How many combos do you actually use in Bayonetta?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

Phoenixmgs:

hanselthecaretaker:
I get what you're saying, but for the most part this seems like an agree to disagree thing. I've never thought of free movement with shield raised being a problem. I've had lock on be finicky with enemies around a corner too, but then again...they were around a corner.

That video was a legit targeting issue though, which should've easily been patched out. Only solution would be to not try to lock on until you're in the same room as the intended target.

I don't see how a game not letting me do something I want to do due to the controls is not a control issue. That exact scenario may have been patched out, but the core issue causing it wasn't patched out. It's kinda hard to wait to get into the same room to lock-on to specific enemies considering the enemy isn't waiting for you to get in the room to attack and the fact that enemy attacks also go through walls.

I could say the same thing about Bayonetta or practically any other game. It sounds like this is more a case of your gaming tastes being predefined and an unwillingness to adapt to anything outside of that mold.

I will agree though that the clipping issues in Souls are far too sloppy, especially when compared to the rest of the games' attention to detail.

Phoenixmgs:

Dirty Hipsters:
You know, if you hit the dodge button without a direction input your character does a back step.

Your problem is literally solved with a single button press as there is a back step button.

Literally name 1 other game that does shield controls like Dark Souls, just one. No other game does it because it doesn't work.

It's been years since I've played a game in the series, so I'm not sure about the controls in the newest ones in the franchise, but I think Monster Hunter does something similar. I remember the first time I played Dark Souls thinking that the controls are kinda similar.

Devil May Cry 3 is the only one of these games I can almost completely get behind. Beat levels eight and nine again yesterday. The cutscenes are better and don't overstay their welcome like the long-ass frequent ones in Bayonetta, the story and characters are better, the atmosphere is far stronger, the music is better, the bosses are good without relying on shitty QTEs and scene changes, and the gameplay is solid. Devil May Cry 4 was a stinking letdown and made me, for a while, not even want another Devil May Cry. Metal Gear Rising wasn't even good, DmC was mediocre and Bayonetta was okay. I also got bored of Ninja Gaiden Sigma (The world and story are so sterile.) and quit before my PS3 died. It's a bland genre overall. That's why I say it doesn't have much legitimacy.

Ezekiel:
Devil May Cry 3 is the only one of these games I can almost completely get behind. Beat levels eight and nine again yesterday. The cutscenes are better and don't overstay their welcome like the long-ass frequent ones in Bayonetta, the story and characters are better, the atmosphere is far stronger, the music is better, the bosses are good without relying on shitty QTEs and scene changes, and the gameplay is solid. Devil May Cry 4 was a stinking letdown and made me, for a while, not even want another Devil May Cry. Metal Gear Rising wasn't even good, DmC was mediocre and Bayonetta was okay. I also got bored of Ninja Gaiden Sigma (The world and story are so sterile.) and quit before my PS3 died. It's a bland genre overall. That's why I say it doesn't have much legitimacy.

Well I also find JRPGs, WRPGs, adventure games, sports games, FPS, TPS, RTS, 4X, flight sims, space sims, city sims, business sims, and a whole bunch of other genres to be bland boring, but that doesn't mean that they don't have much legitimacy, and it's not exactly a good reason to call a whole genre that.

I'm mostly sarcastic about the list of games if anyone can't tell.

Ezekiel:
I'm never gonna bother remembering them. I prefer slower paced combat systems with a limited number of immediate attacks, like in Ocarina of Time, Dark Souls and I guess Chivalry. Combos feel like fluff to me.

Bayonetta isn't what I had hoped. On top of being bland, there are too many long cutscenes, for a story that's kind of shit so far.

Overall why did you bother play the game in the first place, kinda foolish for you to have prior knowledge of the titles this game draws similarities from, knowing you didn't like those either?

-__- I wish this was posted on Reddit, so I down-vote your post into oblivion...

hanselthecaretaker:
I could say the same thing about Bayonetta or practically any other game. It sounds like this is more a case of your gaming tastes being predefined and an unwillingness to adapt to anything outside of that mold.

I will agree though that the clipping issues in Souls are far too sloppy, especially when compared to the rest of the games' attention to detail.

The shield controls are quite shit. This video @ 16:30 demonstrates the shield controls are indeed poorly implemented. The video actually defends Dark Souls controls and saying that combat vs several enemies is in fact good. However, notice he states that he nor the other good player he references use shields in such and such specific fight. In fact, the little "pro" Souls gameplay I've seen, they don't use shields either. I wonder why these people don't use shields. Is it perhaps the shield controls have issues? The reason Matthewmatosis, who's "Dark Souls 2 critique" is referenced heavily for about 5 minutes or so, complains about fighting several enemies at once is because the game doesn't allow him to properly shield without lock-on. If you could simply strafe and backstep with a raised shield w/o lock-on, I'm pretty sure Matthewmatosis wouldn't have nearly the same issue with the combat as he obviously did. That's why he wants to lock-on, not to indeed lock-on to an enemy but for the controls the lock-on affords. I completely agree that you can fight multiple enemies just fine in a Souls game but you can't with a shield playstyle, the games are all about the dodge in that instance. That's why I consider Bloodborne to be leaps and bounds the best in the series due to the game basically removing what didn't work (from shields to an overly cumbersome weapon upgrade system to poorly implemented RPG stats), the combat being the most fun and satisfying doesn't hurt either.

