Video Game General (Official)

[Jobber]

uggggh....2 weeks until batman launches.

[IcarusBen]

i'm gonna guess and say you don't like the combat because you aren't used to it, it's difficult because you aren't used to the combat, and you're frustrated because you aren't used to the combat. that's the same thing three times. a lack of interesting things is blatantly untrue because it has one of the coolest lores in recent memory as well as a really cool storytelling system AND a very creative art design. i personally like that there's a lot of exploring you can do, but different strokes i guess. the menu systems are user friendly either, i'll admit.

 

No, I got used to the combat fairly quick. I just didn't like it.

 

It was designed to be overwhelming difficult. I think a good example would be comparing to Japanese shumps. I'm not some ancient samurai. I don't play games to test my honor or courage. I play games to relax and enjoy myself. If I'm spending more time yelling at the game than not, I'm not relaxing and or enjoying myself.

 

I didn't really care for the game's lore. Sorry, just not that big a fan.

 

Also, I like exploring, but Dark Souls seemed rather dull to me. If I want an explorative game, I'll either play Fallout: NV, Skyrim, Super Metroid, or Symphony of the Night. Dark Souls wasn't interesting to me.

[Archer Vonn]

It was designed to be overwhelming difficult.

 

[citation needed]

 

it was just something different. it's not even difficult once you learn to properly abuse rolling and how to position yourself. why does combat need to be mindless button mashing?

Edited June 7, 2015 by Archer Vonn

[Voltex]

Why does combat need to be constant rolling in the dirt?

 

The world shall never know 

[Archer Vonn]

nice strawman. the game just wants you to apply some strategy in your fights and rolling is a bigger part of that than people realize at first.

[Voltex]

I dunno

 

I think I'd prefer my strategy to not involve having to repeat the exact same rolling techniques over and over and over again throughout the entire game.

 

Give me a variety of tools and moves to use, and then let me use them. (Or just give us hundreds of possible rolling animations).

[Archer Vonn]

use different builds if it's getting stale. such a versatile game.

[Voltex]

I'd rather just play TF2. 

[Jobber]

Bloodborne is a victim of this.

[Archer Vonn]

oh i see

Edited June 7, 2015 by Archer Vonn

[IcarusBen]

 

It was designed to be overwhelming difficult.

 

[citation needed]

 

it was just something different. it's not even difficult once you learn to properly abuse rolling and how to position yourself. why does combat need to be mindless button mashing?

 

Exactly... It's more mindless than any other game I've ever played, save for the LEGO games and Mario. I don't find "roll combat" interesting.

 

Also, yes, the game was designed to be difficult. Everyone and their mother praises it as well as most any other Souls game for it's "marked difficulty." If it's not designed to be hard, why does EVERY SINGLE SOULS GAME GET PRAISE FOR BEING HARD?

[Voltex]

I agree with the button-mashing comment for most Lego games, but I have to disagree with regards to Mario.

 

Unless you're spamming fireballs like the good lord Miyamoto intended.

[IcarusBen]

I didn't say Mario combat was "button-mashing," sans Fire Flower, I mean it's rather... uninteresting. It's not a game built around combat. Of course, Mario makes up for it by being freaking awesome at platforming (something Dark Souls is not.)

 

But, yeah, LEGO games are button-mashy.

[Archer Vonn]

 

 

It was designed to be overwhelming difficult.

 

[citation needed]

 

it was just something different. it's not even difficult once you learn to properly abuse rolling and how to position yourself. why does combat need to be mindless button mashing?

 

Exactly... It's more mindless than any other game I've ever played, save for the LEGO games and Mario. I don't find "roll combat" interesting.

 

Also, yes, the game was designed to be difficult. Everyone and their mother praises it as well as most any other Souls game for it's "marked difficulty." If it's not designed to be hard, why does EVERY SINGLE SOULS GAME GET PRAISE FOR BEING HARD?

