The Soulsborne combat debate

Zero-Cool · 17-05-2020 2:00pm

I think the difficulty comes from the respawning enemies and long treks to bosses sometimes, especially if shortcuts aren't unlocked.

The combat itself is fantastic and most importantly fair. Most deaths come from mistakes and each death makes you better. Serious satisfaction from battles that very few other games reach.

TitianGerm · 17-05-2020 2:25pm

Minime2.5 wrote: »

Have you gotten through Sekiro? I personally find it too hard for me. WAY harder than any of the souls games or Bloodborne. I find both Nioh 1 and 2 way harder too

I found Sekiro the easiest of the games but Bloodborne is my favorite and the first one I've cleared.

Still haven't cleared any of the Dark Soils but I've restarted them on PC and will complete them at some stage.

They really are great games.

nix · 17-05-2020 3:11pm

The Phantom Pain wrote: »

I think the OP doesn't understand that different people like different things. Maybe the genre is just not for Monke?

I personally like a challenge but only when mechanics are super polished and with absolutely no little padding whatsoever. What puts me off buying a Souls games is not the difficult boss fights but the idea that you have to run through the same trashmobs over and over again just to get to it, time that could be spent actually, you know, "gitting gud" against the boss. It's a waste of time and I don't like games that waste my time.

Ummm i say in my very first sentence that i have no problem with him not liking the game

Its him talking **** about the game when he barely gave them a chance, heck i remember when he gave up on Bloodborne, he didnt even get passed a boss and he was hung up on mobs respawning.. Clearly didnt even give the game a chance and was mad he just couldnt windmill in to everything and win.. :rolleyes:

Its like playing a football game for the first time and getting pissed off you cant pick up the ball, calling the game **** and then quitting. And then people saying hes entitled to his opinion when he clearly didnt even put in any effort in to understanding the game :rolleyes:

Its a toxic ignorant opinion in itself and im the one who gets **** when i say he just needed to put in more effort at the get go?

fack off :pac:

noodler · 17-05-2020 3:18pm

The learning curve for souls games has always been like the below. Early game toughness that steadies hugely as your progress. Some of the DLC bosses can be a bit ridic but broadly I would say the difficulty is overhyped.

I've watched someone played Sekiro tho and that looks really tough.

'’'''''''’''''''''''’''''''''''’''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
'
'
'
,

Minime2.5 · 17-05-2020 3:24pm

sweetie wrote: »

I bought Demon's from Play Asia when first released. Couldn't get into it, too tough and so traded it. Then got Bloodborne when it came out, loved the setting but was muck at it. I persevered and after many hours of practice I was much better and addicted. Have gone back and completed them all now and also the Nioh games. That eureka moment when I got the combat of Sekiro down, nothing like it. Nothing else holds a candle to these type of games bar zelda or metroidvania for me now. I start playing Nioh 2 and I can forget the sadness going on at the moment in my life, its a great and necessary escape. Tv doesn't give me that these days, maybe only a good book or film comes close.

I have both nioh 1 and 2 but I don't have the love for them that I do for the Ds games . There's something about them I just don't like

Minime2.5 · 17-05-2020 3:28pm

The Phantom Pain wrote: »

I think the OP doesn't understand that different people like different things. Maybe the genre is just not for Monke?

I personally like a challenge but only when mechanics are super polished and with absolutely no little padding whatsoever. What puts me off buying a Souls games is not the difficult boss fights but the idea that you have to run through the same trashmobs over and over again just to get to it, time that could be spent actually, you know, "gitting gud" against the boss. It's a waste of time and I don't like games that waste my time.