Ezekiel:
Devil May Cry 3 is the only one of these games I can almost completely get behind. Beat levels eight and nine again yesterday. The cutscenes are better and don't overstay their welcome like the long-ass frequent ones in Bayonetta, the story and characters are better, the atmosphere is far stronger, the music is better, the bosses are good without relying on shitty QTEs and scene changes, and the gameplay is solid. Devil May Cry 4 was a stinking letdown and made me, for a while, not even want another Devil May Cry. Metal Gear Rising wasn't even good, DmC was mediocre and Bayonetta was okay. I also got bored of Ninja Gaiden Sigma (The world and story are so sterile.) and quit before my PS3 died. It's a bland genre overall. That's why I say it doesn't have much legitimacy.

I played Bayonetta for those exact opposite reasons. I never dug the world of DMC enough to want to play the game. Also, DMC4 is considered the best combat system in the series by many fans.

Phoenixmgs:

Ezekiel:
Devil May Cry 3 is the only one of these games I can almost completely get behind. Beat levels eight and nine again yesterday. The cutscenes are better and don't overstay their welcome like the long-ass frequent ones in Bayonetta, the story and characters are better, the atmosphere is far stronger, the music is better, the bosses are good without relying on shitty QTEs and scene changes, and the gameplay is solid. Devil May Cry 4 was a stinking letdown and made me, for a while, not even want another Devil May Cry. Metal Gear Rising wasn't even good, DmC was mediocre and Bayonetta was okay. I also got bored of Ninja Gaiden Sigma (The world and story are so sterile.) and quit before my PS3 died. It's a bland genre overall. That's why I say it doesn't have much legitimacy.

I played Bayonetta for those exact opposite reasons. I never dug the world of DMC enough to want to play the game. Also, DMC4 is considered the best combat system in the series by many fans.

The only big thing DMC4 added to the combat was changing styles on the fly, which I found convoluted. I also didn't like that you now had three weapons on each trigger. It changed switching from a toggle to a cycle. DMC4 blew it when it came to atmosphere, writing, cutscenes, characters and backtracking. It also had too many damn aerial enemies for combat that wasn't all that suited too it. I hated the ghosts that waited in the walls. Few of the enemies were entertaining. The dice games and gyro blades sucked. The music was duller. The game had too few bosses because of the lazy backtracking. You fight the bosses three times throughout the campaign. Nero didn't have enough moves and with Dante it's easy to forget which style is active. You don't spend enough of the story as either character to really feel comfortable with them. Dante looks terrible with his cowboy belts and shoes and multiple torso belts. I also preferred the weapons in DMC3 over the ones you got in 4.

They changed Lady from a cool looking gothic girl to a generic babe. All her vulnerability vanished.

http://www.mobygames.com/images/shots/l/236519-devil-may-cry-3-dante-s-awakening-special-edition-windows.jpg

http://orig03.deviantart.net/1ee2/f/2009/053/5/5/lady_dmc2_by_ar_0.jpg

Phoenixmgs:

hanselthecaretaker:
I could say the same thing about Bayonetta or practically any other game. It sounds like this is more a case of your gaming tastes being predefined and an unwillingness to adapt to anything outside of that mold.

I will agree though that the clipping issues in Souls are far too sloppy, especially when compared to the rest of the games' attention to detail.

The shield controls are quite shit. This video @ 16:30 demonstrates the shield controls are indeed poorly implemented. The video actually defends Dark Souls controls and saying that combat vs several enemies is in fact good. However, notice he states that he nor the other good player he references use shields in such and such specific fight. In fact, the little "pro" Souls gameplay I've seen, they don't use shields either. I wonder why these people don't use shields. Is it perhaps the shield controls have issues? The reason Matthewmatosis, who's "Dark Souls 2 critique" is referenced heavily for about 5 minutes or so, complains about fighting several enemies at once is because the game doesn't allow him to properly shield without lock-on. If you could simply strafe and backstep with a raised shield w/o lock-on, I'm pretty sure Matthewmatosis wouldn't have nearly the same issue with the combat as he obviously did. That's why he wants to lock-on, not to indeed lock-on to an enemy but for the controls the lock-on affords. I completely agree that you can fight multiple enemies just fine in a Souls game but you can't with a shield playstyle, the games are all about the dodge in that instance. That's why I consider Bloodborne to be leaps and bounds the best in the series due to the game basically removing what didn't work (from shields to an overly cumbersome weapon upgrade system to poorly implemented RPG stats), the combat being the most fun and satisfying doesn't hurt either.

Fair enough, but at the same time, no shield/guard combat is designed for fighting multiple enemies, as demonstrated here in this mess for example.

And if it is, it has to cheat to do so ala action games like God of War, DMC, etc., where you simply hold a shoulder button to automatically block any attack from any direction. It doesn't even matter if you're facing the direction of an attack since it'll still block if your character hasn't yet spun around to face it.

I'm not as good as I used to be, but technically you should have one combo for each section; taunting and using dodge offset link your aggressive moves into one long combo.

I find it easiest to dodge offset with the standard guns as some enemies will jump back so you miss with some of the other weapons.

Phoenixmgs:

hanselthecaretaker:
I could say the same thing about Bayonetta or practically any other game. It sounds like this is more a case of your gaming tastes being predefined and an unwillingness to adapt to anything outside of that mold.

I will agree though that the clipping issues in Souls are far too sloppy, especially when compared to the rest of the games' attention to detail.

