The Soulsborne combat debate

Retr0gamer

The problem is you are treating dying over and over as a road block. As if you aren't making progress. But its not. You are slowly learning the game. You are getting a little bit further each time. Learning the level and enemy patterns. Each time you die isn't a waste. If it gets frustrating put the game down and play it the next day. You be much better equipped after a session. Each session in the evening you'll have made progress when you look back at it. And the games are set up that if an area is too hard there's always alternatives to try.

Each death isn't the waste of time you think it is. The game gives that impression. You lose 5000 souls when you die which was enough for a level up but in later areas you'll be picking up 5000 souls from one enemy.

Retr0gamer

Potential-Monke wrote: »

But they are, until you've died enough to either like the game or hate it. Once you like something, you won't consider it hard because you're enjoying it. It's like codies saying learning C++ isn't hard, but it is if you've no idea what you're doing, and dipping you toes into it and finding out if it's for you or not, and if it is you'll learn more and eventually be one of the people who thinks it's not hard. Soulsborne are the same. Except that if you don't like it/call it hard, you're met with the "Git gud" arguments, and as you referenced, the elitism that goes with it.

You're not allowed to dislike the Soulsborne games unless you've put dozens of hours into it it appears. And if you do put dozens of hours into you, you'll like it (allegedly). There's no inbetween.

I've no problem with people not liking soulsbourne games. You are allowed like what you like. What I have a problem with is people that can't get into the games saying they are awful, because they just aren't.

Also you equate soulsbourne fans telling people over and over to keep playing the games, stick with them, to git gud as elitism. It's not. Here's my own reason why I push people to play these games.

I've been playing soulbourne games since importing the original demon's souls in 2009 from Hong Kong. Ever since then it's been a struggle to tell people how good these games are and to get them to play them. The media exasperates with by exaggerating how hard they are and then it's made worse by the odd person that jumps on to forums, played maybe 2 hours of it and proclaims it as the biggest heap of ****e ever. It turns people away from these games. I really just want more people to play these games because they really are the best games that have been released in the last decade, it just takes a little bit of effort to get into them.

It's like the difference between Marvel films and a more rewarding artistic film. You can turn your brain off and enjoy a comic book film but it's ultimately unrewarding and hollow while the artistic film might need a bit more effort to get into because the subject matter might be uncomfortable or it's subtitled but it's ultimately a more rewarding experience in the end. I think there's a lot of people out there turned away from these games that would really love them and often times when I convince someone to play them it becomes one of their favourites. The more people that plays these games the better the conversation I can have about them.

It actually really annoys me that I can't get my own personal friend group to play these games. They are put off by the time investment needed yet can pour hours into Assassin's Creed Odyssey or Witcher 3. Then I see them play utter crap like Star Wars Fallen Order because they are SW fans and I try to explain to them they just played and liked a terrible Dark Souls rip off and how much better Souls is and they don't budge. I've even had one tell me to play Dead Cells as they love it and I felt like shaking them and shouting at them that they love a 2D souls game!

From a gameplay aspect can you ask yourself why you thing Fallen Order is a **** Dark Souls clone?

The game now. Not anything about the license tied to it.

Retr0gamer

Where to start.

The combat just isn't precise enough. Dark Souls might be slow but it won't eat inputs and if you get hit it's your own fault. Fallen Order just feels like it isn't responding to your inputs and frequently feels like it's breaking it's own rules so feels cheap as it feels like it's cheating the player.

Then there's the environment which loops back on itself but isn't really as satisfying as a Souls game. Lots of boring slidey bits as well. Enemy variety and design is also an issue with not enough enemies and not enough to differentiate them from each other and too many crabs!

It's a grand first attempt but it just doesn't feel right.

