• 0 Posts
  • 28 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 19th, 2023

help-circle







  • Hot take: It’s not that LotR was a fluke, it’s that it’s massively overrated. It’s just your standard big-budget American blockbuster with amazing visuals and music that does little more than pay lip service to its source material. I have to laugh when people get up in arms about the character derailment of Luke in the sequel trilogy but nobody bats an eye at Aragorn just straight-up murdering Mouth during negotiations in RotK. I likewise don’t get the hate for the Hobbit movies, as if they’re somehow obviously worse than LotR. I really don’t see it, to me they’re just more of the same.









  • More of the same? Awesome, can’t wait!

    Some people were annoyed by the pawns, but personally I loved them. Their chatter can get repetitive at times, but there’s also a lot of detail and subtlety that’s easy to miss. Each pawn gains knowledge of different enemies, quests, and areas as they interact with them, and what they say depends on how well they know the subject they’re talking about. If they know nothing, they will react with surprise or curiosity, otherwise they will offer advice of varying helpfulness. One time I encountered a cockatrice, and my pawns started yelling to watch out for the griffin. At first I thought it was a bug, but after the fight I realized they had some knowledge of these bird-like enemy types but not enough, and as a result they confused one for the other. Now that’s what I call attention to detail!



  • Bethesda hasn’t made a great game since Skyrim.

    Since Morrowind. Skyrim wasn’t bad, don’t get me wrong, but it can’t hold a candle to its granddaddy in terms of world-building and stat-based character advancement, which was sacrificed for the sake of action combat that is not even close to good enough to carry the game.

    But here’s the thing… Bethesda hadn’t made a great game before Morrowind either. That was their big breakout hit, and ever since then they’ve just been remaking that same game with slightly different coats of paint hoping to catch lightning in a bottle for a second time. They used to make more varied and innovative games before that, but none of them was really all that good. Terminator: Future Shock had fully 3D environments and enemies and a mouselook control scheme a year before Quake, but there’s a good reason why the latter game is remembered as one of the foundational pillars of the genre and the Bethesda offering lies forgotten.

    So I agree with you that expecting TES6 to be amazing is naive, but I don’t think it’s because Bethesda has gotten worse. It has simply regressed to the mean.

    their ambition is getting the best of them

    Always has been. I haven’t played Starfield yet, but from what I’ve read about it online, including your description, it sounds a hell of a lot like a sci-fi version of Daggerfall, which was insanely overambitious for its time. It’s a shame they seem to have focused on making the graphics prettier rather than the procedural generation more complex and interesting.


  • Oblivion, on paper, is an objectively better RPG that is truer to the Elder Scrolls formula than Skyrim

    Hard disagree on that one. It’s truer to the Morrowind formula, but Morrowind itself was a radical departure from the previous TES games’ design philosophy. And I despise Oblivion precisely because of that, because it slavishly apes Morrowind’s formula without really understanding what made it tick. I’ll spare you the diatribe. Morrowind was a great triumph but also a turning point for Bethesda. Up until that point, they used to make varied games. Ever since they found success with Morrowind, they’ve stopped trying to innovate and improve and have just been remaking the same game over and over with a slightly different coat of paint each time.


  • I think the combat speed is probably the most noticeable difference between DS and Nioh, and I’d probably prefer some middle ground between the two, but IMO it’s far from the most interesting or impactful one. For example, I love the sheer variety of attacks in Nioh and the emphasis on special moves. In Dark Souls, you mostly just spam the same basic attack over and over. Nioh gives you three stances to switch between (a system copied from the old Jedi Knight games, btw.) and a bevy of special attacks that you can learn. And I love that those special moves aren’t tied to specific weapons but rather to your character and those three stances, so your moveset is not only much larger than in DS but also customizable. And I do think this is straight-up better than DS, because it’s not just a difference, it’s an addition. All that complexity and depth is there for you to explore if you want to, but you don’t have to. If you wanted to, you could play Nioh like Souls and just use the basic medium attack. The reverse is not true, you can’t play Souls like Nioh.