The shield controls are quite shit. This video @ 16:30 demonstrates the shield controls are indeed poorly implemented. The video actually defends Dark Souls controls and saying that combat vs several enemies is in fact good. However, notice he states that he nor the other good player he references use shields in such and such specific fight. In fact, the little "pro" Souls gameplay I've seen, they don't use shields either. I wonder why these people don't use shields. Is it perhaps the shield controls have issues? The reason Matthewmatosis, who's "Dark Souls 2 critique" is referenced heavily for about 5 minutes or so, complains about fighting several enemies at once is because the game doesn't allow him to properly shield without lock-on. If you could simply strafe and backstep with a raised shield w/o lock-on, I'm pretty sure Matthewmatosis wouldn't have nearly the same issue with the combat as he obviously did. That's why he wants to lock-on, not to indeed lock-on to an enemy but for the controls the lock-on affords. I completely agree that you can fight multiple enemies just fine in a Souls game but you can't with a shield playstyle, the games are all about the dodge in that instance. That's why I consider Bloodborne to be leaps and bounds the best in the series due to the game basically removing what didn't work (from shields to an overly cumbersome weapon upgrade system to poorly implemented RPG stats), the combat being the most fun and satisfying doesn't hurt either.

By "pro" souls players do you mean speed-runners?

I'll tell you why they don't use shields, because shield gameplay is slower. In a speed-run you don't want to waste time equipping something you don't need, and if you've played the game long enough to be able to beat it in an hour you sure as hell aren't going to use a shield because you don't plan on getting hit. Blocking with a shield is passive, and you don't have time to be passive in a speed-run. Also, speed-runners always two hand their weapon for the extra damage.

And like I said, you can in fact backstep with a shield without locking on. THERE'S A BUTTON SPECIFICALLY FOR IT. Stop pretending there isn't. Your criticism that you can't strafe without locking on is perfectly valid, there's no reason to straight up lie about missing features that are in fact in the game.

Ezekiel:
The only big thing DMC4 added to the combat was changing styles on the fly, which I found convoluted. I also didn't like that you now had three weapons on each trigger. It changed switching from a toggle to a cycle. DMC4 blew it when it came to atmosphere, writing, cutscenes, characters and backtracking. It also had too many damn aerial enemies for combat that wasn't all that suited too it. I hated the ghosts that waited in the walls. Few of the enemies were entertaining. The dice games and gyro blades sucked. The music was duller. The game had too few bosses because of the lazy backtracking. You fight the bosses three times throughout the campaign. Nero didn't have enough moves and with Dante it's easy to forget which style is active. You don't spend enough of the story as either character to really feel comfortable with them. Dante looks terrible with his cowboy belts and shoes and multiple torso belts. I also preferred the weapons in DMC3 over the ones you got in 4.

They changed Lady from a cool looking gothic girl to a generic babe. All her vulnerability vanished.

http://www.mobygames.com/images/shots/l/236519-devil-may-cry-3-dante-s-awakening-special-edition-windows.jpg

http://orig03.deviantart.net/1ee2/f/2009/053/5/5/lady_dmc2_by_ar_0.jpg

Like I said, I never got into DMC, never played any games in the series. I just know what I gathered from skimming forums and occasional Youtube vids. And from what I've gathered, DMC3 is the best overall game but DMC4 had the best combat system. I also saw/read somewhere that probably the best mod for DMC3 is the mod that allows for switching styles.

hanselthecaretaker:
Fair enough, but at the same time, no shield/guard combat is designed for fighting multiple enemies, as demonstrated here in this mess for example.

And if it is, it has to cheat to do so ala action games like God of War, DMC, etc., where you simply hold a shoulder button to automatically block any attack from any direction. It doesn't even matter if you're facing the direction of an attack since it'll still block if your character hasn't yet spun around to face it.

That's a fair bit different that say fighting 3-5 enemies. God of War and DMC aren't defensive combat games by any stretch, DMC doesn't really have a dedicated block.

Dirty Hipsters:
By "pro" souls players do you mean speed-runners?

I'll tell you why they don't use shields, because shield gameplay is slower. In a speed-run you don't want to waste time equipping something you don't need, and if you've played the game long enough to be able to beat it in an hour you sure as hell aren't going to use a shield because you don't plan on getting hit. Blocking with a shield is passive, and you don't have time to be passive in a speed-run. Also, speed-runners always two hand their weapon for the extra damage.

And like I said, you can in fact backstep with a shield without locking on. THERE'S A BUTTON SPECIFICALLY FOR IT. Stop pretending there isn't. Your criticism that you can't strafe without locking on is perfectly valid, there's no reason to straight up lie about missing features that are in fact in the game.

I don't watch speedruns. It's hard trying to find I guess "pro" Souls gameplay that isn't PvP or I just don't know the proper Youtube search terms to find it. It's more than just a backstep, it's the whole different movement suite of being able to toggle your general movement scheme by holding the shield button, I shouldn't need lock-on to switch my movement. That was also the reason why the Ring of Fog was patched because of lock-on. Just like a 3rd-person shooter when you press and hold the aim button, your movement scheme changes. Not to mention pressing back to go back is a lot more sensible and intuitive than pressing a face button to accomplish that. I've yet to see any Souls vids of anyone masterfully shielding without locking on.

Some people recommend to new Souls players to keep their shield up as they explore the hostile environments, because things can take you by surprise. Well, you can't do that if keeping your shield up prevents you from turning. You'll have to lower your shield, turn slightly and raise it again. I personally prefer strafing while in a defensive stance, but I understand the logic of letting you turn.

Phoenixmgs:

hanselthecaretaker:
Fair enough, but at the same time, no shield/guard combat is designed for fighting multiple enemies, as demonstrated here in this mess for example.

