ITT /v/ related confessions
Whenever someone says any game has "bad combat", such as Witcher or Morrowind, I instantly dismiss them as a Soulsfag and stop reading their post
Bait but fact is even though Witcher and Morrowind do have bad combat in comparison, combat isn't even the main focus for those games so who gives a shit? If you play any other RPG expecting, or desiring souls combat you're an absolute faggot.
>First person real-time action game
>Using traditional turn-based combat mechanics
Morrowind's combat is fundamentally flawed. It's a combat system designed for interactions that aren't in real-time, shoved into a real-time game. Nothing you visually see happening is representative of what's actually happening in the game.
Most Morrowind fags can agree that the combat is unbalanced and clunky as shit. Strong gameplay mechanics were never a strong suit of Bethesda's. There is a lot of other reasons to like Morrowind and the gameplay has it moments here and there especially at the end game.
The Witcher games are a mixed bag I get what they were going for with the combat and it works and looks nice about 75 percent of the time, but they still just aren't quite there with the execution.
You don't need to mention From combat to know other RPG's aren't living up to their full potential gay op.
Scholars of the First Sin was fun and less annoying than DaS, despite the weird movements.
Gone Home was a good game
I hate any Zelda game
Undertale is literally one of the best games out there
I watch Let's Play videos (Pewdiepie and TheRadBrad)
I liked FNAF
Hitman Absolution was a good game
I liked Skyrim
The combat is major gameplay element of these games.
It is the aspect of the game that has a definitive fail-state, so the part that requires the most player input. If you're telling me the core mechanics that make a game a game isn't good, then why should I even bother with them?
I consider Halo 2 and 3 to be great games, not story wise though All Hitman games are great I am more than 13 y/o and still post on /v/
>Everyone who doesn't like BB is just a booty bothered PC gamer
Yes I am a PC gamer primarily, yes I too am annoyed that it's an exclusive, but I like souls enough that it actually is a driving force behind the fact that I will at some point get a PS4
By that definition, something like Gratuitous Space Battles or Endless Space aren't actually games because the combat proper is mostly outside of player hands.
You don't define gameplay as simply whatever part of the game is closest to the fail-state. You can wear a piece of gear in the game that curses you and causes you to instantly die. Did combat happen? No. Is that not a fail state, then?
>everything you do is meaningfull
>on a grand quest in an unknown land
>game is concise and on point with no bullshit like in mmos
its literally the opposite from mmorpgs when it comes to rpgs you massive retard
>"YOU CAN'T SAY THE GAMEPLAY IS SHIT BECAUSE OF JUST THE COMBAT"
>aside from combat game literally just has walking around in an uninteresting world with bland characters and lore
You're all either fanboys or just happy with very fucking little.
BB is a bonus for those who dont play on getting a gaming PC. Hence the no games meme. Its only worth getting a PS4 if you plan on making it your primary system. I got a good 100 hours from BB but its time to move on.
>literally wasting 550$ each year for the latest jewvidia gpu
why do people do this?
why dont you pay a modest amount for your video card and upgrade every 2-3 years?
if it's a game you want money shouldnt be a problem. being an idort is much better
all this tells everyone that you and your ilk are pea-brained morons
>>Hitman Absolution was a good game
Well, I'm stealing this one for myself, Mr. Shitposter.
Hitman Absolution was an amazing game from a technical standpoint with by far the worst mission design in the franchise. This is proven by the fact that the couple missions that actually play like Hitman games are actually wonderful.
I certainly hope you are underage, because at least that would justify you sounding as if you were.
It's not a matter of which game has a better combat, you fool. One doesn't take the same combat pattern and applies it to every single game in existence. No matter how much you might love it, games need to have different systems or else they stagnate.
Would you want every single game that exists to have Assassin's Creed combat? Because that was hailed as pretty good back in the day too, because 20 games were made out of it.
blah blah blah thats a lot of words for such an empty post
i type deez way cuz /v/ is for idiots so I adapt fucktoy
you are talkin maad shit though
>one doesent take blah blah
except youre implying there is good combat out there, dark souls combat isnt even that great and its still the best, the point is all other rpgs have SHIT TIER combat
your entire genre is shit and dark souls is the redeemer
>considered myself a hardcore gamer
I used cheat engine in dark souls and bumped myself to soul level 131 at the beginning and went on through the game with a large health and stamina. I am in anor londo with stone armor and stone greatsword
Yup. 16 or lower, I hope for your own sake that that's the case.
>I try extremely hard to see things from other people's point of view. I can understand why CoD players like CoD, why DOTA2 players like DOTA2, but I still utterly fail to grasp what people see in Undertale.
>Similarly, the only conclusion I have been able to come to when people criticize Dark Souls combat is that they just aren't good at it. Every other explanation (It's too slow or it's too complicated) feels like a cop out.
>I thought base game Diablo 3 was fine the first time I played it. It had way less replay value than the previous installment, but it was fine enough.
>I think Perfect Dark is better than GoldenEye
>I think the focus on graphics has been one of the leading causes on the decline in game quality. Too much funding goes to visual development and story/design/complexity suffer for it.
>I own more consoles that I never play than I do ones I actively use.
>I still think Mario 64 is one of the best games I've ever played.
I never played a Zelda game. The only Final Fantasy I ever played and completed was the first one and I enjoyed it.
no mission plays like an 'actual hitman game' because the game is flawed at its very foundation;
disguises are literally worthless and you're spending more time crouching and hiding and treating it like some third-rate splinter-cell game, than doing the things how agent 47 is supposed to work
I already answered you, idiot.
You deluded yourself into thinking the matter is what combat is the best and that said combat should be applied to every game in existence, then hold onto those goalposts with a deathgrip and when pointed to you that having the best combat doesn't necessarily justifies wanting that combat system to be copy-pasted to every game, or that it remains the best outside of the specific parameters of its own game, you fall silent and fall back on shitposting.
If I want to go fast and play with bows, what does Dark Souls offer me? If I want multi-elemental magic, what does Dark Souls offer me? If I want to be a summoner, what does Dark Souls offer me? If I want to be an illusionist, what does Dark Souls offer me?
