Apologies for the overtly negative title, but I'm getting a little frustrated over here. This year, I've played Khazan, which I've enjoyed a lot, the Elden Ring DLC, which I need to get back to at some point but enjoyed so far, and Lies of P (again) + its DLC, which I've loved. All of these have one thing in common: quality. This makes it really hard for me to give smaller soulslikes a fair chance.
A few months ago, I gave Thymesia a shot. I definitely see the potential and vision and liked some of its mechanics quite a bit, but it just doesn't hold up to the greater soulslikes I've played. I didn't even manage to kill the first boss out of impatience and because of a lack of enjoyment.
Just tried Lords of the Fallen too and, man, I feel like they didn't even try to make this second attempt any better than the first. I was taken aback by the wide range of classes to choose from, but the gameplay just feels so unnecessarily convoluted, floaty and weightless. All of these different mechanics are thrown into the mix that end up being next to meaningless because you end up going from point A to B with a minor detour because you're travelling through the Shadow Realm™. That first boss was also an absolute nothing-burger.
Like, what gives? Are games like Khazan and Lies of P that much of an anomaly? I woild have really liked to expand my repertoire of soulslikes to play, but I'm just getting disappointed left and right despite going into it with an open mind.
Have any of you guys experienced something like that? I really wanted to give both of these a try, but man. Maybe I just need a break from the genre...
I think there are two interpretations of the 'soulslike' genre: bossfight-oriented and exploring-oriented. Most non-fromsoft developers put a lot of effort into bosses and fighting mechanics. Lies of P is a bright example of it. There is really cool weapon customization, challenging boss roster, and the game looks really appealing. I bought it mainly because of a cool looking combat in teaser videos. But what happened to me is the more I played the game, the more I became bored of location design, repetitive exploring mechanics and annoying storytelling. The devs clearly do everything to prevent you from missing any significant piece of lore: any quest follows by a note filling all the gaps, and if that's not enough—Gemini spells it out for you.
Lords of The Fallen, on the other hand, is a spiritual successor of early soulslikes, especially DS1, and is extremely exploring-oriented game. Locations there are intricate and interconnected, you just cannot hurriedly run through them to another bossfight. NPC quests are cryptic and easy to fail—they require reading item descriptions, backtracking, connecting all the dots by yourself, and luck. And even with all these factors combined, you will miss a lot—devs don't fear that you miss the content, making each walkthrough unique, and giving you a great feeling of completion when you manage to solve a quest. And yeah, the game has downsides. It's quite janky, some bosses are annoying to fight, and I wish there were more types of enemies. Does it make LotF a bad game? For me, it's fully redeemed by the merits I described above, but for someone it's a huge red flag.
So, the definition of quality soulslike varies depending on what you consider important in the genre. I personally consider LotF one of the best non-fromsoft games, and on the contrary, LoP was a disappointment. But there are plenty of players who enjoy tight bossfights without being forced to solve mysteries to follow the story. And each is right in their own way.
P. S. I'm interested, what LotF boss did you consider first? The tutorial kinght or the first major boss?
I'll probably get flack for this, but by modern standards, I'd also argue that DS1 isn't as great as people make it out to be. Interconnectedness and storytelling is amazing, of course, and the game is iconic, but game-quality-wise it's a little lackluster. Not to say that the game is bad, not at all, but it's very janky, to put it lightly. To me, Lords of the Fallen felt even jankier than that without any of the redeeming qualities DS1 is being praised for. Mind you, I'm talking out of my ass having only played for like an hour, but I just couldn't.
And it's quite interesting to see how people can dislike LoP. I found it phenomenal. The storytelling might have been a little more straightforward, similarly to Sekiro for example, but I actually appreciated that quite a lot because you didn't need a wiki tab open at all times or Vaatividya to even get what you're doing and what the story is about. That was actually a huge positive for me. And while the level design wasn't stellar, it was still very good and the setpieces felt alive and intricate, like they put care into crafting a cohesive world.
And I wouldn't even say that I prefer good boss fights over the other major aspects of soulslikes, even though my favourites might suggest otherwise (Lies of P, Sekiro, Khazan, Bloodborne). It's just that the combat in general has to feel good for me because it's what you do 90% of the time going from point A to B. I'll give a "weak" boss a pardon if the actually playing the game feels good and is fun, but that wasn't the case for me, sadly, even though I would have liked it to be. I liked that lamp mechanic, for example.
The only boss I saw was Pieta, so I guess she's the first boss?
There is the thing: DS1 and exploring enjoyers in general don't play with wiki, and don't watch Vaatividya. They play really slowly, exploring every inch of the map, and some even make notes. No help, you observe, connect the dots and make assumptions. I watch certain streamers who deeply annoyed by Vaati followers in chat, because they come, claim the streamers are wrong, and explain the lore the way Vaati told them, even though he made that part up.
The problem with LoP is that in the eyes of many "haters", that it's not cohesive at all. The game is inspired by the Pinocchio tale, but the action takes place in a town with a Slavic name, looking like France in the belle epoque period. The art direction is far from great. Areas and buildings look quite generic, and it's especially striking on comparing the Krat view from the mountain, to FromSoft titles, where areas are recognizable only by buildings' silhouettes or palette colors. Enemy design becomes quite boring after cathedral: I cannot even remember a few interesting mutant enemies, they feel the same. Bosses, except the two last ones, were good for me, but they share the same issues ER bosses have.
The game has an amazing "cover", but not much of a substance. Did the developers care, or just tried to make an impression? It's not so striking if you focus on overcoming challenges and experimenting with weapons, and follow the story as a spectator. And I value your experience if you get everything want. But if you try on the role of an archeologist, "a lore hunter", it feels lackluster comparing to the FromSoft games, and even LoTF.