And if it is, it has to cheat to do so ala action games like God of War, DMC, etc., where you simply hold a shoulder button to automatically block any attack from any direction. It doesn't even matter if you're facing the direction of an attack since it'll still block if your character hasn't yet spun around to face it.

That's a fair bit different that say fighting 3-5 enemies. God of War and DMC aren't defensive combat games by any stretch, DMC doesn't really have a dedicated block.

Dirty Hipsters:
By "pro" souls players do you mean speed-runners?

I'll tell you why they don't use shields, because shield gameplay is slower. In a speed-run you don't want to waste time equipping something you don't need, and if you've played the game long enough to be able to beat it in an hour you sure as hell aren't going to use a shield because you don't plan on getting hit. Blocking with a shield is passive, and you don't have time to be passive in a speed-run. Also, speed-runners always two hand their weapon for the extra damage.

And like I said, you can in fact backstep with a shield without locking on. THERE'S A BUTTON SPECIFICALLY FOR IT. Stop pretending there isn't. Your criticism that you can't strafe without locking on is perfectly valid, there's no reason to straight up lie about missing features that are in fact in the game.

I don't watch speedruns. It's hard trying to find I guess "pro" Souls gameplay that isn't PvP or I just don't know the proper Youtube search terms to find it. It's more than just a backstep, it's the whole different movement suite of being able to toggle your general movement scheme by holding the shield button, I shouldn't need lock-on to switch my movement. That was also the reason why the Ring of Fog was patched because of lock-on. Just like a 3rd-person shooter when you press and hold the aim button, your movement scheme changes. Not to mention pressing back to go back is a lot more sensible and intuitive than pressing a face button to accomplish that. I've yet to see any Souls vids of anyone masterfully shielding without locking on.

The point still stands though, where if you're facing multiple enemies with a strafe mechanic, you have to vulnerably lower your shield to face them if you don't lock on.

Like Ezekiel said, the Souls games are as much if not more exploration-based than combat. The two often go hand-in-hand simultaneously. It sounds like you might have expected them to be designed like other action games where head-on combat is the primary focus, and a shield-strafe mechanic takes care of everything.

They were also marketed to be more difficult than they really are. After watching play tests, Miyazaki even went out of his way to tweak the games he directed away from being too difficult for the sake of it alone.

hanselthecaretaker:
The point still stands though, where if you're facing multiple enemies with a strafe mechanic, you have to vulnerably lower your shield to face them if you don't lock on.

Like Ezekiel said, the Souls games are as much if not more exploration-based than combat. The two often go hand-in-hand simultaneously. It sounds like you might have expected them to be designed like other action games where head-on combat is the primary focus, and a shield-strafe mechanic takes care of everything.

They were also marketed to be more difficult than they really are. After watching play tests, Miyazaki even went out of his way to tweak the games he directed away from being too difficult for the sake of it alone.

The point is the shield should already be lowered to regain stamina faster. If you just keep holding the shield up, the enemies will break your stamina or at best you'll barely have any stamina left to attack with.

I went in expecting every action needing to be calculated with regards to stamina management. I was quite disappointed by how simple the game and combat was and how little stamina management was required as stamina worked far more as your DPS limiter than something to actually manage. How is basically a dungeon crawl game about exploration first and foremost? Sure, the level design and atmosphere are the series' best aspects but you are also constantly fighting enemies. When you fight as much as you do in a Souls game, the combat should be damn good. I'd much prefer the Souls games to evolve to a survival horror based game where like 90% of the enemies are removed so that there's more tension concerning what's around the next corner because the enemies that would be left to fight are much sparser while being far more threatening than the average Souls enemy. Also, legit puzzles and a lot more environmental traps would be great. Then, the games would indeed be far more exploration based than they are now. The enemies in a Souls game are the trashiest (weakest) enemies in perhaps all of gaming; you can just run by them all, basic things like strafing (or the bow and arrow) break the game, etc.

The Souls games are easier from a skill perspective than most checkpoint abundant AAA games that are considered easy. Sure, most games probably have a higher completion rate than a Souls game but there's really nothing to master skill-wise in a Souls game either, you're golden once you "get it". I stumbled upon FightinCowboy (an LPer) searching for Bloodborne videos a few years ago and he looks pretty good playing Bloodborne. I watched him play a short late game section of Horizon Zero Dawn and he's not that skilled of a gamer really, all he did was abuse the cheapest things in the game to beat basically every battle. Horizon is more skill-based than a Souls game even if it is easier to complete.

^So much BS and personal issues masked as objective reasoning in one post. Wow... Dark Souls a survival horror with puzzles and 90% fewer enemies? Fucking no! I don't even know if I should bother arguing, with how stubborn and hyperbolic you are. So apparently, the Souls games are easier than most easy AAA games and the only thing that adds any difficulty is the checkpoint system. You're lying.

^^The best part is Souls being full of "trash mobs", like they don't more accurately comprise a major percentage of the games he's compared it to.

There's a lot of subjectivity going on, and his mind is clearly made up.

Ezekiel:
^So much BS and personal issues masked as objective reasoning in one post. Wow... Dark Souls a survival horror with puzzles and 90% fewer enemies? Fucking no! I don't even know if I should bother arguing, with how stubborn and hyperbolic you are. So apparently, the Souls games are easier than most easy AAA games and the only thing that adds any difficulty is the checkpoint system. You're lying.