Slow, lumbering, one-on-one combat in Dark Souls is very satisfying. Slow, lumbering, one-on-one combat is not and will never be the extent to which combat in these games go to.
And no, you ARE pretty clearly either a fanboy or a shitposter
I have beaten every AssCreed that wasn't mobile or handheld release, totaling 13.
1, 2, Brotherhood, Revelations, 3, Black Flag, Rogue, Unity, Syndicate, Liberation HD, Freedom Cry, Chronicles China, and Chronicles India.
I fully intend to purchase Chronicles Russia day 1, and see the movie day 1.
I considered disguises in Absolution as being a pretty good middle point between how unreliable they were in Hitman 2, and how all-powerful they were in Blood Money. And trust me, I played Blood Money extensively, I know that game in and out, and disguises would never fail outside of extreme circumstances like not being in an area where your disguise should give you access or being two feet from a dead body, no matter what. Disguises that allow you to mostly blind in from a distance and when nobody can see you directly but that still requires you to sneak through some areas sound good to me, a police officer would know that you're not part of his patrol team if he gets close enough to you.
to start off, you put that comma in front of idiot
you obviously have autism
>You deluded yourself into thinking the matter is what combat is the best and that said combat should be applied to every game in existence
I never implying it should be applied to anything, you mentioned that first and now are shitposting with it
my question was, an action rpg with better combat?
your answer: sonic isnt even animeme
dark souls still has the best combat and with a proper system for magic/bows it would have better combat than 99% of games, not just rpgs
So what other games offer nice summoner/illusionist/magician experiences?
oh thats right, none, because rpgs have shitty combat
I hate TLOU even though I never played it, just cause I disliked all Uncharted games I played I love Mario 64, it's probably ma favorite game of all time. But I never enjoyed any other mario game I hate fighting games in general, specially SF and SSB I'm to much of coward to be able to play any horror game. So I never played any RE, SH or FEAR
>dark souls still has the best combat and with a proper system for magic/bows it would have better combat than 99% of games, not just rpgs
>Dark Souls would have the best combat for the situations you described if it included great systems for those circumstances that currently do not exist
Well, no shit, aren't you a genius.
And no, I already answered you, idiot, is not gramatically incorrect. You're just grasping at straws here, while STILL ignoring that YOU are the one with a deathgrip on your goalposts despite how irrelevant they are to this discussion, when I have stated multiple times that Dark Souls melee combat is pretty great and I probably couldn't cite a better one. And that by no means mean they should be applied to all games, which is what OP's original statement of "whenever I see someone complaining about combat I disregard them as Soulsfags" implies.
no, it implies that hes butthurt about his shitty games having shitty combat so he takes it out on darksouls
not grasping for shit but thanks for being autistic with those huge replies made my day boii
> probably couldn't cite a better one
thats all i needed to hear, why did you even start this comment chain autist?
> And that by no means mean they should be applied to all games
Theres that tacked on autismo juice you put yourself in the discussion gayboiii
anyway tnx 4 answering, I knew theres no rpg with good combat other than dark souls
no ill tell you why, poor fuck probably doesent know it himself
after finishing any tutorial for a fighting game, something becomes obvious
most game mechanics in fighting games are resolved faster than human reaction time, meaning skill means jack shit and its all about whos more autistic with pre memorised combat patterns and stun locking combos
Its a shitty system and it survived for so long because a lot of people get off on paterns in games (as seen in gookclick 2: wings of liberty)
My interest in video games has seriously waned recently, and suddenly I find myself really interested in Magic cards. My most played game recently is Magic: Origins on steam. Getting into Magic cards has made me exciting for gaming in a way I haven't felt since I was a kid. I have an IRL friend who I used to play 2d fightan with all the time, and now we just play MTG all the time.
>violently defends Dark Souls honor
>oh, and by the way, I'm not a fanboy or anything, it's not like Dark Souls has the best combat out there in the industry :^)
Anyway, yeah, it's been fun, good luck out there.
I've been here for at least 8 years now.
I've seen rules 2 and 3 broken in just about ever single thread in the past 6.
I've seen the mods literally stop giving a shit.
I've applied for janitor the last 3 times applications were up.
I've received nothing in regards to cleaning up this shitpile of a board.
I've only been b& from /v/ for shitting on Nintendo threads.
Not sony threads.
Not xbox threads.
Not PC threads.
Only nintendo threads.
I've witnessed this entire board become run by literal manchildren.
I've never beaten a Final Fantasy game.
I enjoyed The Order: 1886 and Until Dawn.
I think Halo and Gears of War are a lot of fun co-op.
I own a Mac and don't do computer gaming.
but they do in 99% of 2D fighting games, which is most of the games in the genre
its random as shit, I tried to get into blazblue continuum shit and studied its game mechanics a bit
the conclusion was obvious, all the 15-20 intricate systems that are put together to make its combat happen too fast for human reaction time to matter
its for autists who like patterns (or button mashing casuals)
>witcher fags literally think CLICKCLICKCLICKCLICKCLICKCLICKCLICKCLICK is good combat
Well you haven't stopped responding either, fuccboi.
Besides, I don't have extensive experience with action RPGs, turn based RPGs or actual action games like Devil May Cry are more my speed.
>make its combat happen too fast for human reaction time to matter
Jabs have small range, don't run into your enemy if you don't have anything and you're just going to stand there like an idiot.
you fags must have been discussing a specific game earlier in the comment chain or some shit
in most fighting games (that would be 2d games) the animations come out of nowhere and are lazily done, the genre is a joke and relies on memorizing patterns enough that you dont have to think about controls to execute them, so maybe 3000 hours in when you develop full blown autism you will be able to enjoy the game
But Souls combat is its worst aspect and it plays like Ninja Gaiden Black with no real jumping game and at 1/100 the speed and 1/1000 the difficulty. I can never fathom why people like it for that its not really hard or fun for that. Just good games for lore , the world and level design besides 2.
BloodBorne vastly improved the gameplay at its core with a speed/recovery boost as well as weapons with movesets that don't suck but its still leagues behind a real action game series in gameplay.