It's not a waste of time if you keep using the souls or blood echoes to level your character stats and weapons up eventually you become too strong for the normal enemies of an area . DS 1 3 and Bloodborne are fairly straight forward for me to get through the key is to make sure you don't waste any souls. When you die your given the chance to get them back

Minime2.5 · 17-05-2020 3:31pm

nix wrote: »

Ummm i say in my very first sentence that i have no problem with him not liking the game

Its him talking **** about the game when he barely gave them a chance, heck i remember when he gave up on Bloodborne, he didnt even get passed a boss and he was hung up on mobs respawning.. Clearly didnt even give the game a chance and was mad he just couldnt windmill in to everything and win.. :rolleyes:

Its like playing a football game for the first time and getting pissed off you cant pick up the ball, calling the game **** and then quitting. And then people saying hes entitled to his opinion when he clearly didnt even put in any effort in to understanding the game :rolleyes:

Its a toxic ignorant opinion in itself and im the one who gets **** when i say he just needed to put in more effort at the get go?

fack off :pac:

Put a full stop after the word entitled and you'd be on the money 🤣

petes · 17-05-2020 3:42pm

They are the most frustrating pieces of **** I've ever played.

Love all of them. I curse at the TV after dying but I died because I ****ed up, not the game mechanics.

First one I played was Bloodborne and did give up as it was too hard or so I thought. Went back persevered, finished it and moved on to souls.

Don't think there is any game that had my heart pumping that much after beating a prick boss.

johnny_ultimate · 17-05-2020 4:00pm

Penn wrote: »

I was playing it just to play it rather than wanting to play it.

I think this is where there's a fundamental difference in opinion that will never be overcome

To me, few games (a few exceptions such as Outer Wilds or Obra Dinn aside) are as endlessly compelling as a Souls game. When a new one comes out, there's inevitably a two or three week period when I become absolutely hooked on them. I'm not someone who tends to play in long sessions, but with a Souls game I'll inevitably and happily lose hours.

The worlds are so compelling, the mechanics so rewarding and the delight in overcoming the challenges so satisfying that I can't help but push through to discover all that.

The Phantom Pain wrote: »

What puts me off buying a Souls games is not the difficult boss fights but the idea that you have to run through the same trashmobs over and over again just to get to it, time that could be spent actually, you know, "gitting gud" against the boss. It's a waste of time and I don't like games that waste my time.

I have a remarkably low tolerance for video game filler - see my posts across the FF7 Remake or RDR2 threads to see how a game wasting my time will utterly ruin it for me.

Short, isolated sections aside, I think Souls games are remarkably light on what I would consider filler.

If you have to pass through enemies to get to a boss, that to me is as much part of the fight as the boss itself in many cases. It's about pushing through while keeping resources and avoiding damage as much as possible. Learning how best to get through a section is as important as recognising the attack patterns of the bosses. I'm sure there have been a few individual bosses across the six games where the run to the boss is that little bit too long, but for the most part the balance is usually just right (and sure the vast majority have shortcuts or bonfires that speed things up dramatically).

To me video game filler are sections where the player isn't learning anything meaningful about the world or the mechanics, or where new ideas aren't being explored by the designers. If there are a small number of sections in From's game where the balance tips from 'challenging' to 'frustrating' for me, it's more than countered by the remarkable sense of progression and forward momentum, not to mention a genuine sense of accomplishment when you finish the vast majority of tricky sections. These are games that evolve and complicate with each subsequent level or enemy type - and (for me anyway) far away from the tedious stream of 'content' that many game designers seem satisfied to settle on.

In every Soulsborne game - and I've finished them all - I get a sense of a world that keeps on meaningfully expanding as I explore it, mechanics that become more rewarding as I learn them, and an overarching design philosophy that if anything has a deep sense of respect for my effort and time. Whereas with something like FF7R I see a game where designers are on auto-pilot in order to hit some imagined 40-hour ideal.

Greyfox · 17-05-2020 5:40pm

Arcadeheroes wrote: »

the problem is games for decades have offered little to no challenge to the player anymore so when Demon souls came along and asked for alittle bit more of the player it seemed like you were climbing mountains when you just wanted to take a walk through a field.

