@Syzygy#12179
So the games fail in showing this to the vast majority of the players then. I disagree with you BTW but if I agreed the devs failed to make it obvious to players.
on the other hand, a “by any means necessary” method of getting through the game that syzygy alludes to is also an interesting and of course valid read on the games+themes
@CidNight Are you considering “punishment” (e.g., making the player repeat more than just the part that killed them as a consequence for getting killed) an aspect of “difficulty”? To me these are separate concepts. They could preserve the difficulty of these games while reducing the punishment for failure by simply adding more checkpoints, and I guess making fewer things consumable (like in DS1 there‘s an item you have to consume to fight ghosts–if you don’t get through the area in a few tries, you have to drop everything and buy more, which you may or may not even be able to do yet!).
IIRC, the original version of Devil May Cry 3 sent you all the way back to the start of the Mission if you died, even at a boss. Then in DMC3 Special Edition they added checkpoints in logical places, like outside boss rooms. I don't think that affected the "difficulty" of the game, it just made it so more of the player's time was spent learning, rather than meaninglessly repeating content.
To me, the fact that Sekiro *isn''t'* very punishing but still very challenging suggests to me that From considered the punishment an essential aspect of Souls and Bloodborne--I just don't understand why, or why people enjoy that aspect specifically.
@Lacquerware#12270 Hmm… It‘s an interesting question. I don’t know that requiring a player to trek through some of the level before getting back to a boss after death is necessarily punishing, if it is done thoughtfully and meaningfully. I would say that Dark Souls is a mixed bag on this. There are definitely some places where the bonfire is straight up way too far from a boss fog gate. The trek to the Capra Demon in DSI is the one that comes immediately to mind. Other times, clever shortcuts allow for the games to use a single bonfire to serve as a hub for an entire area and still preserve a reasonable run-back to the boss. A good example of this I think is the Grand Archives in DS3 and Hemwick Charnel Lane in BB.
I'm of the opinion that From got better at this gradually over the course of years rather than figuring it out all at once in Sekiro. Each progressive game is less punishing in this way, I think. Simultaneously, the bosses have gotten harder in each game thus making the quick iteration so much more important and satisfying. This is a pretty polarizing topic in the Dark Souls community, as a lot of people hate that the later games would often just drop a bonfire right outside a fog gate, rather than relying on the interconnected world like the one seen in DSI. I'm on your side, I think, in that I prefer to have it be a 20-second or less runback pretty much always.
It's funny you bring up the temporary curse items in New Londo Ruins in contrast with Sekiro. I actually thought Sekiro was more punishing in this aspect.
I also found that segment frustrating at first, but quickly discovered that in Dark Souls they did the friendly thing and made the ghosts in New Londo drop the item you need pretty often. This is in contrast to Sekiro, where there are tons of enemies that you can barely damage at all without having divine confetti - and they don't give you divine confetti hardly at all until the very late game when you can buy it or upgrade weapons with that as a passive.
>bonfire placement
Yeah I just don‘t get why the designers wouldn’t think, by default, “Here's a boss fight that will likely kill many players at least a few times, so there should be a checkpoint right outside,” which was the norm in games at the time of Demon‘s Souls. Presumably this was a very deliberate choice, but the fact that SOME bosses have lenient checkpoints makes it all the more mystifying. Even in cases where there are shortcuts, I don’t see how having to repeat a twenty-second run through the environment to reattempt the challenge at hand serves the experience, unless the point of the experience is to feel bad'.
**>I’m of the opinion that From got better at this gradually over the course of years**
I had hoped this was the case after being disappointed that checkpoints were still such an issue in Bloodborne (Blood-Starved Beast and Micolash both made me shelf the game because I was so frustrated with the "time spent commuting":"time spent learning/fighting" ratio), but my initial experience with DS3 did not allay my frustration. I got as far as Vordt of the Boreal Valley, who I beat in like six tries, but those six tries took a really long time! It seems to continue to be case-by-case at best, except in Sekiro, which makes me think From drew a line in the sand with Sekiro--"Sekiro isn't about punishment, Dark Souls and Bloodborne are."