Also i hate when people just shake it off to me as "Its a ARPG not a action game" At its core and mechanically it is one. You pick gear and stats but the gameplay itself is trying to be like a slow one for idiots. I hope DaS3 is alot more like BB.
The point remains that literally all you do in Souls is run around more or less aimlessly while killing the ever respawning monsters until you run into a boss battle so that you can progress, unlock a shortcut, trigger some objective, etc.
It doesn't actually need the stats. The game wouldn't be much worse if the stats weren't there and the game did character definition through equipment,
>that you dont have to think about controls to execute them
>in most fighting games (that would be 2d games) the animations come out of nowhere and are lazily done
>in most fighting games
Let's hear you name a few. I haven't checked out blazblue, so I want to hear what specific "most fighting games", have 2 frame start-up attacks that aren't jabs.
Here's a tip, champ. Just accept you're bad at the games.
not the same guy but dude you need to buzz of with that shit
stats are great in dark souls, put some in vitality boom nice chunk of hp added, put some in strenght boom more damage and can wield bigger weapons
Unlike shitty classic rpgs where 200 lvls later your character plays the same, acts the same, but has bigger numbers and 10 more buff spells, 10 more nuke spells, 10 more spells that are sword swings with different anims
Fighting games operating on a level faster than human reactions is the point. You're supposed to be fighting the opponent, not observing what he does and then reacting with an optimal decision. If fighting games worked like that there'd be 0 depth
>Thinking you can react to punches in real life
I genuinely get bothered when a console/handheld exclusive gets ported to PC. Every single game getting porting to Steam nowadays just gives me less of a reason to own a console/handheld and, in turn, makes them less unique. Back in the day consoles, handhelds and PCs had their own unique set of libraries, and that was great. You'd buy a PS2 for games like Metal Gear Solid 3, Shadow of the Colossus, and Final Fantasy X. You'd buy a PC for games like Age of Empires, Diablo, and Half Life 2 (Even if some of those games had console/PC ports they were still significantly better on their original platforms i.e. Half Life 2 and MGS2). But now Steam is making everything homogeneous and that's boring as shit to me. Collecting for consoles/handhelds is one of my favorite aspects of this hobby, and Steam making everything one homogenized, digital only platform is depressing.
Top kek you're just a worthless shitter who is objectively wrong. Also SFV has decent animations or actually pretty solid ones. SF4 and BB are the only games i've seen with animation problems. SF4 just primarily jump start animations are really poor and sub consciously this actually leads to making AAing alittle more difficult at first.
>Unlike shitty classic rpgs where 200 lvls later your character plays the same, acts the same, but has bigger numbers and 10 more buff spells, 10 more nuke spells, 10 more spells that are sword swings with different anims
Clearly you haven't played a lot of classic RPGs.
Also, how is what you wrote even relevant to my post? The point remains that the stats don't do much for gameplay. The game's selling point is the combat system, not the stats distribution. If the game didn't have the stats and you defined your character by picking certain types of equipment, the game wouldn't be much worse.
Personally, I hate physical goods so I'm perfectly content with the situation. In my opinion we could get rid of handhelds, consoles, etc. and just distribute everything on PC.
The only thing which bothers me is that Steam is such a cancerous facebook-like data miner.
nah see if you invest the time to be better at fighting in real life you will be, and predicting enemy movement based on their body language is a big factor in evading, but you cant predict shit when 0.3 seconds earlier the enemy was standing perfectly still in their shitty idle animation
yeah, no. when I play its always win some, lose some, its still random as shit because you can button mash to win to break your opponents concentration
also the games are shitty because a big part of the meta is always forcing your opponent into an invisible wall on the edge of the screen and stun locking them
some examples are guilty gear, blaz blue, mugen games, most arcade fighters (on those old arcade machines) - even then it was shitty and random since you cant really react to anything
just face it faggots, those COUNTER moments are random and no one in the world can do it intentionally
Why do you care about data miner, why does anyone care? I never got it.
There're 7 billion people in the world, 125 million on steam. No one give a fuck about you in particular. They just use it to get some stats so they can make more money and shit.
>trash combat, good/great everything else
>loved by /v/
>The Witcher 3
>Decent combat, good/great everything else
>routinely shat on
whenever someone destroys me in CSGO I go through their profile to see if there's something there to make myself feel better about my shit life usually there isn't
wouldnt dark souls work well enough with a system like Monster Hunter, the game it most resembles in combat?
I see souls games as action adventure games with rpg elements, like Zelda 2 on NES.
But once you get rid of consoles and handhelds you're just removing everything unique from this hobby. You wouldn't see stuff like the Wii U's gamepad being a central aspect of games if they were all on PC. Not to mention games making use of their specific platforms would just be flat out lost if everything were on PC. For example, the impact of a game like 999, that made full use of the DS hardware, would be significantly lessened if done on any other
I also hate the thought of everything becoming digital only. I like actually owning my games instead of them being owned at Valve's whim.
>the impact of a game like 999, that made full use of the DS hardware, would be significantly lessened if done on any other
I disagree for 2 reasons
1. I played it on an emulator and loved it
2. Ever17 is made for PC, similar to this and is great
>fighting in real life
What do you know, fighting games are nothing like fighting in real life. Great observation!
>those COUNTER moments are random and no one in the world can do it intentionally
What are frametraps?
> a big part of the meta is always forcing your opponent into an invisible wall on the edge of the screen and stun locking them
That's called "rushdown" not all charcters do that, you silly. Maybe you should have SOME knowledge of what you're talking about before you spout stupid shit.
>yeah, no. when I play its always win some, lose some
Let's run a set. I want to see how "random" it is.
The reason those games are popular isn't because of their combat. Zelda is popular because of it's exploration and formula, GTA is popular because of its open world. The Witcher is popular because it's a fantastic RPG.
Also, what's wrong with the combat in Zelda and GTA?
>There're 7 billion people in the world, 125 million on steam. No one give a fuck about you in particular.
How do you know? You might be a 20 year old college student who's not of interest to anyone right now. If you complete your studies however, get involved with tech branches that are of interest to some, or perhaps government or politics, then you do indeed become interesting to many people as a person, and it's not just in your interest to hide certain things.
