criticism of these games seems to get unnecessarily attacked.
They're probably going to tell you to play differently or not use certain options given to you in the game.
There are plenty of issues that Bloodborne and the Souls games get free passes on, that won't even be mentioned in reviews.
The biggest one is enemies moving through, and attacking your through walls, while you collide with walls, and sometimes you collide with thin air( invisible walls?) during animations.
It's something so common, that in boss fights, it's a good strategy to expect the enemy weapon to pass through indestruible objects, walls, and other enemies.
Also, enemies hitting you through walls, and fire/magic sometimes working through walls/indestructible objects is annoying too.
I think any other game would at least get called out for this as being buggy, but because these games are ambitious, and overall pretty great, these issues don't get called out, and they have been seen in every release since Demons Souls.
Luckily on PS4 I've been able to capture video of this shit when it happens.
In any other game we'd call it a bug or glitch, and expect a patch.
You do, however, potentially weaken your argument by throwing some more petty complaints in there, and I'm sure people are going to only focus on those, as the slightest criticism of these games seems to get unnecessarily attacked.
They're probably going to tell you to play differently or not use certain options given to you in the game.
There are plenty of issues that Bloodborne and the Souls games get free passes on, that won't even be mentioned in reviews.
The biggest one is enemies moving through, and attacking your through walls, while you collide with walls, and sometimes you collide with thin air( invisible walls?) during animations.
It's something so common, that in boss fights, it's a good strategy to expect the enemy weapon to pass through indestruible objects, walls, and other enemies.
Also, enemies hitting you through walls, and fire/magic sometimes working through walls/indestructible objects is annoying too.
I think any other game would at least get called out for this as being buggy, but because these games are ambitious, and overall pretty great, these issues don't get called out, and they have been seen in every release since Demons Souls.
Luckily on PS4 I've been able to capture video of this shit when it happens.
In any other game we'd call it a bug or glitch, and expect a patch.
Those and there needs to be a "hit downed ENEMY " button to hurt knocked down enemies. I think it is stupid when they hit the ground and you just sort of... stand there? Calmly waiting for them to get up? Wtf?
I also hate it when an enemy is swinging around a halberd in a corridor. It is like "I have the same fucking weapon. Why does yours not suffer the same penalties?!"