That's not true, modern games do offer a challenge as most games have a hard mode you can play on. A couple of decades ago there was less great games and less competition from other forms of entertainment meaning games could afford to make you repeat sections or boss fights, I'm glad that trend is almost gone.

nix wrote: »

Its him talking **** about the game when he barely gave them a chance, heck i remember when he gave up on Bloodborne, he didnt even get passed a boss and he was hung up on mobs respawning.. Clearly didnt even give the game a chance and was mad he just couldnt windmill in to everything and win.. :rolleyes:

But he did give the game a chance and he clearly made an effort in his time playing it, is there a time limit you need to play a game for before you can have an opinion on it? He was probably use to experiencing enjoyable combat straight away in a game rather than having to wait a while for the combat to be fun

YouSavedMyLife · 17-05-2020 5:55pm

If you haven't beat a Souls game solo first run, then you haven't beat it. And if you attempt to rectify the mistake of summoning in your first play through by doing another run through of the game without summoning then you are out of luck as its already to late. Beating the game is now locked for you, sorry not sorry

Shiminay · 17-05-2020 6:31pm

I personally dislike these games immensely - I tried playing since DS1 came out on the 360 a million moons ago. I hated it. When it finally came out on PC, I thought "ok, let's give this a go on a proper piece of hardware where it's not going to play like it's submerged in soup" but as anyone who's tried to play it on PC will attest, it's a spectacularly poor port (not an opinion, it's very well documented). So I said "Fk you From Software, I won't darken your doorstep again" and I haven't.

Then game The Grudge - it wasn't 2000 shades of brown, it wasn't alluding that it had some sort of mysterious epic story that it wouldn't tell you, it ran well on my PC and it was quite challenging. I gave that more time than I'd have thought, but ultimately felt that this sort of precision combat isn't my thing at all - it's like fighting games in a lot of ways, there's no room for even a small mistake and that's cool. I have no beef with that at all, but it's not for me. I'm in my 40's now, I don't have the reflexes or the interest in playing that sort of game (conversely, I still love twitchy FPS games, but that's what I cut my teeth with over 20 years ago in college and so I still have the benefits of some muscle memory helping me out

). I played quite a bit of Absolver at this time too, it's a similar affair but more "fighting game" than the Souls-Bournes for anyone who hasn't played it (it's been given away for free on several platforms now).

I have Jedi Fallen Order for PS4 sitting in shrink wrap for a long time. This is unusual in that I adore anything and everything Star Wars, but because people have said that the combat is like a Souls-Bourne, I haven't really had any inclination to even open the wrapping (and tbh, it's a chore having to switch on the PlayStation anyway, it's so fraking slow to do anything).

Minime2.5 · 17-05-2020 6:34pm

Shiminay wrote: »

I personally dislike these games immensely - I tried playing since DS1 came out on the 360 a million moons ago. I hated it. When it finally came out on PC, I thought "ok, let's give this a go on a proper piece of hardware where it's not going to play like it's submerged in soup" but as anyone who's tried to play it on PC will attest, it's a spectacularly poor port (not an opinion, it's very well documented). So I said "Fk you From Software, I won't darken your doorstep again" and I haven't.

Then game The Grudge - it wasn't 2000 shades of brown, it wasn't alluding that it had some sort of mysterious epic story that it wouldn't tell you, it ran well on my PC and it was quite challenging. I gave that more time than I'd have thought, but ultimately felt that this sort of precision combat isn't my thing at all - it's like fighting games in a lot of ways, there's no room for even a small mistake and that's cool. I have no beef with that at all, but it's not for me. I'm in my 40's now, I don't have the reflexes or the interest in playing that sort of game (conversely, I still love twitchy FPS games, but that's what I cut my teeth with over 20 years ago in college and so I still have the benefits of some muscle memory helping me out ). I played quite a bit of Absolver at this time too, it's a similar affair but more "fighting game" than the Souls-Bournes for anyone who hasn't played it (it's been given away for free on several platforms now).