Not to mention that even as a regular guy you may not want your insurance company to know that you've spent your youth playing lots of games while sitting on your ass. If you run for office, are you certain that you want people to find out about that Hyperdimension Neptunia game on your Steam account? etc.
Also, it's a matter of principle. My data belongs to me. They can pay me for it, but they don't have the right to steal it from me, and at least in Europe, people are waking up about this and within the coming years this business model is going to change. Especially after safe harbour was declared void.
>They just use it to get some stats so they can make more money and shit.
They can make money by selling games. If they want to make more money from peoples' personal data, they should pay people for it or give them the option to opt out.
I don't have any "confessions" because I'm not ashamed of any of my unpopular (or at least polarizing) opinions.
PC is better than consoles, because it's nice having all my games on one convenient system. I don't value playing on the original console. Puritans need to fuck off. If I can play a game on my PC, even if it's on emulator, I don't care, as long as it's a good experience. If it runs poorly I'll play it on console, but other than that, 99% of the games I play are playable on PC. So that makes it better. What else would you base your gaming experience off of, other than what system allows you to play the most and best games? This idea that all the games are on consoles is fucking ridiculous. Gen 7 had no good games on consoles, and gen 8, the only good console is the Wii U. And it's selling like shit. So that shows what piss poor taste console drones have. You niggers bought up the PS4 and didn't buy the Wii U - Thus, showing Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft, and any other company that may create a game console, that having more and better games than the competition will not make you successful. You need the netflix. You need the little internet browser, because who doesn't wanna use a non-optimized, non-personalized browser to watch youtube videos or whatever? You need the non-vidya. You need the gimmicks. That's what will make your console successful. Not games. Not having more and better games. But having more SHIT that appeals to millennials. Gen 8 is the most damaging generation to gaming as a hobby ever. Enjoy no more games on consoles in the future. Luckily fewer people are buying consoles and more people are switching to PC so. Even with the PS4's "success" it's much less than what we've seen of consoles in the past.
>Whenever someone criticizes games with mediocre combat, I dismiss their opinion because they may or may not like a game with good combat
The worst part is that you aren't the only idiot who thinks like this. I've seen a good number of people trying to move to goalposts about Souls games whenever they see their favorite games being criticized. Stop being so damn defensive about things you like, The Witcher 3 is a fantastic game, but the combat could really have some improvements, it's dull and pretty generic. As for Morrowind, the combat in that game aged like nigger cum.
Fable 2 was the best fable and is one of my favorite games of all time
Dragon age 2 had really bad gameplay, but it's literally the only game in the series that doesn't have shitty boring characters and an unoriginal plot.
If the game lets me, I'll always make a shota in the character creator. otherwise, I'll play as a woman.
3D combat always sucks so it's only possible to mitigate the damage. Zelda uses lock-on, other games handle it differently but at the end of the day it's never as good as 2D. 3D is suited to racing, exploration and FPS or flying shooters.
>1. I played it on an emulator and loved it
You played on a device that emulated the DS, dual screens included. If the DS hadn't have existed 999 wouldn't have been designed around its hardware.
>2. Ever17 is made for PC, similar to this and is great
Like I said above, 999 was a game that was designed purposefully around the DS and its strengths. If the game was originally made to be a PC game, like Ever17, it would've have to been redesigned and the game wouldn't have been as memorable of unique.
so youre just gonna sit there and pretend fighting games arent all about the following things:
patterns, repetition, memorizing patterns, repetition, patterns, repetition until you "gid gud"
and pretend youre skilled because you can totally wreck all your friends
because you grinded that shit until it turned into muscle memory and thats just so skillfull, what an intricate combat system
>lets see how random it is
no consistency at all, people who button mash with basic controls can sometimes even kill people who played for 100 hours, sure im playing for the first time but its not like your experience will save you when I spam shit
There's nothing that really NEEDS changed. I don't see the point in holding it up to some other games' standards, I think it's perfect for what it is. Can you name a combat system that does everything it does but better?
>people who button mash with basic controls can sometimes even kill people who played for 100 hours
All right then? Fightcade is free, let's run a set of thirdstrike friend.
>It's not like your experience will save you when I spam shit
Holy shit, are you just a comedian? Learning how to counter moves is basics.
Blocking starts on frame 1 if your in neutral, you could put a bit more effort in your shitpost.
Name one competitive game that isn't either a test of pattern memorization or of physical skill
Now name any kind of competitive game that minimizes the need to memorize patterns better than fightan
Protip: you can't
I do think that Dark Souls is the ARPG with the best combat out there though. It isn't perfect by any stretch of imagination and it could sure use some improvements. However, I feel like some people on /v/ are trying way too hard to criticize it these days just because the game is overly praised.
Also, I was mainly pointing out how retarded it is to dismiss someone opining just because you assume that they like something.
Souls combat is best against singular, humanoid enemies. It really falls apart against multiple enemies though and the gigantic monstrous enemies weren't really handled that well either, since their hitboxes tend to be rather icky and the camera is often pretty bad. The lock-on is lacking accuracy due to the fact that it doesn't indicate to you what you're targeting before lock. The fact that the game needs this sort of lock-on mechanic at all is a good indicator that the input mechanics aren't fully working. A good game shouldn't rely on computerised input but put the player fully in charge. Not to mention that distance weapons weren't handled that well either.
Pretty much every time someone says "this game has bad content" its usually followed by saying the game would be better if it was more like Dark Souls, you will see soon enough Redditor.
shit, then I guess the entire genre can burn in hell
witcher, wow, zu online, TERA, black desert, shit, any rpg, theyre all shit
IS THERE A SINGLE RPG WITH GOOD GAMEPLAY THAT DOESENT JUST SERVE AS A FACEBOOK TIER SOCIAL CONTACT EMULATOR
>like in Souls where its the only focus.
Not really. Primary focus in Souls games is atmosphere and It has many elements that come together to make a good combat, I say that the game would be pretty meh if combat was the only focus.
It's hardly even an RPG. Why do people call it an RPG again? You distribute stats in GTA: San Andreas too, does that make it an action RPG?
You run around and kill monsters and if the stats weren't there and you could equip anything, the game would largely be the same.