How is starting off a sentence "I'd much prefer..." trying to mask objective reasoning? Nobody has still been able to mention any other game ever made where a raised shield doesn't change your movement suite. Horizon is more challenging where you'll get a big machine you've never faced before and there's 3 of them with the message of basically "figure it out!" I literally don't understand how the Souls games are considered hard in any way, every enemy you kill the same way and it just takes patience, caution, and attention to detail to get past everything. Unless you consider attention to detail skill, the games aren't skill-based. R1 spam stunlocks every enemy in Bloodborne. Has no modern gamer played NES/SNES games before? The Lion King is harder than any Souls game.

hanselthecaretaker:
^^The best part is Souls being full of "trash mobs", like they don't more accurately comprise a major percentage of the games he's compared it to.

There's a lot of subjectivity going on, and his mind is clearly made up.

Between TLoU and Dishonored 2, there wasn't a single game I've given an 8+/10 to (over a 3 year span), and I played Witcher 3 but the combat was weaksauce. Just recently I've given an 8s or higher to Dishonored 2 obviously, The Last Guardian, and Horizon. None of those games have trash mobs; Horizon will throw a new enemy type in a pack of 3 at the player. And, like I said in this thread, Gracious and Glorious are harder fights in Bayonetta than several Souls bosses let alone normal enemies. What is the basic thing that pretty much beats every single Souls enemy? Running...

The R1 spam is too strong!!!

Ezekiel:
Devil May Cry 3 is the only one of these games I can almost completely get behind.

It's a crying shame that the pinnacle of spectacle fighters happened in 2005 and no one's ever managed to produce anything better since.

How do you even use combos in Bayonetta? Attacks are fast and input window is so short i just always fail them. And don't even get me stated on fighting games, oh god. Monster Hunter gets it, there moves just flow naturally in each other. Am i having some kind of handicapping syndrome or what?
And if i can't figure out how to mash buttons correctly and game isn' tries to help me there, how am i supposed to make a pause in chains? Don't geeeeet iiiiit.
Though moves initiated via lock-on+direction, holding buttons and circling stick are fun and easy, yeah.
Also, is it my hazy memory, or wicked weave weren't mentioned in the tutorials? I had to google that stuff up for the challenge.

Phoenixmgs:

Ezekiel:
^So much BS and personal issues masked as objective reasoning in one post. Wow... Dark Souls a survival horror with puzzles and 90% fewer enemies? Fucking no! I don't even know if I should bother arguing, with how stubborn and hyperbolic you are. So apparently, the Souls games are easier than most easy AAA games and the only thing that adds any difficulty is the checkpoint system. You're lying.

How is starting off a sentence "I'd much prefer..." trying to mask objective reasoning? Nobody has still been able to mention any other game ever made where a raised shield doesn't change your movement suite. Horizon is more challenging where you'll get a big machine you've never faced before and there's 3 of them with the message of basically "figure it out!" I literally don't understand how the Souls games are considered hard in any way, every enemy you kill the same way and it just takes patience, caution, and attention to detail to get past everything. Unless you consider attention to detail skill, the games aren't skill-based. R1 spam stunlocks every enemy in Bloodborne. Has no modern gamer played NES/SNES games before? The Lion King is harder than any Souls game.

hanselthecaretaker:
^^The best part is Souls being full of "trash mobs", like they don't more accurately comprise a major percentage of the games he's compared it to.

There's a lot of subjectivity going on, and his mind is clearly made up.

Between TLoU and Dishonored 2, there wasn't a single game I've given an 8+/10 to (over a 3 year span), and I played Witcher 3 but the combat was weaksauce. Just recently I've given an 8s or higher to Dishonored 2 obviously, The Last Guardian, and Horizon. None of those games have trash mobs; Horizon will throw a new enemy type in a pack of 3 at the player. And, like I said in this thread, Gracious and Glorious are harder fights in Bayonetta than several Souls bosses let alone normal enemies. What is the basic thing that pretty much beats every single Souls enemy? Running...

The R1 spam is too strong!!!

You like certain types of game design; that much is clear. It doesn't automatically make whatever you don't like "bad". I have a hard time believing the millions of people who've played SoulsBorne games have been wrong all along because of a shield mechanic and trash mobs.

I haven't played Dishonored at all, but by your definition I could certainly say there are trash mobs in TLoU (any group of infected pre-Clicker phase) and Horizon (any group of human enemy). Your comment about running away is equally valid for Horizon as well, as ludicrous as it is seeing as how you don't "beat" any enemy that way in the first place. TLoU's level design doesn't even permit it, so why the game would even be brought up leaves me to believe you're grasping at straws to support a flawed argument.

The spamming comment alone proves it, due to the fact you can far more easily get away with spamming a main attack in any of the games you find superior than SoulsBorne due to them not even having a stamina system in the first place. Try to spam your way to the dragon guarding Heide's Tower at a low level for example. The knights couldn't care less if you do anything other than a parry/riposte or the slim chance of sneaking in a backstab. Knowing when and on what attacks to parry these guys alone is more skill-based than anything I remember playing in the Bayonetta demo.

Vassassell:
Also, is it my hazy memory, or wicked weave weren't mentioned in the tutorials? I had to google that stuff up for the challenge.

I don't remember if it was in the tutorial. I had to look it up for that challenge too.

hanselthecaretaker:
You like certain types of game design; that much is clear. It doesn't automatically make whatever you don't like "bad". I have a hard time believing the millions of people who've played SoulsBorne games have been wrong all along because of a shield mechanic and trash mobs.

I haven't played Dishonored at all, but by your definition I could certainly say there are trash mobs in TLoU (any group of infected pre-Clicker phase) and Horizon (any group of human enemy). Your comment about running away is equally valid for Horizon as well, as ludicrous as it is seeing as how you don't "beat" any enemy that way in the first place. TLoU's level design doesn't even permit it, so why the game would even be brought up leaves me to believe you're grasping at straws to support a flawed argument.