I have Jedi Fallen Order for PS4 sitting in shrink wrap for a long time. This is unusual in that I adore anything and everything Star Wars, but because people have said that the combat is like a Souls-Bourne, I haven't really had any inclination to even open the wrapping (and tbh, it's a chore having to switch on the PlayStation anyway, it's so fraking slow to do anything).

Git Gud

J. Marston · 17-05-2020 8:11pm

YouSavedMyLife wrote: »

If you haven't beat a Souls game solo first run, then you haven't beat it. And if you attempt to rectify the mistake of summoning in your first play through by doing another run through of the game without summoning then you are out of luck as its already to late. Beating the game is now locked for you, sorry not sorry

Those people cheated not only the game, but themselves. They didn't grow. They didn't improve. They took a shortcut and gained nothing. They experienced a hollow victory. Nothing was risked and nothing was gained. It's sad they don't know the difference. It's a meme mocking those "Get Good" types before anyone thinks I'm serious.

Temptamperu · 17-05-2020 8:16pm

I get bored with it about halfway through the game. I played them all but only finished two cause me mate let me run through with him.

nix · 17-05-2020 8:21pm

Shiminay wrote: »

I have Jedi Fallen Order for PS4 sitting in shrink wrap for a long time. This is unusual in that I adore anything and everything Star Wars, but because people have said that the combat is like a Souls-Bourne, I haven't really had any inclination to even open the wrapping (and tbh, it's a chore having to switch on the PlayStation anyway, it's so fraking slow to do anything).

Dive in, the combat is nowhere near as punishing as Souls, its got a difficulty setting so you can change it to your own pace if needs be.. I played on normal and it was grand, few attempts needed on some bosses but overall effortless..

Retr0gamer · 17-05-2020 8:23pm

It's also no where near as good as souls but if it's a gateway drug to the greatest series of the decade then give it a go.

Zero-Cool · 17-05-2020 8:28pm

I was roped into star wars because of it's 'Souls like combat'. Turns out the combat was not souls like, just a load of ****. When i hear a game being 'souls like' now, i get skeptical the same as when a game says it has 'Witcher 3 like' side quests. Why you lying?

Retr0gamer · 17-05-2020 8:28pm

Greyfox wrote: »

That's not true, modern games do offer a challenge as most games have a hard mode you can play on. A couple of decades ago there was less great games and less competition from other forms of entertainment meaning games could afford to make you repeat sections or boss fights, I'm glad that trend is almost gone.

Can't agree less with you. Triple A games have been very poor this generation with a massive decrease in the amount of quality games. I've also seen a lot of games get highly rated that would be considered mediocre previously because there's a lack of competition. Triple A games all mostly fit into a few templates that publishers know sell well and it's very boring. Also regarding Hard modes, I usually find them unbalanced and not fun. They are arbitrarily difficult as opposed to Dark Souls.

What people loved about Dark Souls was that it followed videogames of old. And I don't mean in being tough. I mean in how well it's designed, how the combat and situations you are put in are constantly evolving with the player. It has the same feel and flow of a classic 16-bit action game. I've heard it called a spiritual successor to the old school castlevania games. It just feels so different from the usually shooters where you are fighting the same enemies with just the locations and number of enemies changing. People missed the old purposeful design.

noodler · 17-05-2020 9:38pm

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Can't agree less with you. Triple A games have been very poor this generation with a massive decrease in the amount of quality games. I've also seen a lot of games get highly rated that would be considered mediocre previously because there's a lack of competition. Triple A games all mostly fit into a few templates that publishers know sell well and it's very boring. Also regarding Hard modes, I usually find them unbalanced and not fun. They are arbitrarily difficult as opposed to Dark Souls.

What people loved about Dark Souls was that it followed videogames of old. And I don't mean in being tough. I mean in how well it's designed, how the combat and situations you are put in are constantly evolving with the player. It has the same feel and flow of a classic 16-bit action game. I've heard it called a spiritual successor to the old school castlevania games. It just feels so different from the usually shooters where you are fighting the same enemies with just the locations and number of enemies changing. People missed the old purposeful design.