Penn

Retr0gamer wrote: »

It's like the difference between Marvel films and a more rewarding artistic film. You can turn your brain off and enjoy a comic book film but it's ultimately unrewarding and hollow while the artistic film might need a bit more effort to get into because the subject matter might be uncomfortable or it's subtitled but it's ultimately a more rewarding experience in the end. I think there's a lot of people out there turned away from these games that would really love them and often times when I convince someone to play them it becomes one of their favourites. The more people that plays these games the better the conversation I can have about them.

But therein lies the greatest issue; what is "rewarding"?

I love the Marvel films, and I do find them rewarding, because for those few hours, I'm entertained and I'm happy at the end of it (well, not Thor The Dark World). I love a lot of big AAA blockbuster games because even though they might not break new ground, do anything particularly interesting etc, I get enjoyment from playing them. That's rewarding.

It's entirely subjective. Just because something is lowest common denominator, paint-by-numbers standard-fare seen it 100 times before... doesn't mean it can't still be rewarding. Just because something is more artistic, unique, speaks greater truths etc... doesn't mean it's rewarding to all.

Reading your above paragraph, my thoughts went to stand-up comedy. I love standup that tries to do something different, where there's something deeper and smarter than the type of comedy some of my friends like that's more popular, where it's just comics saying "Yo I was f*cking this chick right... like this *humps stool*".

As one of my favourite comedians, Stewart Lee said:
"Hear that applause? That’s what I like. I’m not interested in laughs. I prefer applause. “Is it supposed to be funny?” That’s what the critics say. No it isn’t. I’m not interested in laughs. I’m interested in… People say, “Did you see Stewart Lee?” “Yeah.” “Was it funny?” “No, but I agreed the f*ck out of it.”"

Comedy like that, I find rewarding. Platinuming Assassin's Creed Odyssey, I find rewarding. Films like Marvel movies, I find rewarding. Platinuming Sekiro, I find rewarding. It's entirely too subjective for there to be a "right" answer. Your friends might not like Soulsborne games, or might like some Soulsborne games (without knowing they're Soulsborne, or they're Soulsborne-Lite like SW:FO) but not others. I now love Sekiro which is technically a Soulsborne type of game, but I might not like Bloodborne or the Souls games. I'm probably more likely to try them now and put in the effort, but I'm also still going to play timesink games like AC:Odyssey because I felt the time I put into it was still rewarding.

Is it artistic?
No, but I played the f*ck out of it.

gimli2112

I do agree they are portrayed as harder than they actually are. My BB experience was tempered slightly by the fear it was going to best me at some point. Except for one mid-game stutter when I encountered the giant with the chains on his back in one of the dungeons leading to a "what the actual f**k" moment, I never felt I was going to fail

mouldybiscuits

I have an unpopular opinion. Dark Souls extreme difficulty makes the game a real grind and it bores me. I get sick of repeating the same areas over and over again and I stop playing and then I get worse at the game and when I come back it frustrates me even more. Very overrated games imo.

Retr0gamer

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Where to start.

The combat just isn't precise enough. Dark Souls might be slow but it won't eat inputs and if you get hit it's your own fault. Fallen Order just feels like it isn't responding to your inputs and frequently feels like it's breaking it's own rules so feels cheap as it feels like it's cheating the player.

Then there's the environment which loops back on itself but isn't really as satisfying as a Souls game. Lots of boring slidey bits as well. Enemy variety and design is also an issue with not enough enemies and not enough to differentiate them from each other and too many crabs!

It's a grand first attempt but it just doesn't feel right.

Did you find it less challenging or more challenging than what you would expect?

Retr0gamer

Penn wrote: »

But therein lies the greatest issue; what is "rewarding"?

There's enjoyment to be had from blockbuster films. Sometimes it's all I'm in the mood for as well. My issue is they aren't challenging the viewer. I'm not going to come out of infinity war thinking about what I just saw for a long time afterwards or have it challenge my perceptions and view of the world. It will be forgotten the next day.

Two very different viewing experiences, neither of which is better than the other.

