[teezzy]

I suck donkey dick at elden ring

I'm still having fun

 

[Saruhashi]

This is basically just someone who doesn't like or even understand games but for some reason wants to be able to socially act like they are a person who is into gaming.

I find that really odd.

A new game is 60 bucks. Who the hell wants to spend that money and not get the full experience?
It seems nuts to me that anyone would want to drop $60 on, for example, Sekiro and then just skip all the fights and see the story and be done with the game in a couple of hours.

At some stage you are basically asking for developers to include things in the game for people who don't actually want to play their game. There's a crazy level of entitlement there.

I would say if you are playing a game and using this hypothetical "skip button" at about halfway through the game then you are more or less just going to be doing that for the rest of the game. Then on top of that you won't even be learning about new game mechanics etc because you aren't actually using them.

There can't be too many games out there just now where you could rip out the gameplay and be left with an actually engaging story that is worth the 60 dollars asking price.

 

[DESTROYA]

One of the best feelings gaming is overcoming a tough boss , these new age limp wristed snowflakes that call themselves gaming journalists don't know that feeling and like in real life and everything else want at easy mode. If I'm blowing a lot of money on a game I want a challenge and make it worth my money

 

[Nymphae]

Some comments I wrote recently elsewhere, defending the games from someone who felt it's all just masochism:

I absolutely had a tough time with the series when I first got into it. Any of these games are hard the first time anyone comes across them. I heard the creator once say in response to people who want easy modes added to the games, that the guiding ethos is "tough but fair." To ask for easy modes is to entirely miss the magic of the series, which is that it presents seemingly impossible challenges that are in actuality not as hard as they look and a joy to overcome if you simply learn from your mistakes and play with a little focus. For people that think it's just an over the top punishing game for the sake of being hard, it really is a case of "you aren't playing it right", and playing it right isn't even hard. Just different than what you're used to. But so much more rewarding as a result than typical action/adventure fare.

It's not that anything they ask of you is particularly difficult (although Sekiro can be tough I think if you don't have a sense of rhythm, since you are forced to use the more complex parry system in that game) it's just that the games are highly demanding. The hardest things Dark Souls asks of you is to press the dodge button when you see a telegraphed move coming, to control yourself when you play, to learn from your mistakes and not repeat them.

The tools and game plan are always simple and straightforward, but that doesn't mean things can't be intense and challenging. Like right now I'm trying to take down this Tree Sentinel in Elden Ring, a huge "mini boss" that wanders around the starting area. I've been trying to take him down for about an hour, I keep getting him down to about 1/4 health and dying. It's not cheap, all of his moves are telegraphed and easy to roll away from, and there are many distinct windows you have for getting in a nice jumping heavy attack. I could whittle him down if I could just be a little more patient and make those easy dodges for say 10 minutes, but you always just make a dumb mistake somewhere, lose focus, and you're done. Until that one time you don't, and then success feels a lot more meaningful than beating a boss in some generic game where you played on normal difficulty and everything was tuned to be minimally frustrating.

Side note: I took that bitch down right after writing this comment, he's not hard

 

[Allnamestakenlol]

'Gamers' that ask for this need to be honest with themselves and admit that it isn't the game that needs to change.

 

[Zefah]

Totally agreed that meaningful and satisfying challenge is part of their identity. I'm only 12 hours in Elden Ring, but other than the opening couple of hours where you feel a bit powerless, this feels like the least challenging Souls-like yet (with Sekiro and parts of Bloodborne being the most challenging in my book).

I'm honestly kind of annoyed at how convenient fast travel is in this game. It cheapens exploration a bit in my opinion. They should have made it so you have to be at a bonfire to trigger it.

 

[DonDonDonPata]

There's no way modern games are too demanding for customers, even casual Customers. Normies loved mastering repetitive levels in Dance Dance Revolution and Guitar Hero not awhile ago. This fear of difficulty is artificial and contrived. Arcades began in bars among adult patrons, not among teenage boys with "too much time on their hands"

 

[GreyHorace]

This is basically just someone who doesn't like or even understand games but for some reason wants to be able to socially act like they are a person who is into gaming.