**>divine confetti**
I definitely agree this was bad--in fact, my least favorite thing about Sekiro--and it immediately reminded me of New Londo. (Tbh I'm not sure I successfully killed a single ghost before losing all my ghost juice.) BUT, I don't think it's actually "tons" of enemies. IIRC, only the Headless and the Shichimen Warriors, all of whom are optional bosses/enemies, require Divine Confetti. You CAN use it on other enemies but I don't recall ever relying on it, especially since there are other attack buffs.
But yeah, I did waste an entire night trying to fight a Headless whose cave I'd stumbled into, only to later Google it and realize I couldn't even hurt them yet, and this did give me a bad early impression of the game. I guess I owe a lot of the fun I had with Sekiro to the internet. Hunting all the Headless was actually a really fun late-game side task, but only because Confetti became purchasable for negligible cost and the game had really generous fast-travel.
What I really want to do is play through the Souls games and Bloodborne with a veteran player in my ear telling me what to do and what not to do, lmao.
@Lacquerware#12279 I think all of these feelings are really valid. Demon‘s Souls had the worst runs to bosses. One bonfire per level! They were really dedicated to that idea that there was precisely one archstone per area to their detriment. Blood Starved Beast, Micolash, and Vordt are probably three of the worst offenders in the series - and all in the latter games. I suppose this undercuts my argument quite a bit! Haha, oh well. I can do the run from the Old Yharnam lamp to the Blood Starved Beast like a damned speedrunner - dropping from ledges to clip the next ledge just enough to not take damage as you land below, and such. I don’t want to play the games that way - you just have to for bosses that have bad run backs. I just generally agree with you that if the games dropped a bonfire/lamp directly outside the fog gate of every boss in every game - I would find that quite friendly and enjoyable.
Part of this, I suspect, is Fromsoft wanting these to feel like real places. The bonfire right outside the fog gate can sometimes be a little immersion breaking, I guess? Like usually bonfires exist in places that make sense, in world. Putting a bonfire at the bottom of that big staircase right outside Vordt in DS3 would probably feel a little weird. Why not put one in the church at the top of the stairs instead? Oh wait - there IS one there, but it doesn't appear until you beat the Dancer like 20 hours later.
Having an experienced player to be able to either play with or have a text chain going with is awesome. I played through Dark Souls I for the first time voice chatting with one of my best friends who was a super seasoned player of the game. He had a blast watching somebody fumble through the game, and it was great to get feedback from him in real time. My very favorite thing to do in these games now is to toss down my summon sign outside really tough bosses and be one of those random summons that _doesn't_ suck.
is there some way to break off these tangents into new threads? Feeling guilty for may part in fucking up several threads in the past couple of weeks alone. Very sorry, going to talk to my pastor about thjs
@CidNight Haha yeah, the realism/immersion angle kind of goes out the window when lamps/bonfires just appear out of nowhere after you beat a boss (is that how it works with Bonfires? Can‘t actually remember.). Besides, that sounds like designing the mechanics around the window dressing, when I feel like it should be the other way around? Like, if it’s unrealistic to have a bonfire in every place where it's logical to have a checkpoint, how about making something other than a bonfire the checkpoint?
I still want to enjoy these games so bad, and I'm sure they're super fun once you know all the ins and outs and are awesome at them. But when I think of how much time I'd have to spend figuring them out on my own, simply because the checkpoints are (imo arbitrarily) mean, it becomes very hard to justify the investment.
The trouble with summoning, at least in my experience with Bloodborne, is that it's hard to find someone who's just the right level for you. Most of my co-op partners either died very quickly or were so strong that they completely dragged me. But yeah, playing while chatting with a seasoned player sounds like the ideal experience to me, which, to be fair, is the only way I was able to get into some games I *do* like, like Monster Hunter.
@yeso Yeah I was just thinking that as well. Sorry, everyone. FWIW I did try to steer it towards Super Metroid!