 

 

i was thinking along the lines of games like skyrim where you just charge into every scenario the same way. in dark souls you have to consider layout and what enemies you're actually fighting. lego games are the same way as skyrim but frankly they have no place in this conversation. mario isn't even an action game so again i don't know where it's coming from.

Edited June 7, 2015 by Archer Vonn

[Hodor]

 

 

It was designed to be overwhelming difficult.

 

[citation needed]

 

it was just something different. it's not even difficult once you learn to properly abuse rolling and how to position yourself. why does combat need to be mindless button mashing?

 

Exactly... It's more mindless than any other game I've ever played, save for the LEGO games and Mario. I don't find "roll combat" interesting.

 

Also, yes, the game was designed to be difficult. Everyone and their mother praises it as well as most any other Souls game for it's "marked difficulty." If it's not designed to be hard, why does EVERY SINGLE SOULS GAME GET PRAISE FOR BEING HARD?

 

Because most people are used to games that let them rush in, guns blazing, with no regard for surroundings. Souls punishes this line of thinking by slapping you around for being careless. This leads to the exaggerated difficulty the games supposedly have- not helped by reviewers boasting about difficulty, who are notoriously baaaaaad at games. The games were not designed as being difficult- they were designed as games that the FROM Soft team thought would be fun.

 

The only times DaS gets overwhelmingly difficult are Blighttown, the buttress in Anor Londo, Ornstein and Smough, and Bed of Chaos. Artorias of the Abyss is challenging, but it's not in the console base game and is intentionally designed to be more challenging than Gwyn.

 

Blighttown was difficult less for its content, more for bad framerate. The buttress was just them being overwhelmingly sadistic- and eventually can be beat. Ornstein and Smough are only difficult if you tackle them without the NPC summon or other players, since it was designed to be fought by more than one person. Bed of Chaos was just a poorly thought out fight, since it becomes more like some sort of twisted Zelda-esc puzzle boss instead of the usual fights.

 

As for my Egoraptor comments, the majority of the man's arguments in that video are nitpicks about the game- and while he does have a handful of legitimate complaints (such as the combat being slower), they're mostly drowned out by his bias against 3D games. I wasn't expecting a Matthewmitosis video or anything, but I still think the majority of arguments presented in the video weren't very solid.

[IcarusBen]

 

 

 

It was designed to be overwhelming difficult.

 

[citation needed]

 

it was just something different. it's not even difficult once you learn to properly abuse rolling and how to position yourself. why does combat need to be mindless button mashing?

 

Exactly... It's more mindless than any other game I've ever played, save for the LEGO games and Mario. I don't find "roll combat" interesting.

 

Also, yes, the game was designed to be difficult. Everyone and their mother praises it as well as most any other Souls game for it's "marked difficulty." If it's not designed to be hard, why does EVERY SINGLE SOULS GAME GET PRAISE FOR BEING HARD?

 

Because most people are used to games that let them rush in, guns blazing, with no regard for surroundings. Souls punishes this line of thinking by slapping you around for being careless. This leads to the exaggerated difficulty the games supposedly have- not helped by reviewers boasting about difficulty, who are notoriously baaaaaad at games. The games were not designed as being difficult- they were designed as games that the FROM Soft team thought would be fun.

• Fallout 1 and 2 (especially 2)
• Fallout: NV (especially on Hard)
• Half-Life
• Resistance 1 and 3
• CoD 1 and 3 (aka the only good games in the franchise I've played)
• Daggerfall and Morrowind (especially at Very High (DGRFL) and +100 (MRWD)
• Legend of Zelda: Link to the Past

These are (with the possible exceptions of F:NV) all games that make you pay if you don't pay attention. And all of them do it so much better. All of them have much better combat, all of them have fair difficulty, all of them are nice and fluid and button-mashing is to a minimum, and none of them are Dark Souls.

 

And, again, DaS was designed to be hard. When your marketing slogan is "You Will Die" and your special edition is the "Prepare to Die" Edition, you're designing your game with difficulty in mind. Now, it's not always that hard =/= not fun, but hard does not always equal fun (looking at you, Lost Levels.)