The spamming comment alone proves it, due to the fact you can far more easily get away with spamming a main attack in any of the games you find superior than SoulsBorne due to them not even having a stamina system in the first place. Try to spam your way to the dragon guarding Heide's Tower at a low level for example. The knights couldn't care less if you do anything other than a parry/riposte or the slim chance of sneaking in a backstab. Knowing when and on what attacks to parry these guys alone is more skill-based than anything I remember playing in the Bayonetta demo.

The main point I'm sorta arguing as being objective is the shield controls. Literally no other game has shield controls that work like Dark Souls and that's for a reason. Nor has anyone posted "pro" footage of someone in Souls using a shield really well vs say 3-5 enemies. The controls make controlling my character harder and less effective, that's just plain bad controls. I'm a fan of complex control systems too; knifing someone in MGO2 (greatest online shooter) was a 4-step process and it didn't cause me to play less effectively.

You sorta need to kill enemies to complete quests in Horizon, sure you can run away from enemies in the open world. I liked to see someone just mashing melee against the medium to bigger sized machines. Also, the human enemies aren't the core enemies of Horizon. Lastly, Horizon had so much variance on how to take out enemies, I had fun just planning how to go about a fight and make it look "cool" vs a Souls game and you really just dodge and attack, there's no real creativity that the game allows for.

Phoenixmgs:

hanselthecaretaker:
You like certain types of game design; that much is clear. It doesn't automatically make whatever you don't like "bad". I have a hard time believing the millions of people who've played SoulsBorne games have been wrong all along because of a shield mechanic and trash mobs.

I haven't played Dishonored at all, but by your definition I could certainly say there are trash mobs in TLoU (any group of infected pre-Clicker phase) and Horizon (any group of human enemy). Your comment about running away is equally valid for Horizon as well, as ludicrous as it is seeing as how you don't "beat" any enemy that way in the first place. TLoU's level design doesn't even permit it, so why the game would even be brought up leaves me to believe you're grasping at straws to support a flawed argument.

The spamming comment alone proves it, due to the fact you can far more easily get away with spamming a main attack in any of the games you find superior than SoulsBorne due to them not even having a stamina system in the first place. Try to spam your way to the dragon guarding Heide's Tower at a low level for example. The knights couldn't care less if you do anything other than a parry/riposte or the slim chance of sneaking in a backstab. Knowing when and on what attacks to parry these guys alone is more skill-based than anything I remember playing in the Bayonetta demo.

The main point I'm sorta arguing as being objective is the shield controls. Literally no other game has shield controls that work like Dark Souls and that's for a reason.

We already explained to you why that is. You don't care. Nothing wrong with a game being unique.

Ezekiel:
]We already explained to you why that is. You don't care. Nothing wrong with a game being unique.

I clearly showed in videos why you shouldn't need to lock-on to change your movement suite.

Phoenixmgs:

Ezekiel:
]We already explained to you why that is. You don't care. Nothing wrong with a game being unique.

I clearly showed in videos why you shouldn't need to lock-on to change your movement suite.

The purpose of locking the camera is to mitigate the need for the right control stick (Because controllers don't make a lot of sense.) and keep focusing on the target. Locking with the stick makes sense in a two hands weapon wielding system that lets you change targets by nudging the stick. An alternative would have been to make the player lock on with one of the bumpers and hold it for the duration, but that presents other limitations, like having fewer weapons and having to drop attack or defend from the bumpers. You would then have to assign those actions to one of the face buttons, which would again keep you from using the camera. With how much you lock on, holding one of the bumpers would become strenuous. Locking the camera also presents its own intentional challenge. The game lets you turn with a shield raised because you can be surprised from any direction in the open world. The mistake you're making is comparing Souls to games that have little in common with it.

^More specifically trying to play it like other games. It's like people complaining that Crysis was a bad or boring game because it didn't force your hand or point everything out.

Ezekiel:
I hated the ghosts that waited in the walls.

Argh, I remember now as I'm playing DMC4 again that it's the fucking sharks too. Seriously, why does DMC4 have so many enemies that you can't reach? It's not fun jumping repeatedly or shooting repeatedly into the ground and waiting for them to come. DMC3 usually didn't bullshit you like this.

Ezekiel:
The purpose of locking the camera is to mitigate the need for the right control stick (Because controllers don't make a lot of sense.) and keep focusing on the target. Locking with the stick makes sense in a two hands weapon wielding system that lets you change targets by nudging the stick. An alternative would have been to make the player lock on with one of the bumpers and hold it for the duration, but that presents other limitations, like having fewer weapons and having to drop attack or defend from the bumpers. You would then have to assign those actions to one of the face buttons, which would again keep you from using the camera. With how much you lock on, holding one of the bumpers would become strenuous. Locking the camera also presents its own intentional challenge. The game lets you turn with a shield raised because you can be surprised from any direction in the open world. The mistake you're making is comparing Souls to games that have little in common with it.

What is your obsession with the camera? I have no issue controlling the camera in any game with a controller. I freaking control the camera in Ghost Recon Future Soldier with the right stick WHILE HOLDING DOWN A FACE BUTTON, and I even quick-scope with a sniper rifle doing that. Back to Dark Souls, why would you need to press a face button in a battle unless you want to dodge? The attack/block buttons are on the shoulders, you don't need to move your thumb off the right stick to do anything pertinent to attacking or blocking. You can move the camera during the dodge animation so you should know if you're clear to get some health even if you're dodging away to drink an estus flask. I've showed a video where a player couldn't control his character they way he'd like completely due to Souls reliance on an archaic lock-on system.