@Lacquerware#12289 Yeah that‘s a real good point about bonfires and lamps that just emerge from the dead carcass of whatever fool you’ve just curb-stomped with an eight foot long sword. I suppose I was trying to play devil‘s advocate. It’s possible that bonfire locations are just not as deeply thought out as I like to think!
Bloodborne does have a very generous level window for summoning. I think it's 20 levels in either direction. This has the benefit of meaning it's much easier to find someone to summon/be summoned - but definitely has the side effect that you could get someone who is pretty drastically under over over leveled for what you're working on.
Something I'd love to see in Elden Ring: a way to choose to just respawn directly in front of a damn fog door while I make attempts on a boss
Huh, I was going to contribute a few games I can‘t stand here but then I talked myself out of disliking a bunch of them! I guess what I mean is that I don’t like playing a bunch of very popular games, but it's hard for me to have an emotion about them as strong as dislike. Also, there are a few games that while I enjoy them on paper, the discourse around them (in a variety of ways) makes me nope out on them. Dark Souls etc. is in this category for me.
There are a few games that were reviewed extremely highly and that friends of mine LOVE lately that for whatever reason I could just never get into:
**Into the Breach**: I like these kinds of turn based games quite a bit! Advance Wars and Fire Emblem are two big favourites of mine, but for some reason Into the Breach just didn't grab me. I'm still not sure if it's because of the pacing, the writing, the setting, or whatever.
**Invisible Inc.**: Again, usually love these sorts of games, and at least one acquaintance of mine considers this their absolute favourite. I've tried playing it a few times, and bounced off of it. Unlike the last game, I know 100% why I didn't enjoy it-- It just felt a lot more fiddly than I wanted it to be, and (this makes me sound like an old person) I had trouble identifying all of the on-screen objects successfully. I want to like it! I just didn't.
Oh, here's one that I feel like I have to give a disclaimer for! I'm not saying it's a bad game, I just never enjoyed it. I don't care for **Kingdom Hearts**! I tried the first game years ago, and it didn't impress me. I'm not a fan of Disney stuff, I didn't care for the aesthetic, and the gameplay was bland and kinda boring.
Also, I completely agree with @exodus about a bunch of stuff, but mostly **God of War** and **Witcher 3**. I was turned off by the first GoW game when it first came out, and its casual approach to brutal violence, and I haven't really softened on that, to the point where I never played the newer one that everyone raved over. As for Witcher 3, I tried playing it twice now-- my partner enjoys it, so we have a copy around. I just didn't find the gameplay to be fun at all, and the setting and characters were bland and unlikeable. I do enjoy watching my partner play though, I so that's something I guess!
@Syzygy#12324 Or if you personally rammed a coiled sword through their burning pile of dead meat where once resided a consciousness. That would rule.
I’ve read about that feature before and, while it sounds pretty cool, I think it would have broken the flow of the game in weird, hard to predict ways. The Souls games are so meticulously crafted - I think any freedom you give to players to alter the level design is a freedom for them to fudge it up.
@Syzygy#12324 oh hell yeah… I really hope Elden Ring will feature some interesting new ways to freshen up these gameplay concepts. Carving your way through an open world and creating your own sanctuaries throughout it would be really cool
@Karasu#12311 +1 for Witcher 3, though I‘m not sure what constitutes giving it a fair chance. I played about four hours of it and nothing about it grabbed me at all 
I was playing in Polish for added immersion, but I think it resulted in greater fatigue since I had to read all the dialog (I don’t understand Polish) and there sure is a whole lotta dialog!
I guess the combat and stuff probably opens up a lot over time, but I have a low tolerance for open-world missions that mainly consist of going from point A to (a very far away) point B and talking. Also missions where you examine a scene by picking up various objects and saying something about each one. These feel like book things done more poorly than books!