You can create your own character, customize your build and play however you want in GTA?Dark Souls is considered a RPG because it has a big focus on immersion, atmosphere and also has a open-ended gameplay.
Souls game really are the most fun I've ever had from a combat system. I get that it's got flaws, but so few other games give you such a wide variety of weapons, each handling in a unique way. Like, with most ARPGs you'll have a couple of varieties of sword categories (usually just shortswords and greatswords) and everything within handles the exact same; you'll be slashing with rapiers and stabbing with scimitars the exact same way you would with an arming sword. But not with souls. Rapiers are actually based around stabs, scimitars slashes. Polearms have damage sweetspots on the blades. Spears can be used from behind shields. Shit like that.
Chalice dungeons are the worst inclusion in souls' history.
The inclusion of gun parries still suffers in execution and the changes to pvp are downright retarded.
The weapons are limited to a single system of gun in one hand and melee in the other. It's a limiting system that never expanded in depth even after the dlc release.
Magic is all over the place and arcane doesn't become interesting unlike the end of ng.
Which ng+ is utterly pointless past one novelty playthrough. No changes to the environment, no new items, and no significant changes to boss fights.
The speed of the game is never matched by difficult enemies. 3/4 of the enemies are pathetically weak to r1 spam and the remaining 1/4 feature retarded amounts of super armor with easily avoided attacks. Only one enemy is remotely challenging and it possesses a shitbox attack that would make ds2 proud.
by good gameplay i mean the interaction with the game world should not feel like it needs to be labeled made in china
that means people go trough each other, everything is homing, enemies could have 5X less HP and the game would be better, 90% of encounters are trivial (A STRONG PLUS FOR DARK SOULS) since other rpgs are easy as shit when it comes to basic enemies, some originality would be nice.
Basically every rpg I have encountered EVER plays like a failed turn based game and would probably be better as a turn based game, honestly a good rpg would be the biggest surprise ever, if you could name me one?
Compared to other RPGs Dark Souls has a lot less to offer, even a Souls fan has to admit that. Thats why they like it, because they want to always be in action.
So complaining Morrowind isn't like an action movie at all times is pretty retarded.
>Dark Souls is considered a RPG because it has a big focus on immersion, atmosphere and also has a open-ended gameplay.
San Andreas has all of that too.
The point remains however that Dark Souls mostly focusses on action based combat. In San Andreas you get to fly aircraft, does that mean it's a flight simulator? No, of course not, because the flying-aircraft part is a tiny bit of the whole package and most of the time you do other things.
In Dark Souls you mostly run around and slay monsters in action-based combat. That's what you do 99.9% of the time.
At its very heart it's an action game.
I prefer the Untold series over the mainline Etrian Series.
I consider BB to be the most complete Souls game.
I think the Halo series has good lore and EU(until 4)
I play LoL over DOTA2 because LoL is simpler.
Beat DaS in 2 days, missed on a bunch of side content I eventually went back to but didn't die more than 3 times to a boss. Game's easy, and the trial and error of exploration is not "difficulty", soulsfags hold on to that for dear life afraid that they lose their status of having played a (lol) hard game
This week I tried DaS2 and almost puked at how relatively worse it is. Movement/combat is slow and clunky, fast weapon degradation adds literally nothing but being a nuisance, the lore is spit in your face instead of subtlety, surprise gangbangs more frequent as a way to try to make the game harder. Not to mention was on pc so the controls are absolute dogshit, FromSoft somehow fucked up their port even harder than DaS1 with the exception of optimization.
Got hopes for DS3 as Miyazaki's on the helm again tho
is that available for PC I have would like to try it but i got turned off by people saying
IM HITTIN IT FOR 10 MIN AND ITS NOT DED
was it just a case of getting an enemy into a certain state or climbing it to deal more damage like in shadow of the collosus?
Not him, but I didn't care for BB.
You are kind of stuck with one play style when going through BB. The counter-attacking, stealth build with high risk, high reward gameplay.
If that is your preferred style from the souls game, it is fantastic experience and one of the best in the series. Unfortunately, it was my least preferred style of gameplay.
I liked being a slow bastard with crazy high defense and fuck huge weapons. I liked playing a glass cannon mage fucking up the battle area with magic. I liked playing an archer picking off foes from afar. On the whole though, I didn't like playing a parrying quick foot character, so BB didn't feel as fun to me.
What is with Morrowind faggots having such shitastic opinions?
I mean first they're trying to shill their game as the best ever made, then they're sitting here trying to deny how shit their game is.
Literally garbage combat, art design, story, and rpg mechanics.
But it's shilled to no tomorrow
>rpgs are easy as shit when it comes to basic enemies
It's not like Dark Souls was particularly difficult either. I've had trouble with a few bosses, but most of the basic gameplay is fairly straightforward.
Also, RPGs - and that does not include Dark Souls here - are a genre which by definition is not about difficulty, since the player is "playing" a role rather than "being" that role. In an RPG, the player makes the decisions, but they are executed by the player's character, and if the player's character happens to be bad at what the player wanted him to do, then he may likely fail at doing so, even if the player happens to be very good at that very thing. Dark Souls heavily relies on player input, if a player is bad at flipping around and hitting monsters at the right moment, then he's likely going to fail at playing the game. A one-armed, blind kid is going to have a hard time playing Dark Souls, yet he could perfectly play Fallout or Baldur's Gate by making use of the auto-pause functionality - or the original D&D for that matter.
>lot less to offer
what about all those hidden areas that you had to think real hard how to get to and the fact that exploring the world in dark souls is about 7 times more thrilling than in other rpgs?
I suppose youre going to back that up and name me an rpg that has more to offer huh?
some thrilling immersive experience no doubt?
possibly not with piss easy crabs as a starter "enemy" and a world that isnt empty valleys populated with the same mob like someone pulled an editor out of their ass, selected place mob, and spammed left click?
>San Andreas has all of that too.
No, it doesn't. GTA games are linear as it gets.
Who was the idiot who said that RPGs need to have focus on story and dialogues?Because that's exactly what you're saying. The biggest difference between Dark Souls and games like GTA or Zelda is that these games give you the impression of being open-ended but are extremely on rails, while in Souls games you actually have freedom of what do in relation to the gameplay, your character and world of the game.