Anyone link to a video of some "pro" shield Souls gameplay. I can link to "pro" MGO shielding gameplay requiring much more precision than a Souls game ever requires.

Ezekiel:

Ezekiel:
I hated the ghosts that waited in the walls.

Argh, I remember now as I'm playing DMC4 again that it's the fucking sharks too. Seriously, why does DMC4 have so many enemies that you can't reach? It's not fun jumping repeatedly or shooting repeatedly into the ground and waiting for them to come. DMC3 usually didn't bullshit you like this.

Because unfortunately a lot of the DM 45 enemies are designed specifically for you to use the devil bringer, which only Nero has access to. Makes the Dante sections kind of a pain even though Dante is the more interesting character to play as.

If I remember correctly, some of the configurations of Pandora's box really help you take down the ghost type enemies a lot easier.

Phoenixmgs:

Ezekiel:
The purpose of locking the camera is to mitigate the need for the right control stick (Because controllers don't make a lot of sense.) and keep focusing on the target. Locking with the stick makes sense in a two hands weapon wielding system that lets you change targets by nudging the stick. An alternative would have been to make the player lock on with one of the bumpers and hold it for the duration, but that presents other limitations, like having fewer weapons and having to drop attack or defend from the bumpers. You would then have to assign those actions to one of the face buttons, which would again keep you from using the camera. With how much you lock on, holding one of the bumpers would become strenuous. Locking the camera also presents its own intentional challenge. The game lets you turn with a shield raised because you can be surprised from any direction in the open world. The mistake you're making is comparing Souls to games that have little in common with it.

What is your obsession with the camera? I have no issue controlling the camera in any game with a controller. I freaking control the camera in Ghost Recon Future Soldier with the right stick WHILE HOLDING DOWN A FACE BUTTON, and I even quick-scope with a sniper rifle doing that.

Good for you. The claw grip is shitty. Developers don't design with it in mind, so the limitations are there regardless.

Back to Dark Souls, why would you need to press a face button in a battle unless you want to dodge? The attack/block buttons are on the shoulders, you don't need to move your thumb off the right stick to do anything pertinent to attacking or blocking. You can move the camera during the dodge animation so you should know if you're clear to get some health even if you're dodging away to drink an estus flask. I've showed a video where a player couldn't control his character they way he'd like completely due to Souls reliance on an archaic lock-on system.

Because you're not locked on at all times. I don't use the lock on throughout every fight. I need my thumb for the camera. I also need to be able to switch targets quickly and quickly toggle the lock on. I ran off that ledge too in my many hours of Dark Souls. The lock on has issues, but most of the time, it works.

Anyone link to a video of some "pro" shield Souls gameplay. I can link to "pro" MGO shielding gameplay requiring much more precision than a Souls game ever requires.

No. I barely watch YouTube, playthroughs least of all. Stop asking.

Ezekiel:
The claw grip is shitty. Developers don't design with it in mind, so the limitations are there regardless.

Because you're not locked on at all times. I don't use the lock on throughout every fight. I need my thumb for the camera. I also need to be able to switch targets quickly and quickly toggle the lock on. I ran off that ledge too in my many hours of Dark Souls. The lock on has issues, but most of the time, it works.

No. I barely watch YouTube, playthroughs least of all. Stop asking.

I don't use the claw grip, I merely stretch my left thumb to the right stick to control the camera during the cover swap in Ghost Recon.

My question is what do you need your thumb for but the camera? You're not pressing face buttons when fighting. Outside of dodging and drinking an estus, there's nothing else your using the face buttons for. During the dodge you can adjust the camera during the animation if it becomes out of whack in the short time it took to leave the right stick to press the dodge button. When you're fighting, you're just using the sticks and shoulder buttons and nothing else, how is the camera a hassle? Whether locked-on or not, moving the camera in a fight isn't an issue. The locked-on camera causes more issues than anything, it's more effective to fight bigger bosses without lock-on because of the camera issues. I shouldn't need to lock-on to an enemy and have the shitty lock-on camera forced on me to use certain controls. The fact is playing without a shield is far easier because of the controls themselves.

The ledge video does demonstrate the core issue with lock-on, it wasn't the fact that he died that I'm pointing out. I'm pointing out why was the player even locking on to begin with? So he could use the shield properly. If the game didn't require use of lock-on to shield properly, the player wouldn't even have locked-on in that situation at all.

Here's the main video I was referencing:

This video @ 16:30 demonstrates the shield controls are indeed poorly implemented. Notice he states that he nor the other good player he references use shields in such and such specific fight. The reason Matthewmatosis, who's "Dark Souls 2 critique" is referenced heavily for about 5 minutes, complains about fighting several enemies at once is because the game doesn't allow him to properly shield without lock-on. If you could simply strafe and backstep with a raised shield w/o lock-on, I'm pretty sure Matthewmatosis wouldn't have nearly the same issue with the combat as he obviously did. That's why he wants to lock-on, not to indeed lock-on to an enemy but for the controls the lock-on affords.

It's sorta funny how all the top Souls players don't use shields. Why is it easier to find high-level shield play in a 3rd-person shooter than it is in a Souls game that's all about swords and shields? Just maybe it has something to do with the controls?

Phoenixmgs:

Ezekiel:
The claw grip is shitty. Developers don't design with it in mind, so the limitations are there regardless.