    Another interesting difference is that Nioh lets you put pressure on enemies in ways that DS disallows. In DS, when an enemy’s stamina is depleted and their guard broken, you’re given the opportunity to do a finisher. But regardless of whether or not you take it, they regain their stamina and the fight basically resets, forcing you to dodge the enemy’s attacks and chip away at them again. That can also happen in Nioh, but you can also choose to forego the finisher and keep the pressure up instead with a zero-ki combo. Attacking an exhausted enemy again will knock them on the ground, opening them up to a different type of finisher, but you can also still attack them normally (probably requiring a stance switch) in order to force them to stand back up without giving them the opportunity to regain their ki/stamina. At the same time, you can use well-timed ki pulses to replenish your own stamina, so if you have the timing down, you can keep an enemy stunlocked pretty much indefinitely. And you can even do this to bosses. Dark Souls doesn’t allow you to keep the upper hand in a fight, it goes so far as to give the enemy several seconds of invincibility after a finisher in order to reset the fight. Nioh isn’t like that, it does let you keep the upper hand and really exploit it if you know what you’re doing. And once again it’s not a difference, it’s an addition. That basic DS cycle of “dodge enemy attack, break their guard, do a finisher, rinse and repeat” is present in Nioh too, but whereas in DS it’s the end point and the pinnacle of player skill (because they game doesn’t allow you to do anything else), in Nioh it’s the start. It’s what newbies do. Over time you learn to dominate enemies in far more effective ways, and it feels oh so much more satisfying than anything Souls can offer.

    In short, I think Nioh is just a straight upgrade to Souls in terms of gameplay. Souls starts you off as a weak little hollow, and you fight like one. That’s all well and good, but you never move beyond that, you’re always the one under pressure even after you’ve absorbed the souls of lords and acquired legendary weapons. That slow, methodical combat is also present in Nioh, but it’s an early-game element, it’s something for you to grow out of as you upgrade your character and improve your own skills as a player. That late-game fast-paced brawling action is no less skill-based, mind you, I’d even argue it requires way more skill than Souls. But it also rewards you for your skill way more than Souls ever does.

    I could list Wo Long right alongside Elden Ring as a game I found disappointing. It doesn’t seem to have been very well received in general, and I stopped playing at the first boss. I could write a whole other diatribe about how the tutorial bosses in From Soft games become more and more unfair bullshit over time, and to my dismay the first boss of Wo Long is basically Iudex Gundyr, whom I absolutely despise. In other words, he’s a fairly easy humanoid boss with clearly telegraphed attacks in his first phase, but in his second phase he turns into a mutated shapeless blob that spazzes the fuck out all over the place in ways specifically designed to kill you because you can’t tell WTF he’s even doing. You know the saying “when people show you who they are, believe them”? When Team Ninja showed me they were doing a Dark Souls 3, I believed them and lost all interest in playing further.

    Sekiro and Bloodborne are interesting, since they’re variations on the formula that show that From Soft is actually capable of trying new things. It’s just a shame that, as with DS2, basically none of the improvements they pioneered were carried forward to Elden Ring (such as showing you the enemy stamina bar, which is also something Nioh does). Pretty much their only legacy is the replacement of poise with hyperarmor, which I consider a detriment. In Nioh, stunlocking an enemy is possible but requires a lot of game knowledge and practice to get the timing right. In From Soft games since Bloodborne, stunlocking an enemy requires nothing more than hitting them before they hit you, at which point you’re free to keep swinging for as long as your stamina lasts. That’s just dumb and boring.

    As for farming a specific spot over and over, that is absolutely something that exists in Souls. It’s usually not a boss, since most of the games don’t let you easily respawn bosses (DS2 being the exception, with the Giant Lord specifically designed to be farmed), but farming for souls and/or upgrade materials has been a staple of the series since its inception.

    If you do play Blade of Darkness, temper your expectations. I love it because of massive nostalgia, but it was clunky as hell even by the standards of its day. There are good reasons it wasn’t a commercial success.