I find that really odd.

A new game is 60 bucks. Who the hell wants to spend that money and not get the full experience?
It seems nuts to me that anyone would want to drop $60 on, for example, Sekiro and then just skip all the fights and see the story and be done with the game in a couple of hours.

At some stage you are basically asking for developers to include things in the game for people who don't actually want to play their game. There's a crazy level of entitlement there.

I would say if you are playing a game and using this hypothetical "skip button" at about halfway through the game then you are more or less just going to be doing that for the rest of the game. Then on top of that you won't even be learning about new game mechanics etc because you aren't actually using them.

There can't be too many games out there just now where you could rip out the gameplay and be left with an actually engaging story that is worth the 60 dollars asking price.

What's scary is that she was actually working in videogame industry. Jennifer Hepler was a writer at Bioware who penned characters and scenarios for Dragon Age: Origins and Dragon Age 2. Not saying she's the main reason why Bioware started to suck (and many people were very vocal online that she was the reason), but the fact that Bioware were willing to hire people like her speaks to me of their lack of focus on developing the gameplay aspects of their titles. They were too focused on their precious stories, hence the decline of their recent games.

There's no way modern games are too demanding for customers, even casual Customers. Normies loved mastering repetitive levels in Dance Dance Revolution and Guitar Hero not awhile ago. This fear of difficulty is artificial and contrived. Arcades began in bars among adult patrons, not among teenage boys with "too much time on their hands"

Implying modern woketards would get off their lazy asses to play Dance Dance Revolution.

 

[Saruhashi]

There's no way modern games are too demanding for customers, even casual Customers. Normies loved mastering repetitive levels in Dance Dance Revolution and Guitar Hero not awhile ago. This fear of difficulty is artificial and contrived. Arcades began in bars among adult patrons, not among teenage boys with "too much time on their hands"

I was actually thinking about Guitar Hero in relation to this too.
It could just be that a lot of people's objections come from the games internal context.

If you are playing Tetris and can't beat your high score for ages after one particularly good run then you don't really mind. Same with games like space invaders or that snake one on old Nokia phones. Players will just keep on going and trying to get a better high score.

With Guitar Hero I am sure most players will learn the songs one bit at a time until they can pass the level and then until they can get a decent grade. Nobody seemed to mind that you would master each level in stages as you learned the exact moves over time.

Seems to me like a big bit of the issue with Dark Souls etc is that when you don't progress in the game you get a big "You Died" message and this has some kind of psychological impact? Like it's not just "ah I was miles away from my highscore and don't have time to keep playing so maybe tomorrow" like it would be with Tetris or "I have the verses of the song perfect but still need to get better at the chorus" with Guitar Hero. It's "You Died". You aren't a badass who can melt enemies with one or two hits, you aren't tearing through the levels and looking at all the cool images. You Died.

Maybe with Guitar Hero, Tetris etc the difference is that it is still YOU doing the thing. With a 3rd person game it's you playing as a character and you are making them do the things and when an enemy comes along and destroys you it feels more like a failure to be a badass and beat the game?

I would have thought online multiplayer games would be WAAAAAAY harder than anything From Software could come up with as most people simply aren't good enough to compete at any kind of decent level.

The average win rate in Fortnite seems to be around 1 or 2% and a win rate of 5% would be considered good. So it's pretty damn difficult to win a game. I'd assume that the average player online loses more often than not.

Yet, you say to people "OK you gotta learn the game and level up your character and learn the bosses moves" and they lose their shit and start screeching about accessibility and no time to play games etc etc.

On the accessibility conversation I would be interested more in people setting out what specific disabilities cause an issue with Dark Souls etc and why the only solution put forward is "the game needs an easy mode". Surely accessibility options that are related to actual disabilities could and should be solved at the hardware and accessories level?

Seems to me like the demands for easy mode were laughed at in the beginning and so the "it's about accessibility for disabled people" is the tactic because it attempts to shame anyone who thinks people just need to get good.

