277
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2024
277 points (100.0% liked)
Games
16918 readers
548 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Haven't played Elden Ring, but I hate when games establish some way to play in the tutorial and when you watch some guides they first tell you to ignore what the game taught you.
Star Wars Squadrons was such an offender. Star Craft kind of is because singleplayer balancing is different from multiplayer. Can't think of more now but I have a feeling like that's the case with many games.
So, great that Elden Ring wants to tackle that. Ideally a game should teach you the ideal way to play.
Arguably the first Dark Souls is one of these. Most of the classes push you towards shields as the cornerstone of defense. The studio felt like this overemphasis on shields was such a mistake they took 2 whole games (Bloodborne and Sekiro) in an almost entirely shield-free direction to teach players there were other ways.
Pyromancy (and magic in general) were also undervalued in DS1 initially due to how the game presents them. People eventually figured out that Pyro is so OP you don't even need to use leveling with it to have an easy time.
That's more the studio changing design philosophy rather than the game giving poor hints, I would argue. Shields are very viable through all of DS1.
The game is amazing. It was easily GOTY for me when I got it and I dumped around 300 hours into it. That said, there are a lot of players out there that really deserve to enjoy it, but it’s insanely tough and not ideal for some people, especially if you’re someone that plays mostly for the story. So I appreciate that the ER devs are thinking about this to some degree.
I feel like aside from full-on accessibility settings for those who need them (which absolutely should be implemented and the FromSoft devs don't get a pass on this), they could do something as simple as a 2% speed, health, & damage nerf to all their enemies and it could be enough for most newcomers that have paid for the game, but didn't get anything out of it. Like me. There are probably a huge amount of people that bought the game because of glowing "this is GOTY" reviews and couldn't get past even Margit.
There’s old guys like me too that don’t have the reflexes the younger gens do lmao. I had to get help from other players on a few occasions.
Honestly, summoning is the accessibility to get through hard areas in FromSoft games (not saying it's good accessibility, mind you). Summons that won't die in one hit basically trivialize most single-enemy boss fight since their AI spazzes out because it's not meant to fight 2 opponents at once.
I really had to embrace summoning and I was fortunate enough to have some nice people. I’m so used to people being dicks on video games, but the soulslike players have been pretty awesome.
I'm in my 40s and I barely made it through a bunch because before playing I hadn't gamed in a decade, this was my first souls-like, and I'm honestly just not that good.
I never summoned. I only played online long enough to do the white mask quest. I was proud of what I did and very happy with my 100% achievements.
That being said, I wouldn't begrudge someone turning the difficulty down if it were available. I see anything that allows more people to enjoy it as a win.
One of the worst arguments I had online was about "what is accessibility? How does it fit into multiplayer?"
Is increasing the parry window accessibility? Should you be able to change yours in a competitive match?
Is changing health levels an accessibility option? Should you be able to change that in multiplayer?
My opposite number said they should be able to do whatever they want whenever they want, and if that means spoiling the game for an invader or cooperator well that's their problem.
I'm sure most people have a more nuanced take.
Or, just make multiplayer (competitive, anyway) locked out if you're using certain options. If you're struggling and using accessibility options such as stat buffs/nerfs, you proooooobably don't want to engage with invaders. And who cares if a friendly summon gets pulled into a slightly easier world? Oh no, I get easier souls, the horror. Now, everyone can play, AND we're not interfering with anyone else's gameplay in a meaningful capacity. Win/win.
I would care a little if I got pulled into a coop session that was in godmode. I'm usually playing for fun, not efficiency.
Your stance is generally fine, though.
I found it absolutely dull. Worst $40 I've spent in a long time.
Elden Ring's tutorial consists of a single little cave that merely tells you all the basics of the game (how to move, your basic attack buttons, dodging, blocking, parrying, backstabs, sneaking, posture breaking and guard breaks) and then gives you an emote to perform as if to say "have fun" on your way out. The best part, to me coming from previous From games, is that you can skip it. It's just off to the right from where you start the game proper and if you don't want that emote, you can just go off to play the game. All the other games have a forced tutorial section (you can still sprint through it though).