As for my friends not liking Soulsbournes games, the problem is they can't even say that because they've never actually tried one before. I've tried telling them I'll take them through one in co-op but they just want to play vermintide. They have been totally put off by the media's and public narrative that these games are too hard and inaccessible that they won't even give them a go.

mouldybiscuits wrote: »

I have an unpopular opinion. Dark Souls extreme difficulty makes the game a real grind and it bores me. I get sick of repeating the same areas over and over again and I stop playing and then I get worse at the game and when I come back it frustrates me even more. Very overrated games imo.

And this here sums up everything I'm talking about. You didn't like the game, ergo I'll make a sweeping statement it's rubbish and overrated.

Which makes me a hypocrite because I'm as likely as anyone to get passionate about a game and make a similarly sweeping statement for dramatic affect. But I feel these statements are putting people of giving these games a chance.

Have you ever seen a great film or TV show and tried to get your friends to watch it and they won't because they heard it's subtitled or some other excuse. It's that kind of frustration I get trying to get people to play these games, even people I know will love them.

Deleted User wrote: »

Did you find it less challenging or more challenging than what you would expect?

It was less challenging than a Soulsbourne game yet somehow more frustrating. I ended up giving up on it because I wasn't enjoying it and if I was going to play a soulsbourne game I'd rather play Sekiro which I hadn't.... and still haven't finished.

I think your specific frustrations are not common amongst anyone I've discussed it with

I could point to Sekiros god awful frame spiking on the xbox but that shouldn't deter from the PC version as it's addressed here

The general opinion around Fallen Order was that it was a more forgiving game than Dark Souls

And you could adjust difficulty on the fly

This garnered a different type of audience

Who cares IMO I'm happy for the folks who could enjoy this type of game with less challenging demands and don't require as much repetition from an attack pattern point of view

Some folks no longer have the time to piss away at a repeat section for a play session. Rewarding as it may be or not

Penn

Deleted User wrote: »

I think your specific frustrations are not common amongst anyone I've discussed it with

I could point to Sekiros god awful frame spiking on the xbox but that shouldn't deter from the PC version as it's addressed here

The general opinion around Fallen Order was that it was a more forgiving game than Dark Souls

And you could adjust difficulty on the fly

This garnered a different type of audience

Who cares IMO I'm happy for the folks who could enjoy this type of game with less challenging demands and don't require as much repetition from an attack pattern point of view

Some folks no longer have the time to piss away at a repeat section for a play session. Rewarding as it may be or not

I think it was probably a lot more forgiving than Souls games, definitely more forgiving than Sekiro. It is ultimately Souls-Lite. It's a lot of the experience and repetition of Souls games (meditation points respawning enemies etc), and it doesn't just focus on combat but also a lot of platforming. I enjoyed Fallen Order, there were some frustrating elements where it felt the game design fails you rather than you failing at the game but overall I thought it was well worth playing.

My biggest complaints would be the blandness of Force powers/abilities and some awkward level design that made backtracking when going for completion a real pain. A lack in enemy variety in terms of bosses and bounty hunters was also a bit disappointing.

Retr0gamer

It's not as challenging but it's also not as fun, rewarding or well designed as a Dark Souls game imo. Nothing wrong with bringing the souls type combat to a wider audience by making it more accessible but my issues with the game aren't that it's too easym it's that it just isn't as well designed as others in the genre. Enemy, level and combat design just aren't as good or deep as they should be and I think the Star Wars license forgave a lot of these issues for some people.

It's something that can be changed with a sequel and hopefully the star wars license will get more people into these games.

Retr0gamer

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I've no problem with people not liking soulsbourne games. You are allowed like what you like. What I have a problem with is people that can't get into the games saying they are awful, because they just aren't.

Also you equate soulsbourne fans telling people over and over to keep playing the games, stick with them, to git gud as elitism. It's not. Here's my own reason why I push people to play these games.