 

[Dr. Farnsgoth]

Has this pathetic sort heard of Netflix

 

[DonDonDonPata]

I was actually thinking about Guitar Hero in relation to this too.
It could just be that a lot of people's objections come from the games internal context.

If you are playing Tetris and can't beat your high score for ages after one particularly good run then you don't really mind. Same with games like space invaders or that snake one on old Nokia phones. Players will just keep on going and trying to get a better high score.

With Guitar Hero I am sure most players will learn the songs one bit at a time until they can pass the level and then until they can get a decent grade. Nobody seemed to mind that you would master each level in stages as you learned the exact moves over time.

Seems to me like a big bit of the issue with Dark Souls etc is that when you don't progress in the game you get a big "You Died" message and this has some kind of psychological impact? Like it's not just "ah I was miles away from my highscore and don't have time to keep playing so maybe tomorrow" like it would be with Tetris or "I have the verses of the song perfect but still need to get better at the chorus" with Guitar Hero. It's "You Died". You aren't a badass who can melt enemies with one or two hits, you aren't tearing through the levels and looking at all the cool images. You Died.

Maybe with Guitar Hero, Tetris etc the difference is that it is still YOU doing the thing. With a 3rd person game it's you playing as a character and you are making them do the things and when an enemy comes along and destroys you it feels more like a failure to be a badass and beat the game?

It's true, the Souls games have far less artificial reward and obvious hand-holding. You could do a song on Easy mode or even turn on No Fail mode, but you're still playing Guitar Hero. Sure, there are some "broken" Soulsborne builds, summons, hints, etc that make the game easier, but there isn't an equivalent payoff and player feedback. An artificial crowd doesn't cheer for your 90%+ clear on Normal mode. Also the feedback is instant in Guitar Hero. You missed the bright Green button. You failed the song because you missed too many bright buttons in a row. All the correct buttons scroll down from the top identically in every single song. You aren't suddenly confronted by an enemy with an unfamiliar attack pattern with huge AOE. Not so much in Soulsborne, where you might not realize (or might never realize) the flaws of your character build until 10 hours into the game. Rock Band doesn't make you regret "going with a lead guitar build instead of a drummer build".


The way to master both franchises -- Guitar Hero or Soulsborne -- is to be patient, to try again, and to build up the muscle memory. Dunno why that's acceptable for one but not for the other.

I would have thought online multiplayer games would be WAAAAAAY harder than anything From Software could come up with as most people simply aren't good enough to compete at any kind of decent level.

The average win rate in Fortnite seems to be around 1 or 2% and a win rate of 5% would be considered good. So it's pretty damn difficult to win a game. I'd assume that the average player online loses more often than not.

Yet, you say to people "OK you gotta learn the game and level up your character and learn the bosses moves" and they lose their shit and start screeching about accessibility and no time to play games etc etc.

On the accessibility conversation I would be interested more in people setting out what specific disabilities cause an issue with Dark Souls etc and why the only solution put forward is "the game needs an easy mode". Surely accessibility options that are related to actual disabilities could and should be solved at the hardware and accessories level?

Seems to me like the demands for easy mode were laughed at in the beginning and so the "it's about accessibility for disabled people" is the tactic because it attempts to shame anyone who thinks people just need to get good.

Modern multiplayer still keeps people on that artificial hamster wheel of progress. You might not "win", but you shot some guns. You can still open loot boxes. You can still explore the map. You drove around in a vehicle and ran two people over, that part was fun too. Souls doesn't have a lot of moment-to-moment "fun" to distract you / reward you in between the genuine challenges.

Personally, I think Soulsborne only gets the ire for being a "hard game" because of popularity, not actual difficulty. When Jack Thompson went after Violent Videogames, he went after popular and recognizable games like Grand Theft Auto and Gears of War, even though far more violent games like Manhunt, Condemned, and F.E.A.R were available at that time. So in the same way, our modern ideologue churchmarms are going after Large Targets for the sake of broadcasting their own ideology, not really because the game in question is the hardest game out there.