TWIII is a weird one for me bc I agree with all these critiques except the characters being bland, and semi agree with the world being bland. I had a good time with it by turning off the music and focusing on the prosaic detail and just enjoyed doing mundane jobs and being enmeshed in the setting/atmosphere. The high fantasy stuff like the more peter jackson-looking environments and the main plotline with interdimensional elves was totally boring. But hanging around farms, villages, swamps and getting caught up in local intrigue (without an overbearing soundtrack) was great. I guess what I‘m saying is I liked it after I contorted the game into shenmue as much as possible. So maybe the best game I don’t like for the reasons it was well regarded, but do like it for other reasons. Incidentally, this is how I'm managing to enjoy cyberpunk as well
My problem witb CDPR‘s games (besides, you know, the glaringly obvious ones) is that I don’t want to play a 100+ hour rpg where I‘m forced to play as a character that I don’t like. Geralt is like the exact opposite person I want to role play as.
I love Geralt but am very ready for W4 to transition away from him. Put Ciri in, coach.
@MichaelDMcGrath#12392 yeah I can sympathize. I personally wasn’t crazy the character initially, but the writing I think does the kiryu thing where they know he's ridiculous as a macho power fantasy and play off of that while indulging in semi-seriousness from time to time. So at the end of the day I like polish edgar winter
Yakuza 0.
**Why I didn't like it:**
This year starting in April I played Yakuza 0, Judgement, Kiwami 1, Kiwami 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and then Like a Dragon. Tons of friends had been encouraging my partner and I for years to dive into the series, and when we asked "where to start?" the answer was a unanimous "start with 0!" So we did... and we loathed it. The game was a slog. While some story moments were a amazing and top tier, it felt like a lot of moments were deeply based in people who previously loved the series getting new content. I found the pacing of the game monumentally jarring as well, and would have been better served as playing through each protag's full story THEN doing the other's to their crossover point. It felt like every time I got hyped about the thread someone was on it stopped called and swapped to the other protag and it was mind boggling. It also feels like a nitpick but within a game where a mainline story mission is "here's a gun, shoot a TON of people" that an emotional moment is based around "no don't cross that line and kill someone!" which later we found out was a ha-ha joke in the fandom how that character never kills despite the violence.
A lot of people also told us some of the best bits were the side quests so we went thru almost all of them, and some were real bad. Especially everything to do with the Pleasure King, which was wild as several friends who are trans recommended the game to us and when i asked about it said they never went into that side quest bit. (Later entries into the series are... better about this, not perfect but definitely leagues above.)
Lastly, there's this ending bit for MajimaI cannot **so big spoilers** here - Sagawa being an inspiration to Majima, when he was just awful the whole game is mind boggling weird. He gets killed off-camera moments after his scene with Majima... when they could have done it on screen and by Shimano's hand and it would have beautifully tied up several themes and narrative threads and further cement that Shimano has no loyalty but to his own power and is still a threat to Majima's life. Nishitani should have been the one watching Majima in Sotenbori, inspired him by his death, and Sagawa should have just been an antagonist trying to get Majima to slip up so he could off him for Shimano. They made it fundamentally messier than it had to be, and I assumed it was for some character involvement later in the series but no! This still keeps me awake at night. Who was story editing here, what happened?
I feel I'd have had a better time with the game had I jumped back to it after Kiwami 1 or 2, or any of the later games. So many moments in retrospect are to give fans some more time with characters that didn't get a lot in other games, and that's fine, but as the opening volley to the world it almost made me quit the series immediately.
**Why I know Its Good:**
This is a game with an over the top soap opera story of Yakuza with absolutely top tier facial animation even compared to stuff that has come out today. The voice acting is above and beyond. The "sheer amount of stuff" is overwhelmingly good. As an origin story for Kiryu it does a lot to humanize him a bit more than the mainline games as he's not already THE paragon/top of the heap in terms of "ideal yakuza. " It was also the easiest obtainable starting point for the series for a long while. As the Remasters had not been released yet, and not everything was available on PC. 0 was the best/easiest to point to. Also Pocket Circuit. How can you not love Pocket Circuit.