Shit are you guys implying that there is meaningful interaction with characters and a good story in other rpgs?
i have read every fucking piece of dialogue in every rpg i fucking tried and it was always, ALWAYS, pointless bullshit that didnt matter
my decisions didnt matter, the things npcs talked about didnt matter
the other rpgs are just as bad with their role playing as dark souls, except they pretend they arent AND have shitty gampeplay to top it off
>No, it doesn't. GTA games are linear as it gets.
You're locked out of certain areas until you do a certain thing. GTA operates the same way. Until you've done a certain amount of missions you're locked out from parts of the world map.
>Who was the idiot who said that RPGs need to have focus on story and dialogues?
They certainly don't focus on beating up monsters in action-based combat, because that's what action games do. Is Devil May Cry an RPG too?
RPGs as a whole were founded because some wargaming nerd wanted to make a wargame that was smaller in focus, where the players could create characters with their own personalities and stories and roleplay them.
>i have read every fucking piece of dialogue in every rpg i fucking tried and it was always, ALWAYS, pointless bullshit that didnt matter
I very much doubt that you've played a lot of RPGs.
>the other rpgs
Dark Souls is not an RPG.
>just as bad with their role playing as dark souls, except they pretend they arent AND have shitty gampeplay to top it off
Except for the part where they're actual RPGs. What you want is not an RPG but an action game.
>RPGs have to be bioware dialogue-fests
role playing games on computers were about building characters for combat since the very beginning; tabletop-style character roleplaying was introduced later.
It's not just that. The focus was cooperative storytelling and non-combat player-world interaction.
In Dark Souls you barely interact with the world beyond hitting things.
And keep in mind: I'm not even saying that it's a bad game, however, as an RPG it's lacking.
Dark Souls has great lore. A lot of hidden areas. Tons of different builds to try. Rare yet meaningful interactions with NPCs. Enemies, especially bosses, have terrific designs. Great world-building. A lot of little things that add to your immersion(such as the lack of music, NPCs or the way that the enemies behave)and are lacking in other games.
Better question would be, what Morrowind has to offer aside from endless texts and a boring combat?In my opinion a good game should be able to convey the majority of its feelings through gameplay and while Dark Souls manages to do it, Morrowind fails miserable. Morrowind tries to convey what it wants through huge amounts of texts, which is boring and could be managed in a book.
In Dark Souls I had a harder time against common enemies in areas in which they can ambush you than against bosses.
The archers of anor londo, or the crystal dudes + the channelers in the library of Seath.
The hardest boss for me was Bed of Chaos, and it isnt a real boss, it is a stage hazard.
shiit boi you have chosen the worst person to fucking doubt because all my friends and my freakin brother love rpgs.
I have tried almost every popular one in existence and even some niche ones.
So now that we got that out of the way, are you willing to admit that role playing games are shit with shit stories that are always generic and play out like they are written by 12 year olds who watches lord of the rings once and then made all character interaction in every rpg ever
Mind you, story based games with some nice small rpg turn based combat are great, and usually well writen
I am talking specifically about real time role playing games and how shit they are (since the shitty gameplay isnt redeemed by their shitty stories)
Even these games usually had much more intricate player-world interaction. Not to mention that the rudimentary first steps don't necessarily define a genre. In the beginning, singular people tried to emulate RPG game functionality on computer systems and various solutions were found. It took quite a few years until a sufficient solution was found, and arguably we haven't found a fully pleasing one up to this day.
I disagree there. There are games out there with more intricate RPG elements which also feature action-based combat, e.g. Fallout: New Vegas or the Gothic series.
Aren't these action RPGs?
>I have tried almost every popular one in existence and even some niche ones.
Name some titles then.
>I am talking specifically about real time role playing games and how shit they are (since the shitty gameplay isnt redeemed by their shitty stories)
Like what? Like Baldur's Gate 2? Planescape: Torment? These games take place in real time.
Except in a lot of ways whole genres of RPGs never developed the character roleplaying side. Like how many JRPGs have virtually no choices or even dialogue options.
RPGs as they developed in videogames never had story roleplaying as a crucial part
the only reason I finished dark souls 2 was because I couldn't stand the idea of saying that I couldn't beat it, had the game not been such a popular game I would probably have dropped it a long time ago, smelter demon round 2 can go fuck himself
>You're locked out of certain areas until you do a certain thing.
I'm not talking about this. I'm talking about the way that the games are played. Missions in GTA are played and completed in a linear fashion, while the same isn't true for Dark Souls due to the different paths, builds, optional areas and the gameplay that it has.
>They certainly don't focus on beating up monsters in action-based combat,
You don't seem to know what the concept of role play means. If the game provides useful tools for you to enter in the head of the character and become more immersive in the world, then it's probably closer to be a RPG than a game that doesn't do this. Like, can you kill an important NPC in GTA?Or experiment with different kinds of builds/playstyles?Or create your own character?Or ignore a bunch of areas of the story?You can do these things in Dark Souls.
Story was never a requirement in RPGs, it just seemed that way because most games in the 90's didn't have gameplays that were good enough to carry the game. There's games like Temple of elemental evil or Icewind Dale, which are based on D&D, that have barely any focus in story or characters and are mainly about combat/mechanics.
I have stopped playing nearly all video games because they have no depth or the core mechanic is boring. The last games I enjoyed playing recently were Bloodbourne, Dwarf Fortress and Monster Rancher 2. No game, save for multiplayer ones, has made me want to go back and play it after I've beaten it since the PS1 era. I consider well made super metroid romhacks better games than triple A titles. I can't tell if the quality of products available to this hobby has declined or if I became an adult.
JRPGs are more of an offshoot of western computer RPGs than they are an attempt to emulate tabletop RPG systems. They are to be judged entirely differently since they don't attempt to be RPGs in the classic sense.
Not to mention that all kinds of other experiments were made, for example party based RPGs, which present the player a full party of various characters, often already somewhat defined characters who interact with the world, putting the player in the position of someone "directing" an RPG party rather than being in charge of a singular character within one.
There is no definitive solution.
