Drive here to watch a cutscene to get a mission which is to drive somewhere and watch a cutscene. Once completed, drive somewhere to watch a cutscene to complete the mission.

monkey wrote:

Not all subjective opinions are equal. Some are nuanced and considered and can incorporate facts. Yours is wildly inaccurate and made from a position of ignorance, but wrap it up in that 'subjectivity' fig leaf and maybe no one will notice.

 

Bloody hell, who pissed on your chips?


Okay, my exact opinions expressed were that the combat in Dark Souls is slow and clunky. I did not express any opinion about the quality of the game as a whole, nor did I suggest that slow or clunky were undesirable things for game combat to be in general, just that this put me, personally, off the game.

Now, I have expressed before that I found the combat in Dark Souls to be slow and clunky (or words to that effect), in the Dark Souls thread no less when I was trying out the game. Nobody in there disagreed with me at the time that it was slow, clunky is more subjective, but as I suggested earlier, Chalice's 'deliberate' could be my 'clunky'.

So, with all this in mind, how exactly is my opinion 'wildly inaccurate'?

Yossarian wrote:

monkey wrote:

Not all subjective opinions are equal. Some are nuanced and considered and can incorporate facts. Yours is wildly inaccurate and made from a position of ignorance, but wrap it up in that 'subjectivity' fig leaf and maybe no one will notice.

 

Bloody hell, who pissed on your chips?


Okay, my exact opinions expressed were that the combat in Dark Souls is slow and clunky. I did not express any opinion about the quality of the game as a whole, nor did I suggest that slow or clunky were undesirable things for game combat to be in general, just that this put me, personally, off the game.

Now, I have expressed before that I found the combat in Dark Souls to be slow and clunky (or words to that effect), in the Dark Souls thread no less when I was trying out the game. Nobody in there disagreed with me at the time that it was slow, clunky is more subjective, but as I suggested earlier, Chalice's 'deliberate' could be my 'clunky'.

So, with all this in mind, how exactly is my opinion 'wildly inaccurate'?

I was just winding you up because your Dark Souls views are just the sort of thing you would have picked up on if it had been about Destiny and probably derailed the thread into tedium. I don't give a shit. Sounds like you've played more Souls than I have.

monkey wrote:

I was just winding you up because your Dark Souls views are just the sort of thing you would have picked up on if it had been about Destiny and probably derailed the thread into tedium. I don't give a shit. Sounds like you've played more Souls than I have.

Actually, no, they aren't in the slightest. I've never argued with anyone who has tried the game and didn't get on with the fundamental mechanics. I've argued against people who slag the game off after giving up on before reaching the endgame, but then I wasn't slagging Dark Souls off. If I was, then that would have been just the sort of thing I'd have picked up on, but as it is, I'm afraid you're wide of the mark here.

I'm done with anything that even remotely hints at requiring DLC to progress. That's not so much a mechanic as it is a scam.

The real Dark Souls starts at...

I believed this thread was about game mechanics, not the mechanics of debating or the discussion around how many hours enables you to have a valid opinion on said mechanics or experiences.

Bob wrote:

Is it a game mechanic when the checkpoint is before a cutscene? Or when checkpoints can happen in the middle of you being attacked?

Just go with it. I only said mechanic because convention is easier to confuse. I'll change the title.

that's just shit design. 

as for mechanics we're done with, Okami's bark button is legit. glad to see it make it's way into Tokyo Jungle. that game really is the dark souls of the animal survival genre.

I think really my biggest annoyance is the fake interactivity a lot of action adventure type games have nowadays. It usually involves something like giving you a grappling hook which can hook onto this very specific type of scenery if you press x. So for the rest of the game every time you see that type of scenery you press x and it swings you from this platform to the next. Fine if there's skill involved, but a lot of the time it's more like a Pavlovian response, where you remember which button to press given a certain visual cue (which sometimes even works by flashing a button prompt on the screen as well).

The Batman games, Castlevania: LoS, Enslaved, Tomb Raider, and Assassins' Creed were all guilty of this last gen to varying extents, as were probably many others.

It's all part of not wanting players to fail all the time and give up, but there's not much point playing at all if the choice and skill is removed to too great an extent.

JonB wrote:

I think really my biggest annoyance is the fake interactivity a lot of action adventure type games have nowadays. It usually involves something like giving you a grappling hook which can hook onto this very specific type of scenery if you press x. So for the rest of the game every time you see that type of scenery you press x and it swings you from this platform to the next. Fine if there's skill involved, but a lot of the time it's more like a Pavlovian response, where you remember which button to press given a certain visual cue (which sometimes even works by flashing a button prompt on the screen as well). The Batman games, Castlevania: LoS, Enslaved, Tomb Raider, and Assassins' Creed were all guilty of this last gen to varying extents, as were probably many others. It's all part of not wanting players to fail all the time and give up, but there's not much point playing at all if the choice and skill is removed to too great an extent.

yeah i hate this shit too, though i think batman is the least of those offenders. you could pretty much grapple off any ledge if my memory serves. you're probably thinking of the gargoyles though.

i also feel tomb raider mitigated it slightly - rock climbing still involved some jump timings, but shooting rope arrows into things and it had stupid 'hunter vision' which is just an excuse to not design your game properly.

My feelings on trophies/achievements is in a constant state of flux.. I like teh collecting but can't really be bothered trying to do anything special for them.

Shit games.

Smang wrote:

yeah i hate this shit too, though i think batman is the least of those offenders. you could pretty much grapple off any ledge if my memory serves. you're probably thinking of the gargoyles though.

I think with Batman it was some of the other tools. Specific places you could press a button to spray explosive gel, or particular panels you could pull off the wall with some gadget or other to open new routes.

As Chalice says, anyone who thinks that's some sort of Metroid style gameplay needs to play Metroid again.

IanHamlett wrote:

In Batman it was usually a choice tho. Use the explosive gel to take out that guy or pull him  under the grate or hang him from the gargoyle or punch him in the fucking neck. I've only played Arkham Asylum tho. Have we had false peril? Grabbing onto a ledge that breaks away and makes precisely zero difference to the inputs required. Fuck that. Tomb Raider did a variation of this that actually worked pretty well. A building might be crumbling while you jump, it wouldn't make a difference to you right this second but it would make you change your next move.

Oh you mean like 90% of Uncharted's "platforming". Oh gee, the pipe/ladder/branch/train you were climbing and almost at the top of just collapsed and now you have to do twice as much more! Joy!

Fucking Enslaved did this too.

Insipid design. Even exploding barrels are less predictable.