 

And, again, the various open world/Metroidvania titles in my little list. Most if not all of them are really good about telling you where to go, not how to get there. Dark Souls rarely even does that.

[Just A Dot]

EDIT: Also, I like Game Theory. They've made mistakes (10ft tall Wario, tsk tsk) but they're still fairly reliable.

After the Rosalina theory, I lost most respect I had for Game Theory. MatPat's very good at not thinking things through. To his credit, he has had some pretty interesting and even well supported theories, but for every good one, I feel he has one just as terrible.

 

 

As for my Egoraptor comments, the majority of the man's arguments in that video are nitpicks about the game- and while he does have a handful of legitimate complaints (such as the combat being slower), they're mostly drowned out by his bias against 3D games. I wasn't expecting a Matthewmitosis video or anything, but I still think the majority of arguments presented in the video weren't very solid.

 

I've sat through the Ocarina of Time sequelitis video several times, and, while I think Egoraptor sucks at video games and hates Ocarina of Time for no good reason at all, I agree with a number of his criticisms of the game. I think he completely ignored everything the game did right, but it was nice to see some solid criticisms of the game, since I feel OoT is pretty overrated.

[Archer Vonn]

 

These are (with the possible exceptions of F:NV) all games that make you pay if you don't pay attention. And all of them do it so much better. All of them have much better combat, all of them have fair difficulty, all of them are nice and fluid and button-mashing is to a minimum, and none of them are Dark Souls.

 

i've played about half the games on that list and i don't think any of them really fit your description. stop trying so hard to win the conversation. if you don't like dark souls that's fine, but don't start making up stuff.

 

 

 

Blighttown was difficult less for its content, more for bad framerate. 

 

i destroyed blighttown. didn't die once. maybe it was because i played on ps3. ornstein and smough, however? i was stuck on that for like ten years.

Edited June 7, 2015 by Archer Vonn

[IcarusBen]

 

EDIT: Also, I like Game Theory. They've made mistakes (10ft tall Wario, tsk tsk) but they're still fairly reliable.

After the Rosalina theory, I lost most respect I had for Game Theory. MatPat's very good at not thinking things through. To his credit, he has had some pretty interesting and even well supported theories, but for every good one, I feel he has one just as terrible.

Really? Now, explain to me why you think the Rosalina theory went hooey. I thought it was one of his better ones.

 

better than a freaking 10 foot tall Wario, that's for sure.

 

The only theories I can think of that I disagree with were the "Potions and Power Bands" one and the first FNAF theory.

 

Oh, and aspects of FNAF 3, but most of it was pretty solid.

[Just A Dot]

 

 

EDIT: Also, I like Game Theory. They've made mistakes (10ft tall Wario, tsk tsk) but they're still fairly reliable.

After the Rosalina theory, I lost most respect I had for Game Theory. MatPat's very good at not thinking things through. To his credit, he has had some pretty interesting and even well supported theories, but for every good one, I feel he has one just as terrible.

Really? Now, explain to me why you think the Rosalina theory went hooey. I thought it was one of his better ones.

 

better than a freaking 10 foot tall Wario, that's for sure.

 

The only theories I can think of that I disagree with were the "Potions and Power Bands" one and the first FNAF theory.

 

Oh, and aspects of FNAF 3, but most of it was pretty solid.

 

His whole bit about genetics was downright nonsensical. This is a world where the STORK brings children to their parents. Therefore, aren't genetics irrelevant? Bowser's unmarried as far as we can tell, but he as a kid, because the bloody stork exists. Even so, he hardly "proves" genetics. They have the same eye color and earlobes (which happen to be shared by EVERY human in the Mario world, so irrelevant again), and even if they were unique to them, it doesn't count as proof of anything. There were two people at my highschool who had blue eyes, attached earlobes, and were both lefties, AND actually looked strikingly similar, yet were not related, since one moved in from across the country. That's just within my small district (and I live in a village, to give you an idea of how small my area is). Now we are talking Super Mario Galaxy. GALAXY. As in, space. You visit several galaxies. So a few similar traits means they are related somehow? In a nearly infinite world? His genetics theory is ridiculous. Other than that, he had nothing. He tried to prove the tree in the end scene as being the tree from the story book, yet the art in the book doesn't resemble the other tree at all. He tried to cite Luigi using a telescope once as proof that he is her father, despite the telescope phasing out of existence shortly after you use it in a mansion that has been established as a mere illusion.