I've been playing soulbourne games since importing the original demon's souls in 2009 from Hong Kong. Ever since then it's been a struggle to tell people how good these games are and to get them to play them. The media exasperates with by exaggerating how hard they are and then it's made worse by the odd person that jumps on to forums, played maybe 2 hours of it and proclaims it as the biggest heap of ****e ever. It turns people away from these games. I really just want more people to play these games because they really are the best games that have been released in the last decade, it just takes a little bit of effort to get into them.

It's like the difference between Marvel films and a more rewarding artistic film. You can turn your brain off and enjoy a comic book film but it's ultimately unrewarding and hollow while the artistic film might need a bit more effort to get into because the subject matter might be uncomfortable or it's subtitled but it's ultimately a more rewarding experience in the end. I think there's a lot of people out there turned away from these games that would really love them and often times when I convince someone to play them it becomes one of their favourites. The more people that plays these games the better the conversation I can have about them.

It actually really annoys me that I can't get my own personal friend group to play these games. They are put off by the time investment needed yet can pour hours into Assassin's Creed Odyssey or Witcher 3. Then I see them play utter crap like Star Wars Fallen Order because they are SW fans and I try to explain to them they just played and liked a terrible Dark Souls rip off and how much better Souls is and they don't budge. I've even had one tell me to play Dead Cells as they love it and I felt like shaking them and shouting at them that they love a 2D souls game!

It's this kind of hyperbole that'll bring me back to this thread :D:D

Retr0gamer

I actually really do believe they are. At the very least they are a contender in any debate about the best games of the decade, unarguably so.

eyeball kid

So I've started playing Bloodborne off the back of this thread. Never played any of the Dark souls before. Tried BB initially when it came free on the PSN, put a couple of hours into it and just couldn't get the hang of it. Didn't know what to do, repeatedly dying, found it pretty frustrating. Thought it looked and sounded great though but gave up on it.

But reading through this thread and the praise it was getting made me give it another go. Have only got as far as the Blood starved beast but really enjoying so far.

Don't get a huge amount of time to play so it will take me ages to get through it but I'm looking forward to exploring this creepy world.

gimli2112

I found the blood starved beast quite tough, probably harder than Fr Gascoigne but there are things you can do that make the fight easier. I think it's just the music fighting it panicked me.

Penn

I followed FightingCowboy's Youtube walkthrough for Sekiro, usually by watching his video in the morning or lunch then doing that bit myself in the evening mainly because no way in hell would I have figured out how to get some of the endings or items without it.

Went to check out his Bloodborne walkthrough but it seems like he's playing it for the first time and figuring it out himself rather than Sekiro where he knows what to do and where to go, so after I finish Borderlands' new DLC, might take another stab at Bloodborne. Dunno if I'll use a walkthrough or not though. Might just check out a few "Tips for beginners and best builds" kind of videos and then go from there.

gimli2112

yeah that's what I did, started playing and as I was getting into it devoured videos on best builds, equipment and boss fight strategies

nix

I went through Bloodborne blind on my first go, i replayed it loads of times then after, doing different builds and the likes.. thats what else is great about it, excellent replay value, you will miss loads of stuff playing through it, it keeps it fresh stumbling upon new things you missed first time around. And the many different weapons can help keep the gameplay fresh...

You can spend hours getting to a certain point on your first play through, and then on the next play through you can get back to that point in no time.. So restarting from scratch is never a bad thing, if you have taken a long break from it and are looking to jump back in, id advise doing a fresh run..

Brozy

Yeah, same as with Dark Souls. I watched a few beginners videos to figure out what to be at early on. I wouldn't have had a hope on my own, which is what happened when I tried Demon Souls years ago. I stopped watching them after I'd figured out what to level up and how to upgrade weapons and armor. I don't have the time to be watching the videos either tbf.

The losing souls can be annoying but you can't be worrying about it too much. You can farm certain areas to get build them up again and practice different weapons and parrying. As long as you don't lose them on the way back from a boss, which hasn't happened to me yet.