Can I just say plus 1 to the point on hard modes.

Simply giving you less health, giving the enemies more health etc is so arbitrary.

A hard mode should have additional objectives or other nuances.

The combat in dark souls is great but the world design, the way areas connect and fold back on each other is exceptional.

Potential-Monke · 17-05-2020 10:32pm

Minime2.5 wrote: »

The very fact there are people on you tube who can get through the game without even getting hit proves what your saying is absolute garbage.

Minime2.5 wrote: »

I'm guessing all these posters calling Dark Souls hard are not a fan of retro gaming

I'm happy you said both, because I was going to make a point. I loved Mario on the SNES. Beat it many, many times. But I can't speedrun it. Does that still mean I need to git gud? Can you speedrun it? Suppose you're a Ninja Gaiden master too? Or do you only have to be good in the games you consider good to be in this club of looking down on us lesser mortals?

nix wrote: »

Its him talking **** about the game when he barely gave them a chance...

Its a toxic ignorant opinion in itself and im the one who gets **** when i say he just needed to put in more effort at the get go?

Someone already replied, but I did. I put in more than enough of my time to see if I liked it. Seems my idea of how long one should put into a game before i've given it enough time is not the same as the developers, or yourself. Just so I know, what's the cut off? How long is long enough? Is it the same for all genres?

And it's not because you're saying to get better, you're saying it in a way to make people who disagree with you seem inferior. It's not the opinion, it's the way it's said. It's elitism, up there with the PC v Console crap.

Look, different people like different things, and have different ideas of what keeps them entertained. Maybe if I was still in my 20's i'd be more willing to try them for longer, but i'm nearing 40, and there are too many good looking games in my opinion out there to be spending too long on something that doesn't initially grab. Maybe my attention span is shorter than it was. No, actually, it definitely is.

Nowadays, I'm about the overall experience, and i'm particularly picky these days. To me, the perfect blend of combat and challenge was 2018's God of War. Sure, in comparison to DS it's simpler, but it was the feel of it that I liked. I'm a demi-god, I shouldn't have issues with the fodder, only with bosses such as the Valkyries and larger enemies in general. DS does that, but requires a lot more time to learn and I don't have that time to invest.

Maybe if a future God of War had combat like DS, I'd be more likely to give it a longer go, because I'm already invested in that world. I know nothing of DS, nor do I want to anymore, because the combat had too steep a learning curve for the time required for me, and there are a lot of people who will agree.

I don't think I've ever said that the combat was straight out styte in DS, just that it wasn't for me. I think I gave Bloodborne about 4 hours, DS2 5 hours, tried our Nioh and The Surge too, while not at the same level apparantly as the From games, still the same style of combat and requirements to learn. Not for me. They don't entertain me.

All the back and forth, and it's personal opinion. Some people get more upset when others don't like the things they like. It's life. Don't be letting it get you so upset that you need to start judging. Discuss the reasons why, don't attack people for not liking something you like because you don't consider their reasons valid. I don't like Fifa because it's too complicated to learn these days. Doesn't mean I'm wrong. Doesn't give you a reason to belittle me for that opinion. God damn me for being different.

This is why gamers get a bad rep.

17-05-2020 10:50pm

I remember co-oping the first game with a friend albeit with difficulty getting summoned and a few solo sections but it was a blast.

I missed that aspect in Sekiro, helping people overcome difficult parts or the reward that comes from it or indeed getting help when needed.

I still have people in my friends list that added me from summoning me in DS1 I regularly chat with in parties.

Minime2.5 · 17-05-2020 11:34pm

this is a great guide for people finding ds1 tough

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BJn9tMZzXA&list=PLnyoYBfiQHtaqJ-p7tYHyGZfKP93eOygQ

Exclamation Marc · 17-05-2020 11:45pm

I really have no problem with people loving or loathing the combat systems. Have at it. Whatever makes you happy. It's the attitude of "if you don't love it you're crap/not skilled enough/unable to 'get' it/not a true gamer/not able for the challenge/don't understand it/clearly into crap games etc." that really pïsses me off.