 

At one point, the two characters WERE planned to be related. The Super Mario Galaxy artbook had a design for Rosalina that looked similar to Peach, but they scrapped it when they decided against the two being related. That right there shoots down the entire theory, word of God. The traits they do share are likely just leftovers in her design from that phase of the game's development. 

 

I don't feel like rewatching his video again, but I bet I could debunk most of his other points, since I seem to recall the only point I couldn't really argue against was the tidbit about Rosalina's father having a mustache, which I will admit to being a really interesting thing to add, but still not proof. That whole video was painful and cringeworthy, and I'm shocked how many people seem to think it's one of his better theories.

 

I disagreed with the first 5 Nights theory, but it was cool and supported well enough that I wasn't annoyed by it. I agreed with his second theory, and don't agree with his third, but again, it's not trash like the Rosalina one, I still think it's viable.

[IcarusBen]

@Archer; I... I give up... You seem so dead set on denying evidence that's right in front of your face... I give up.

 

@Ghoti; The castle in the story looks similar (and are the only two castles in the Mario universe to share such a design, if I'm not mistaken) there are very few humans in the Mario universe (Mario, Luigi, E. Gadd, Peach, Daisy, Rosalina, Jumpman (yes, I count him as a seperate person even before the GT episode) and Pauline), therefore your argument about how infinite the universe is is irrelevant (especially since the odds of any alien life looking even remotely human are (pardon the pun) astronomical) and even in stories where children are brought by storks, they'll still resemble their parents.

 

Plus, while we do know the reproductive cycle of humans, do we know how it works for Koopas? In the main series of Mario games (I.E. the platformers) I think we see a grand total of 1 female Koopa, and she looked very similar to a male Koopa. For all we know, Koopas are like the dwarves from Once Upon A Time, where they grow eggs that hatch into dwarves.

 

Also, from the Mario wiki;

 

Rosalina was actually born in the Mushroom Kingdom, and that is where she was raised as a child.

 

Unless the current regime is the result of an old one being overthrown after Rosalina grew up, the only occupants of the only castle that looks like the one in the storybook in the Mushroom Kingdom were, for lack of a better term, the Toadstool Dynasty. This means that somewhere, Rosalina and Peach share a family tree.

[Archer Vonn]

thats what im saying you dont have any evidence LOL

[IcarusBen]

thats what im saying you dont have any evidence LOL

 

I... I have never facepalmed harder in my life.

 

I gave you evidence. I listed various games that do the whole "pay-attention-or-die" much, much better than Dark Souls, and your entire argument is "no they aren't?"

 

Have you ever, in any Fallout game sans 3 fought a Deathclaw/Cazador? The amount of planning that goes into fighting one of those things is simply astounishing. Have you ever had to fight the Nihilanth in Half-Life? If you don't make sure you follow his pattern to the letter you will die.

 

Do you have a counter-argument that isn't "that doesn't count?"

[Archer Vonn]

deathclaws are easy to kill in fallout 3. different story in new vegas, but even then it's just compound as many healing items as you can. cazadors are also easy to kill, once you cripple a wing they move slower than you. i didn't play half life. in fallout 1 and 2 since its turn based it's also a totally different beast than dark souls which is why i don't think they're fair comparisons since dark souls makes you think on your feet and it's more reaction based. i also don't remember any reason why resistance would included in this conversation but maybe you could remind me.