However, I'd still say that in the case of Dark Souls we still have a game that most of all wants to be a good action game rather than an RPG.
There is barely any point into playing any Mario game besides 64 and SMB3.
I would stop playing any MOBA even If I ever considered getting and/or getting into it. Just, never.
Deus Ex is praised for its mechanics, but the level design is abhorrent, no matter what's said.
I make an extensive usage of options. If the possible shitposter/baiter uses anime pictures, report and sage.
Mobile gamers are to gaming what those kids with small electric powered toy cars are to driving.
Most 8 to 16-bit games are pretty bad, and their standards were worse compared to nowadays in certain, yet most cases.
Despite the quality of a game, if it's too pricey or I haven't seen a review or honest opinion on it, I won't buy it.
Except "RPGs in the classic sense" is a moot point, because the earliest vidya RPGs were coming out like 10 years after tabletop RPGs began at all. Within the context of videogames, there's a history of RPG games with no story focus, going as far back as the 70s, and they're based all around character builds and stats.
>I'd still say that in the case of Dark Souls we still have a game that most of all wants to be a good action game rather than an RPG.
Souls games are some of the most immersive experiences I've had in gaming. For me, the lack of dialogue, hand-holding or a clear goal just adds more to its status of role play game, instead of removing like you are implying.
>Missions in GTA are played and completed in a linear fashion, while the same isn't true for Dark Souls due to the different paths, builds, optional areas and the gameplay that it has.
In San Andreas you could skill your character differently and you didn't need to visit every location either. There were all kinds of side-quests which you didn't need to finish.
>If the game provides useful tools for you to enter in the head of the character and become more immersive in the world, then it's probably closer to be a RPG than a game that doesn't do this.
My point is: the game doesn't focus a whole lot on the whole role playing aspect. It's there to some extent, but most of all you run around and hit things.
>Like, can you kill an important NPC in GTA?
Is there an important NPC in Dark Souls? In my experience there were very few NPCs and none of them were essential for anything. They barely had anything to say and it didn't make a big difference whether you killed them or not.
>Or experiment with different kinds of builds/playstyles?
As I said earlier: if Dark Souls didn't have the stats but relied on defining a build via equipment only it would still largely be the same game. The stats are not vital for the experience.
>Or create your own character? Or ignore a bunch of areas of the story? You can do these things in Dark Souls.
You can do it in San Andreas too. You can get a different hair cut, you can invest skill points, you can even eat lots of fast food to become fat. Or work out to become tough, etc.
me too, I find the w3 combat so shit and frustratingly bad, that I enjoy more the combat from the first game
>I would stop playing any MOBA even If I ever considered getting and/or getting into it. Just, never.
what? I seriously cant understand what you mean here.
Because that's the most straightforward solution. These games were made by college students in their spare time, often as experiments. They weren't made with the idea "this is what an RPG is supposed to be". Not to mention that mechanically, they wouldn't be classified as RPGs, they'd be tabletop war games, like Chainmail, since the definitive aspects of what defined D&D in contrast to the war games that came before simply weren't there.
I don't doubt that.
It reminded me a lot of System Shock 2 for example, which I wouldn't classify as an RPG either, even though it has classes, stats and skills, simply because you run around alone all the time and try to survive somehow.
>getting hate on /v/
... I never remembered it getting hammered? Not even on release. It's literally a board favourite.
Too much time consuming and, uh, not as fun as other genres of online games.
I'd take something like WoW over that all day any day. Not battling over and over in small arenas.
The thing I'd lose is good commerce and money making. I'd like to make money from shit like CSGO.
I got so fucking buttmad about MGSV that I lost most of my interest in vidya.
No games coming out interest me and I just feel apathetic when playing vidya.
Like something in my brain had flipped and as soon as I launch a game I just have this feeling of waiting for the game to get good. But it never does.
What do I do /v/? How do I fix this?
Take time off and play the easily-enjoyable classics.
Play some FPS like the first Half Life, FEAR, platforming like Super Mario Bros. 3, pirate Minecraft and download comfy maps and go into server communities, etc.
>people actually think souls combat is any good
how many fucking games do you play? morrowind and witcher are shit but souls is barely any better
if you honestly believe souls is the best combat in ARPGs then you don't play many games
I pretty much did. I haven't really played anything in the last 3 months.
Though I probably should dust off some of the stuff that made me fall in love vidya. The PC port of FF9 is coming sometime soon so I should probably give that a go. One of the comfiest games I played.
>you didn't need to visit every location either.
You've to complete all missions in the game, otherwise the story won't advance. In Dark Souls you can literally ignore half of the game if you want. Depths, Ash Lake, Painted World, Lower Undead burg, Dark Anor Londo are all completely optional areas. Not to mention that you can skip more than 12 of the 24 bosses that the game has. And please, don't compare the ''different playstyles'' in San Andreas with Souls games, that's grasping at straws.
>My point is: the game doesn't focus a whole lot on the whole role playing aspect. It's there to some extent
Like I said, only if you have a limited view on what RPG means. A game like GTA will never be a RPG to me because I'm not roleplaying anything. My character already has a defined personality, a defined name and a defined objective. The game tells where I've to go and MC himself will say to me what he wants to do, meaning that I've no much input on what's going on.
>Is there an important NPC in Dark Souls? In my experience there were very few NPCs and none of them were essential for anything.
That's the whole point. There's many NPCs in Souls games that are useful and may have interesting arcs or dialogues, but none of them are required to clear the game. Hence, you can kill all of them and still complete the story. GTA lets you attack random pedestrians, but you can't lay a finger on any NPC that gives missions or talks with you.
>Dark Souls didn't have the stats but relied on defining a build via equipment only it would still largely be the same game.
First, that isn't true at all. Second, the weapons in Dark Souls actually change your play style and how you approach the game, instead of just changing your stats like it's the case with the vast majority of RPGs.
>You can do it in San Andreas too.
No, you can't. You're forced to play as CJ, a character with defined background, personality and behavior, no matter what you do.
>You've to complete all missions in the game, otherwise the story won't advance.
No, there are missions which you don't need to complete.
Also: optional content does not define an RPG.
