djsoren19

joined 11 months ago
[–] djsoren19@yiffit.net 30 points 13 hours ago

I mean, this looks like a slam dunk win to me. Guy looks way hotter in a crop top.

[–] djsoren19@yiffit.net 42 points 18 hours ago (6 children)

Then why did you throw him out?

[–] djsoren19@yiffit.net 5 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Spoken like someone who hasn't touched the game.

The single biggest issue is that the high difficulty is the only thing that actually pushes you to explore the world. If you were able to just kill every boss right away, 50% of the Elden Ring's content becomes immediately pointless busywork. It already is, but that busywork offers small, incremental rewards that allow you to last a little bit longer, or learn a little bit more about a boss' moveset. The intended gameplay experience is to run into a brick wall, explore and discover new options and opportunities, and then returning to break the brick wall. For experienced players on their second or third playthrough, you can basically strip out the open world entirely after an initial 2-3 hours of running around to grab what you want.

I'd also like to point out that 90% of the difficulty of bosses has nothing to do with their health or how much damage they do. FromSoftware has really pushed the envelope on boss design and AI, to the point where many of the hardest bosses are difficult because of their moveset. You can especially see this in the DLC, where you're able to collect Scadutree Fragments to increase your damage and health, but players still have difficulty with many bosses even after maxing them out. Dealing 3x more damage doesn't mean anything if you can never get a hit in, and taking 3x less damage won't save you from a fatal grab. You can make an argument for difficulty levels toning down boss AI and making them less aggressive, but I'll make a different one.

If a player doesn't want to engage in difficult boss fights, and doesn't want to be forced to learn combat encounters, they probably don't want to play Elden Ring. There's a lot of people who didn't actually want to play Elden Ring in that 20 million. Only about 27% ended up completing the game. FromSoftware is still making niche games for a niche audience, but now they're known for their exceptionally high pedigree, which causes people to feel FOMO. It's okay to not want to play Elden Ring, but no amount of handicap is going to change that feeling for players.

[–] djsoren19@yiffit.net 6 points 3 days ago (5 children)

The difficulty is tied to the story and the gameplay though. A lot of things start to break down if the Tarnished is able to travel through the Lands Between unfettered. Should a successful developer who develops niche games for a niche audience be forced to capitulate to the demands of players outside of their niche just because they have a fear of missing out?

[–] djsoren19@yiffit.net 14 points 1 week ago

Yeah, it's a bit of a let-down when you compare what's on offer here with a previous Larian title like Divinity 2. That game lets you make full on campaigns.

[–] djsoren19@yiffit.net 6 points 1 week ago

It worked fine at the time, the problem is that all of that motivation to defend democracy was artificial, and slowly faded from the public as the war faded into the past.

[–] djsoren19@yiffit.net 6 points 1 week ago (2 children)

If you crossed Sonic and Eggman, which one would get pregante?

[–] djsoren19@yiffit.net 9 points 1 week ago

The flavor text teally sells this meme.

[–] djsoren19@yiffit.net 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

At the very least, FromSoftware continues to prove that level scaling is not a requirement. I honestly think that without their influence, we would have seen a lot more adoption of the practice. It's the kinda brain-dead idea that comes from an MBA who's sole focus is reaching the widest audience possible .

[–] djsoren19@yiffit.net 3 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah, that's fair. I guess I'm hopeful that things have changed after Microsoft bought them, but they probably still suck.

[–] djsoren19@yiffit.net 2 points 2 weeks ago

Eh, it sounds to me like they're saying "we tried to imitate D2 exactly, but people don't want it anymore." That's just flat out a lie though, because they didn't imitate D2 at all. In the article, the mention that a player could conceivably take years to drop specific "uber uniques." While true that it would take a lot of time to drop it naturally, D2 had a pretty robust trading economy in it's later years. Unless you were specifically going solo, you had the option to save up. It took time, but it was a goal that was accomplishable on ladder.

Unless they changed it when I wasn't looking, uber uniques are not tradable in D4 at all. I'm not necessarily going to argue for or against that, it's a game design choice, but it's specifically not the choice made by D2. Obviously players aren't going to want to grind for years for a specific item, but they never had to in the past.

[–] djsoren19@yiffit.net 4 points 2 weeks ago

I agree that an item-filter would have been a nice addition, but with Blizzard you have to take a hardline #NoChanges approach. Otherwise you'll get something like the WC3 remaster, or every Classic WoW expansion. They did add a few small additions after the remaster was released, like Helltides and some new Runewords, but they're all thankfully ignorable if you want to.

view more: next ›