 

[regawdless]

How did I miss this. That's totally crazy. Like, imagine racing games having a rewind function fucking lol.

Wait a minute.

 

[DonDonDonPata]

I wanted to let everyone here at D-Pad know that last week's game of Monopoly went very poorly for me so I'll be adding a new rule where anyone who can't pay Rent is allowed to retry their turn and roll the dice again.

This will make the game more fun. If you don't like this new rule you hate fun and you're excluding me.

Seriously though. Anyone else grow up with the rule in chess, checkers, cards, etc where a "card laid is a card played" or taking your hand off your piece was confirmation of the move you made?

 

[Saruhashi]

Totally agreed that meaningful and satisfying challenge is part of their identity. I'm only 12 hours in Elden Ring, but other than the opening couple of hours where you feel a bit powerless, this feels like the least challenging Souls-like yet (with Sekiro and parts of Bloodborne being the most challenging in my book).

I'm honestly kind of annoyed at how convenient fast travel is in this game. It cheapens exploration a bit in my opinion. They should have made it so you have to be at a bonfire to trigger it.

To be fair to the developers I feel like this was an argument they were always going to have to give in to. Especially with needing investment in projects etc.

They've basically introduced accessibility without making it as simple as just picking an option in a menu screen.

Which is the thing I always argued that they should do. I'd argue that it's what they have been doing all along but Elden Ring just makes it a bit more obvious in some ways. Like in Demon's Souls each boss it more like a puzzle. Once you have the solution it's simple to beat them. In Sekiro each boss will be very weak to at least one of the skills you've learned and it's just a case of making the right choices.

I don't mind this too much as it then becomes my own choice to ignore or engage with aspects of the game. I just refuse to engage with sorcery because it's really too powerful and not satisfying but I will 100% apply magic to my sword so that it looks cool as fuck when I am mowing down mobs. Same as I will just never use summons for boss fights.

I'd rather bang my head against the wall until I beat Margit in one on one combat than summon my wolf buddies in the fight or use the gold summon sign. Wolf buddies for clearing out inconvenient mobs only.

Which is my choice and for me it's the best way to introduce options.

I think when you are familiar with these games the challenge is just naturally diminished. You know that you gotta be wary around enemies and you know to never just go flying into a boss just spamming R1 and hoping for the best.

I started with Vagabond, dropped the halberd to get myself to Med Load, levelled vigor to 20 and Endurance to 17, strength to 16 for brass shield, longsword to +1. I have taken out Margit and Tree Sentinel in the first area at level 22 with a decent bit of trail and error but also with knowledge that these enemies attacks need to be predicted and then dodged or blocked and I should only strike them at the right moments.

Coming from, for example, Horizon or Spider-Man or Guardians of the Galaxy into this is like night and day. Where you can kind of get away with spamming attacks and dodges and not really paying too much attention to what the enemies are up to.

Personally, I just wish more people were more positive about the concept of challenge in games. Instead of just immediately reaching for their phone to demand a "story mode" on Twitter.

I also hate the aesthetic of having daft phantoms running around helping you beat a boss, always have. Fuck that! I prefer the feeling that it's just you and the boss and this is going to take as long as it takes.

 

[Saruhashi]

I wanted to let everyone here at D-Pad know that last week's game of Monopoly went very poorly for me so I'll be adding a new rule where anyone who can't pay Rent is allowed to retry their turn and roll the dice again.

This will make the game more fun. If you don't like this new rule you hate fun and you're excluding me.

Seriously though. Anyone else grow up with the rule in chess, checkers, cards, etc where a "card laid is a card played" or taking your hand off your piece was confirmation of the move you made?

I actually played football (soccer) to a pretty decent level until my early 20s and there was just no margin for error at all. Rampant gamesmanship, arguably cheating, was the order of the day. Tough physical contact and you either win or you feel like shit for days. Some bigger lad boots you up and down the pitch for 90 minutes and you miss a handful of chances to score before going back to the dressing room to sit in silence while you listen to the wild celebrations across the hallway.