>My character already has a defined personality, a defined name and a defined objective. The game tells where I've to go and MC himself you say to me what he wants to do, meaning that I've no much input on what's going on.
The point remains that your character's personality is mostly something taking place in your head. This is true for all RPGs to some extent, but most RPGs offer you the opportunity to make your personality known here and there through player-world interaction in the sense of solving a quest in a certain fashion or giving certain dialogue answers and so on.
In Dark Souls there's barely anything of it.
The game is 99.9% beating up monsters.
Refer to what I said before about GTA being a flight simulator due to being able to fly planes. It obviously isn't a flight simulator because it doesn't focus a lot on it.
>First, that isn't true at all. Second, the weapons in Dark Souls actually change your play style and how you approach the game, instead of just changing your stats like it's the case with the vast majority of RPGs.
In good RPGs the build defines the experience. However, you do more than just beat up monsters there. In Dark Souls most of the experience is about the beating up monsters and the beating up monster part which makes up the vast majority of the game wouldn't be much different if your equipment defined your character rather than your build.
>You're forced to play as CJ, a character with defined background, personality and behavior, no matter what you do.
In that regard Dark Souls is more of an RPG, but it's an RPG in the sense of the character not getting in the way, rather than giving you lots of opportunities to act your character out.
The point is that Dark Souls has a much stronger combat focus. In both games I've mentioned you spend a lot of time talking to people, you travel through non-hostile territory, you can steal from people, sneak past enemies, you need to solve puzzles, you have multiple solutions to quests, etc. - there's a whole lot more to do.
In Dark Souls you literally run through hostile territory all the time, beating up monsters in the process in order to reach the next boss and trigger something so that a new area unlocks.
The role playing aspects are much less prominent.
>A game like GTA will never be a RPG to me
That guy wasn't saying that GTA was an RPG, dude. He was saying that San Andreas has just as many, if not more, RPG elements as Dark Souls. Since it's easy to see how absurd it would be to consider GTA an RPG, calling Souls an RPG is equally absurd.
nothing wrong in loving some yumy cocks
i made this webm of me playing today and i just wanted to share it in a dark souls thread since theres no webm thread
I've never played an mmo for more than an hour
I used to play fighting games but I stopped a few months ago after I got really salty one session from losing
I'm kind of tired of souls games but I still want to play ds3 on release. I wish it was coming out later so I'd have more of a break
I started playing Diablo 3 again and I've been enjoying myself even though I'm part of the Diablo 2 generation
I'm tired of soulsfags too, OP. We'll never get rid of them, though. It gives a false sense of accomplishment to casuals who think the game is difficult and there's always new casuals finding this game.
But those games do have bad combat.
Those games are developed with hitbox/combat as a side thought. They develop those games about the quests and dialogue options and loot tables.
The whole souls game development mantra is about movesets, hitboxes and animations for weapons. It's literally about the combat.
The good thing about those games is that this is then hooked further into a stat system that makes for very interesting role play and customisation ontop of a hands on combat scheme.
It's why the games are popular. You feel like you're good and really in control of your attacks instead of watching a movie play, and you get to then control how and what your damage and stuff does via stats and armour and rings and shit.
I only played Dark Souls just recently, but It was fantastic. Zweihander is some fun fucking shit.
Dark souls 2 was my first souls game. everyone shits on it but I really enjoy it.
I hate just about everything about DaS1. the levelling seems like it does nothing and it takes too many souls. the movement is shit, the combat is shit, the bosses are shit. everything.
Dark Lurker is arguably the best boss design wise and the greatest thing to come out of any souls game.
if you think that the strengths of Dark Souls don't lie in exploring the world and interacting with the people around you, then you need to go back and replay DaS
hint: the #1 demographic for trash like Vaati are people who never bothered talking to the NPCs or reading item descriptions (aka interacting with the world)
So i bought dark souls scholars of the first sin but returned it through steam when i realised i needed a controller. I recently bought a ps4 so i can now play pc games with a ps4 controller. Does it work the same as if i were using an xbox controller on dark souls?
enyone whant to help me with the roten in NG+1?
i whant the cript grate sword for my spooky build
This is retarded. It's still a relevant flaw even if it's not the single most important part of the game. Dark Souls has a garbage covenant system, should everyone just ignore that because it's just a small part of the game?
Dark Souls dodge mechanic is one of its biggest flaws though. It's not even a dodge, it's just a magic teleport with a rolling animation attached, the invincibility frames are ridiculous.
he literally spooks mei only fight him once and was the only boss that i kill with other persson so i never lern his moveset, now im scared
is funny because i easly kill freya in NG+ 2 but he spook the shit out of me
I love the Souls series but it's lore isn't anything special. It's the kind of thing you could make up for a solid tabletop campaign that uses the very familiar elements of traditional fantasy in a way that presents itself as not generic medieval fantasy campaign #999256.
It's overall individual storylines are very hit or miss, too many characters are too obtuse or all cackling oddballs to use as a crutch for actual characterization.
Dark Souls 1 was left with too many dangling plot threads while Dark Souls 2 shifted the focus from the Twilight of the Gods plot of 1 to the Age of Man aka Kings.
Bloodborne had the best atmosphere and most cohesive story of all the souls like games. You get a good set up, enough lore and small stories with some resolution and enough endings to satisfy basic plot resolution.
Combat is getting stale and repetitive and hopefully From will try a different style of combat for future games.
Dodging being shit is pretty standard too, and for all people praise Souls I expected it might have actually done something special with dodging. But it's just the same old 'dodge' right through an attack that games have stalled at. Dodging should be about avoiding the hitbox, not moving through it.
99% of the time if you're dodging to move through the hitbox you've fucked up. there are very, very few attacks in DaS and DaS2 that can't be avoided by dodging away from the hitbox instead of tanking with iframes. in fact, doing this is usually more consistent than trying to dodge through the attack
there is literally nothing wrong with dodging through the hitbox
>b-but muh realism
games aren't meant to be realistic, they're meant to be fun and thrilling. do you bitch about not getting 1hko by literally every move that connects? guarantee that you shouldn't be surviving a blow from a giant sword, axe, or arrow, no matter how glancing