Another aspect I have to live with it, is missing stuff. I'm not going to get everything the first time through and I won't understand much of anything it seems, like covenants but I don't mind a quick google to see what they're about if I'm interested. There's also all them hidden bonfires and fake walls I'm probably missing too. It can be a little disconcerting for someone with mild OCD. The fact you have 1 save file is probably a good thing, as you can't be saving and reloading the whole time afaik.

The level design is great, when you unlock a shortcut or see part of map you were on earlier from a different angle it really clicks together. Was stuck in them woods wanting to clear out those hunters you can't lock onto and then just defeated the wolf boss on my first attempt which was very rewarding.

Left some souls in the blight town earlier and will have to try and collect them tomorrow. I think the game is well suited to playing for 30 minute or 1 hour sessions as it can get frustrating but after a while I'll be looking forward to going back to it.

I'm repeating a lot of what's been said on here already but thought I'd add my 2 cents. I've been recommended Seikiro by a friend but might work my way through the DS's series first.

The start of Bloodborne is fairly unforgiving. Am I right in thinking that you have to get to the first boss before you can level up at all?

nix

Deleted User wrote: »

The start of Bloodborne is fairly unforgiving. Am I right in thinking that you have to get to the first boss before you can level up at all?

You need to get 1 Insight, you get one for every boss you see i think, so you dont need to kill the boss, just need to start a fight with one. You could trigger the boss and then hunters mark teleport out if you wanted to play it safe, but its really not necessary unless you had farmed a lot before the boss.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

The start of Bloodborne is fairly unforgiving. Am I right in thinking that you have to get to the first boss before you can level up at all?

Best off literally legging it to the boss.
Then start farming the area and upgrading.

McFly85

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The start of Bloodborne is fairly unforgiving. Am I right in thinking that you have to get to the first boss before you can level up at all?

You can get insight before any boss. Exploration really is worth it in this game.

EDIT: But I agree, the start of it is definitely one of the most difficult sections of the game

Retr0gamer

McFly85 wrote: »

You can get insight before any boss. Exploration really is worth it in this game.

EDIT: But I agree, the start of it is definitely one of the most difficult sections of the game

The first street section took me more tries than any other part of the game. It's there to teach you how to play properly but I can see how some people could get put off by it.

petes

Retr0gamer wrote: »

The first street section took me more tries than any other part of the game. It's there to teach you how to play properly but I can see how some people could get put off by it.

It was the reason I stopped playing it, was my first time playing any of the Soulsbourne games. Went back to it though and haven't looked back since!

Retr0gamer

petes wrote: »

It was the reason I stopped playing it, was my first time playing any of the Soulsbourne games. Went back to it though and haven't looked back since!

Yeah it's a real baptism of fire. Got frustrated myself with it as in the beginning it would catch me sometimes even when I'd gotten through it a few times. I could see people getting frustrated. It's a pity as the game gets so much easier as it goes on. Father Gascoigne is a stumbling block and Vicar Amelia is as well but they are awesome boss fights so didn't mind repeating them. After Vicar Amelia the game is a bit of a breeze and only had any trouble with Orphan of Kos at the end of the DLC who was a real ball buster.

nix

Yeah the first area is littered with tough enemies everybody should just skip and i still do to this day as there is no real reward for killing them.. The two wolves on the bridge for example, and the fat guy with the axe, just steer well clear.. Until you have parrying down at least.. :P

TitianGerm

nix wrote: »

Yeah the first area is littered with tough enemies everybody should just skip and i still do to this day as there is no real reward for killing them.. The two wolves on the bridge for example, and the fat guy with the axe, just steer well clear.. Until you have parrying down at least.. :P

The wolves on the bridge are easy. Bait them back to the narrow stairs at the house and hack away at them from the door. Or use Molotov.

gimli2112

I spent many an hour twocking those wolves from that doorway