I'll often hear "oh that's no problem you don't like it and I respect your opinion, but you clearly didn't take the time to learn it" which doubles back to the shïtty attitudes and superiority people mistakenly believe they have.

I hope they make tons of Soulslike games and their fans eat it up and the games get better each time. And if someone loves them, great, go wild. But talking down to people is one of the absolute worst traits a gamer can have. Especially when they're talking out their arşe and are nowhere near the high ground they believe they're on.

johnny_ultimate · 18-05-2020 12:40am

I love the series and would always encourage anyone with an interest in trying the games to give them a shot as I think the reputation for relentless, barely surmountable difficulty is somewhat unwarranted.

But i think it’s straight-up embarrassing when I see the phrase ‘git gud’. They’re bloody computer games, no need for any sort of elitism. That goes for every game by the way, not just these ones. It’s just adolescent bull**** that’s putting people off playing some of the best games ever made.

Robert ninja · 18-05-2020 12:55am

I don't think there's nearly as much elitism as people are suggesting. Players just wish to defend the difficulty and approach of such games because they're a dying breed in AAA world. Demon's Souls was a hit because people were starved for content like that, not because it broke new ground (although it did use PS3 tech very well).

There's been years of yap from users and MSM to casualise games. Give us more easy modes, add more tutorials (that last the entire game), floating button prompts, QTEs, compromise the integrity of multiplayer so people 'feel' like they're good at it. That's where "git gud" came from. It was the response of Demon/Dark Souls players in their glory days. They didn't have the patience left for any more lip about how unfair the game was or how it should be easier. Players didn't want to explain anymore, they just wanted to play and enjoy those types of games with each other. Git gud was essentially "f*ck off". Don't f*ck with our hobby, don't try to dig your filthy casual nails into this one. It worked for a while but now it's just a meme, one that continues to trigger people which is hilarious.

Greyfox · 18-05-2020 1:21am

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Can't agree less with you. Triple A games have been very poor this generation with a massive decrease in the amount of quality games. I've also seen a lot of games get highly rated that would be considered mediocre previously because there's a lack of competition. Triple A games all mostly fit into a few templates that publishers know sell well and it's very boring. Also regarding Hard modes, I usually find them unbalanced and not fun. They are arbitrarily difficult as opposed to Dark Souls.

Objectively there hasn't been a decrease in quality, I think its more a case of you getting a little jaded with many AAA games. Theirs also the fact that more games are been made these days which makes people less likely to stick with something that doesn't grab them straight away. Yes hard mode tends to just be tougher enemies etc but it does change how you play the game. Playing the last of us, Resident evil 2 remake or the Witcher 3 on hard is a different experience to easy as you have to make the most of your resources. some people just want to enjoy a story and feel like a beast. The combat does sound like it gets very rewarding although combat cant get any better than the bar set by Zelda BOTW

Potential-Monke · 18-05-2020 2:09am

Robert ninja wrote: »

I don't think there's nearly as much elitism as people are suggesting...

Git gud was essentially "f*ck off". Don't f*ck with our hobby, don't try to dig your filthy casual nails into this one.

There it is. Seems to be the trigger is saying Dark Souls is shyte... :pac:

Robert ninja · 18-05-2020 2:38am

You realise that was a quasi paraphrased quote from the attitude at the time and not my actual opinion. I don't care who likes Souls games anymore because I stopped playing them after DS2 which was meh to me and the AAA industry is beyond saving. I'd rather just play Blade of Darkness. Still got it in my GOG library... I think it's time for a reinstall.

johnnysmack · 18-05-2020 3:14am

Played them all, beat them all, hate them all. Most overhyped biggest load of shìt games I've ever come across. I foolishly believed the hype so when they were on sale bought the lot only to find the utter nonsense within but by god I get my money's worth no matter how crap a game is.

The Soulsborne combat debate

Comments