 

i'm just trying to figure out your point of view. like, say something compelling

[IcarusBen]

deathclaws are easy to kill in fallout 3. different story in new vegas, but even then it's just compound as many healing items as you can. cazadors are also easy to kill, once you cripple a wing they move slower than you. i didn't play half life. in fallout 1 and 2 since its turn based it's also a totally different beast than dark souls which is why i don't think they're fair comparisons since dark souls makes you think on your feet and it's more reaction based. i also don't remember any reason why resistance would included in this conversation but maybe you could remind me.

 

i'm just trying to figure out your point of view. like, say something compelling

Exactly why I didn't include FO3 on the list; it's too easy.

 

NV deathclaws were hard. Just because you have healing items doesn't make a game easy. If that was the case, any game with healing items would be easy as all ######. Stimpaks are hard to find (at least in my experience) and on hardcore, they don't heal instantly. Cazadors are deathclaw-lite. They're fast and annoying, and yes, I tried taking out the wings. It never, ever, ever worked for me. I don't what it was, but it never worked for me. At all.

 

Resistance was basically "Halo + CoD except better." It was a genuinely hard game (at least on hard) and was pretty much the antithesis to the standard "shoot stuff" game.

[Archer Vonn]

i exclusively play new vegas on hardcore it's basically fallout 3 without it. use VATS to kill cazadors. but again, deathclaws are only dangerous because they just overwhelm you.

 

i really like resistance but i think halo was better. i see the comparison you're making though

Edited June 8, 2015 by Archer Vonn

[Just A Dot]

@Ghoti; The castle in the story looks similar (and are the only two castles in the Mario universe to share such a design, if I'm not mistaken) there are very few humans in the Mario universe (Mario, Luigi, E. Gadd, Peach, Daisy, Rosalina, Jumpman (yes, I count him as a seperate person even before the GT episode) and Pauline), therefore your argument about how infinite the universe is is irrelevant (especially since the odds of any alien life looking even remotely human are (pardon the pun) astronomical) and even in stories where children are brought by storks, they'll still resemble their parents.

 

Plus, while we do know the reproductive cycle of humans, do we know how it works for Koopas? In the main series of Mario games (I.E. the platformers) I think we see a grand total of 1 female Koopa, and she looked very similar to a male Koopa. For all we know, Koopas are like the dwarves from Once Upon A Time, where they grow eggs that hatch into dwarves.

 

Also, from the Mario wiki;

 

Rosalina was actually born in the Mushroom Kingdom, and that is where she was raised as a child.

 

Unless the current regime is the result of an old one being overthrown after Rosalina grew up, the only occupants of the only castle that looks like the one in the storybook in the Mushroom Kingdom were, for lack of a better term, the Toadstool Dynasty. This means that somewhere, Rosalina and Peach share a family tree.

Castle looking similar isn't proof since there are most likely other castles in the whole universe, and is hurt by the tree being completely different. Heck, should the different tree more or less disprove that entire point of the theory? I wasn't sure what to think when MatPat drew attention to that, since I felt it shot the entire theory down the drain.

 

Doesn't matter how few humans we've seen, 100% of them share the same eye color and earlobes. Does this mean Daisy is also related to Peach? It's not "proof" she's related, she could just share those similar traits. Also, considering how the aliens in Mario Galaxy were giant bees, I think humans are a possibility. Yoshi's seemed to exist on MANY different galaxies in the second game, so shouldn't humans be possible too?

 

Valid point on Koopas, but the genetics thing still seems to baseless to me. EVEN if they were the only characters to share an eyecolor and earlobes, that hardly proves them being related. The only point he made that I feel has an ounce of credibility is the mustache, since that's an odd detail to throw in, but I still don't see it as evidence.

 

Does Mariowiki have a source for that? NONE of the Mario games I've played mentioned that at all, and I'm very tempted to say it's false. Also, the artbook. Word of God. They aren't related. End of story.

[Terminus]

And while we're still on the subject of games that are too easy....