Because you're not locked on at all times. I don't use the lock on throughout every fight. I need my thumb for the camera. I also need to be able to switch targets quickly and quickly toggle the lock on. I ran off that ledge too in my many hours of Dark Souls. The lock on has issues, but most of the time, it works.

No. I barely watch YouTube, playthroughs least of all. Stop asking.

I don't use the claw grip, I merely stretch my left thumb to the right stick to control the camera during the cover swap in Ghost Recon.

While that may work, HOLY SHIT THAT'S FUCKING STUPID.

And you're actually complaining about the controls in Dark Souls? Fuck man, that sounds awful in every way possible.

The lock-on does help. Of course you don't use it all the time.

You answered your own question. The player needs the face buttons so they can use items and dodge/run. That's why the lock-on is there. When I'm not using lock-on, I have to frequently use the claw grip on B/Circle. Because of the dense and claustrophobic environments, the camera is positioned too closely to your character for the game not to rely on lock-on. You keep saying lock-on is bad and archaic, but a Bayonetta-style camera wouldn't work at all in Dark Souls. Games like Bayonetta have big empty arenas, allowing the camera to be pretty distant. I have a feeling you're gonna bring up Dragon's Dogma again, but even that game has fairly open environments compared to Dark Souls.

Playing without a shield is easier if you've learned the timing. I know I would have had a harder time on my first Demon's Souls playthroughs without one.

I don't know why you keep bringing up a third-person stealth-action shooter like its controls would translate well to an action-RPG. I don't even remember a shield in MGS4 or how you control it. Turning with a shield is fine. One useful application is defending against multi-directional and unpredictable bolts, arrows and magic attacks as you progress through an environment. I've also defended against hordes that way, like the skeletons accompanying Gravelord Nito.

Phoenixmgs:

It's sorta funny how all the top Souls players don't use shields. Why is it easier to find high-level shield play in a 3rd-person shooter than it is in a Souls game that's all about swords and shields? Just maybe it has something to do with the controls?

Phoenixmgs:

Anyone link to a video of some "pro" shield Souls gameplay. I can link to "pro" MGO shielding gameplay requiring much more precision than a Souls game ever requires.

What...exactly how difficult is it supposed to be to use a shield in a game anyways? If I was holding a shield in real life for example, I sure as hell wouldn't be cool with needing a multi-step strategy to even begin using something that's supposed to be the most efficient defensive tool a soldier has, and I certainly wouldn't appreciate having to lower it just to turn to face another direction for x number of hazards. Stamina drain also isn't nearly as big of an issue as the damage you'd take having to let your guard down in the first place either.

Put arena style shield mechanics in a Souls environment and a far greater number of those "my fault" death comments would turn into "unfair". Far more-so than a premature lock-on walking someone off a bridge at least.

Dirty Hipsters:
While that may work, HOLY SHIT THAT'S FUCKING STUPID.

And you're actually complaining about the controls in Dark Souls? Fuck man, that sounds awful in every way possible.

Why? I don't need my left thumb for anything as my character is moving by holding down X during a cover swap anyways.

Ezekiel:
The lock-on does help. Of course you don't use it all the time.

You answered your own question. The player needs the face buttons so they can use items and dodge/run. That's why the lock-on is there. When I'm not using lock-on, I have to frequently use the claw grip on B/Circle. Because of the dense and claustrophobic environments, the camera is positioned too closely to your character for the game not to rely on lock-on. You keep saying lock-on is bad and archaic, but a Bayonetta-style camera wouldn't work at all in Dark Souls. Games like Bayonetta have big empty arenas, allowing the camera to be pretty distant. I have a feeling you're gonna bring up Dragon's Dogma again, but even that game has fairly open environments compared to Dark Souls.

Playing without a shield is easier if you've learned the timing. I know I would have had a harder time on my first Demon's Souls playthroughs without one.

I don't know why you keep bringing up a third-person stealth-action shooter like its controls would translate well to an action-RPG. I don't even remember a shield in MGS4 or how you control it. Turning with a shield is fine. One useful application is defending against multi-directional and unpredictable bolts, arrows and magic attacks as you progress through an environment. I've also defended against hordes that way, like the skeletons accompanying Gravelord Nito.

Again, why do you need to move the camera and face buttons at the same time? If you want to use an item, you sorta have decent separation from the enemy to heal, use magic, or an item. If you want to dodge, the camera isn't important anyways because you have the entire animation to adjust the camera. The only reason I even use the lock-on in a Souls game is for the different movement suite it offers, nothing else. In Bloodborne, you use lock-on even less, really just for the gun.

hanselthecaretaker:
What...exactly how difficult is it supposed to be to use a shield in a game anyways? If I was holding a shield in real life for example, I sure as hell wouldn't be cool with needing a multi-step strategy to even begin using something that's supposed to be the most efficient defensive tool a soldier has, and I certainly wouldn't appreciate having to lower it just to turn to face another direction for x number of hazards. Stamina drain also isn't nearly as big of an issue as the damage you'd take having to let your guard down in the first place either.

Put arena style shield mechanics in a Souls environment and a far greater number of those "my fault" death comments would turn into "unfair". Far more-so than a premature lock-on walking someone off a bridge at least.

Lowering it to face another direction is easy and how it works in every other game (for example @ 2:55). I'm pretty sure you need even quicker controls when you're using a shield against human opponents with guns vs Souls much slower enemies. The dodge is easily the most efficient defensive tool in a Souls game. If you lower your shield between enemy hits, you'll have like full stamina to attack back with to the point I found shielding pretty broken because there's no risk plus you still have full stamina to hit back with, and I played a no strength dex character.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here