Spent my late 20s to mid 30s running 10ks, half-marathons, marathons at a just OK standard with a running club and again there is not the possibility of skipping to the end or avoiding all of the things that can go wrong and turn a potentially satisfying finishing time into a total nightmare of cramp and chaffing and dehydration. If only I hadn't skipped so many training sessions etc.

I kind of hate the idea that everything must be "fun". Sometimes a challenge met can leave you feeling contented or can reveal aspects of your character or can drive you on to future success even in unrelated endeavors.

Maybe that's a bit much to ask of videogames but it's the same fuckers insisting that games can be political and inspiring and blah blah blah that are the first to screech when a game kicks your ass for not being thoughtful and prepared and willing to learn.

 

[GreyHorace]

Has this pathetic sort heard of Netflix

How did I miss this. That's totally crazy. Like, imagine racing games having a rewind function fucking lol.

Wait a minute.

Surprised you guys haven't heard of the Hambuger Helper. She was the catalyst that soured the relationship between Bioware and their fans. More on the link below.

Jennifer Hepler - Encyclopedia Dramatica

encyclopediadramatica.online

In fact one could say this was one of the earliest instances of Gamergate.

 

[DonDonDonPata]

I kind of hate the idea that everything must be "fun". Sometimes a challenge met can leave you feeling contented or can reveal aspects of your character or can drive you on to future success even in unrelated endeavors.

Maybe that's a bit much to ask of videogames but it's the same fuckers insisting that games can be political and inspiring and blah blah blah that are the first to screech when a game kicks your ass for not being thoughtful and prepared and willing to learn.

Videogames are probably one of the BEST tools we have to safely challenge ourselves and entertain ourselves at the same time. Consider the studies (popularized more recently, but 100% rejected when I was growing up) that videogames are actually beneficial in many ways, from motor skill development to critical thinking to patience and so forth. Fitness games are an obvious route for the industry to take, as well as "brain games" and puzzle games. Consider how often we are now trying to "game-ify" something to make it easier for someone to learn, like piano lessons on a phone app (which level up your profile, track progress, and give bonuses for practicing every day of the week).

You're right. If the pearl-clutchers expect videogames to teach moral lessons to the player (adhering to their own moral ideology...) then certainly we could expect videogames to teach basic virtues like "patience" and "observation". I don't think it's far fetched for us to get more out of games than "fun". Books and TV are acceptable even when the "fun" is lower.

 

[Saruhashi]

Surprised you guys haven't heard of the Hambuger Helper. She was the catalyst that soured the relationship between Bioware and their fans. More on the link below.

Jennifer Hepler - Encyclopedia Dramatica

encyclopediadramatica.online

In fact one could say this was one of the earliest instances of Gamergate.

LOL.

"Bioware had made the unfortunate mistake of hiring a 16 ton marine creature that could neither write, play video games, or avoid the malicious harpoons of the internet."

 

[GreyHorace]

I kind of hate the idea that everything must be "fun". Sometimes a challenge met can leave you feeling contented or can reveal aspects of your character or can drive you on to future success even in unrelated endeavors.

Maybe that's a bit much to ask of videogames but it's the same fuckers insisting that games can be political and inspiring and blah blah blah that are the first to screech when a game kicks your ass for not being thoughtful and prepared and willing to learn.

This. I expect games to have gameplay that challenges me in some manner and provides me with a sense of accomplishment if I beat it. If the challenge is too steep for me or the difficulty is cheap, then I'll move to another title. No bitching required.

The butthurt SJW mob who want developers to follow Jennifer Hepler's example of every game being a visual novel can get fucked. For me, a game's story should be a secondary concern, not the main focus. It's the reason why I have a problem with Obsidian Entertainment's titles. I like their games but more for their writing rather than the gameplay. Alpha Protocol had one of the best espionage tales I've seen in media but you couldn't pay me to finish it because the broken gameplay and buggy design just pissed me off. Same with Pillars of Eternity, it has a compelling plot and a unique fantasy world, but the game bored me with it's outdated rpg systems.