 

Hyrule Warriors is apparently getting a 3DS port. Kinda surprised, since it's still pretty new on the Wii U, however, Zelda ports seem to be the big thing on it now.

[IcarusBen]

And while we're still on the subject of games that are too easy....

 

Hyrule Warriors is apparently getting a 3DS port. Kinda surprised, since it's still pretty new on the Wii U, however, Zelda ports seem to be the big thing on it now.

*sniff* I think I smell a cashgrab...

[Archer Vonn]

nintendos been rereleasing the same games for years whats the surprise

[Just A Dot]

nintendos been rereleasing the same games for years whats the surprise

They kinda only started that a few years ago.

 

 

And while we're still on the subject of games that are too easy....

 

Hyrule Warriors is apparently getting a 3DS port. Kinda surprised, since it's still pretty new on the Wii U, however, Zelda ports seem to be the big thing on it now.

*sniff* I think I smell a cashgrab...

 

I'm not too crazy about this, unless it's discounted for people who own the Wii U version or something. Or you can purchase the new characters/content as DLC in the Wii U version. On-the-fly character switching should be a free update.

[Terminus]

 

 

nintendos been rereleasing the same games for years whats the surprise

They kinda only started that a few years ago.

Well, Nintendo's rereleased Super Mario Bros. in some form every generation, the N64 Zelda games have been on every home console since the 64, and they've been pushing rereleases of their old NES games since well before the Wii VC days. If anything, they've at least been doing this (and doing it successfully) longer than anyone else.

[Archer Vonn]

 

They kinda only started that a few years ago.

 

 

mwuahaha you've fallen for my master ruse, i am the best troll this site has ever seen

[Jobber]

 

 

They kinda only started that a few years ago.

 

 

mwuahaha you've fallen for my master ruse, i am the best troll this site has ever seen

 

corrrect

[Just A Dot]

 

 

nintendos been rereleasing the same games for years whats the surprise

They kinda only started that a few years ago.

Well, Nintendo's rereleased Super Mario Bros. in some form every generation, the N64 Zelda games have been on every home console since the 64, and they've been pushing rereleases of their old NES games since well before the Wii VC days. If anything, they've at least been doing this (and doing it successfully) longer than anyone else.

 

I did forget about the Classic NES series, but I'm not really counting Virtual Console as quite the same thing as Hyrule Warriors 3DS. But point made.

[Terminus]

Well, I've already got my eyes on one leaked game that's probably going to be officially announced at E3: Transformers Devestation.

 

I'm not really a big Transfomers fan (I had fun watching the movies and had a few toys when I was a kid), but the fact that Platinum is gonna be behind it really interests me, since they're one of my favorite devs.

[Jobber]

Speaking of E3, anyone gonna watch it live, if at all? I'm only interested in the Destiny/Street Fighter V coverage, but I'mma check out the Playstation Experience portion for any good things.

[Archer Vonn]

FALLOUT 4

A 

L

L

O

U

T

 

4

 

outside of that, i'm interested in FALLOUT 4

Edited June 14, 2015 by Archer Vonn

[Terminus]

I'll probably be watching a good deal of the PS/Nintendo/Square Enix stuff, and I'll also be keeping an eye out for stuff from Atlus, XSeed, and Aksys.

 

I'm gonna bet it'll be a decent year for me, hopefully we get some more info on FE if and SMTxFE, a release date for Xenoblade, some updates on Starfox, and a few other surprises from Nintendo, more info on Uncharted and maybe a few other surprises from Sony (hopefully they also mention the Vita in some form), some Kingdom Hearts 3 info from Square Enix (also really hoping for a console port of the arcade Dissidia), and stuff on the upcoming Persona titles from Atlus.

 

Also looking forward to the hype trailers that'll make games so much more awesome then they'll turn out to be. And Star Wars Battlefront, really want to see more Battlefront.

Edited June 14, 2015 by Terminus

[Jobber]

Battlefront? Ugh, I really want to like but with all the info coming out about it...I dunno.