Your video game hot take(s) thread

[hanselthecaretaker2]

Thanks @BrawlMan for the parry videos. Yes, outside of maybe one ranged weapon in the game (which awkwardly can use the telescope for assistance in manually aiming pretty effectively) that’s the extent of their function. The bullets are limited (but farmable or purchasable) to prevent spamming and encourage proper timing. Lock-on may not be fool proof but when used judiciously it works well enough for people to do no-damage runs and perfect parrying tutorials are in no short supply.

The thing about lock-on that’s overlooked in these games is it’s not meant to function like with pure action/hack n slashers. In those games the control scheme is most effective using the face buttons for offense, and the environments are a non issue which frees up the camera and lock-on function to fully facilitate effectively using them. With Souls, the player needs camera control at all times for navigating environments, avoiding stray arrows, fire bombs, etc. which often needs to be done independently of active combat. That way the player can have 360 degree movement at any point with say a shield raised on a narrow ledge without having to worry about lock-on screwing up their pathing.

Hence, offensive/defensive controls work best on the shoulder buttons. Otherwise the player would need to constantly be fuddling between the face buttons and right stick, which would make targeting of any kind a complete shit show. Knowing when/what to lock onto or not is possibly the most essential part of making the games work for player instead of against them.

 

[Casual Shinji]

You're really hung up on the fact that it's a gun. It's not really a gun, it's a function. The function is to parry and stun enemies. To that end it could have been anything. Instead of having you fire a gun they could have had you throwing a brick, shooting off a roman candle, using a spring-loaded boxing glove, whatever. They chose a gun because a gun is a cool thing for it to be, not because they wanted the function of a gun.

To explain this with another example: Halo has a weapon, the energy sword. People aren't complaining that the game doesn't let you have big cool sword fights with the energy sword with blocking and parrying and ripostes, because that's not the function of the energy sword. The function of the energy sword is to be a close range power weapon that can one hit kill. It's just the Covenant equivalent of the shotgun in terms of function. It wouldn't matter if it was a sword, an energy shotgun, a short range heat ray, or something else. It exists to be a close range power weapon, it doesn't exist to be a sword, despite being a sword.

It is a gun, it functions as a gun; you use it to shoot projectiles at targets. You just can't aim it. I'm hung up on the fact that it's a gun, because this is a recurring issue in the Souls games. In Dark Souls it already ticked me off that you couldn't manually aim spells, you were depended on the lock-on, which has a margin for error, and everytime that margin occured I was out a spell. This was mitigated by the fact that spells would refill at bonfires, but it was still annoying. Then we had the bow which you could aim, but it was an aim so bad you avoided it like the plague. But eh, Fromsoft might still be a bit fresh to this whole action RPG genre, I'm sure they'll learn eventually.

Out comes Bloodborne which has a straight-up gun - no spells, no bow - a gun... and you still can't bloody aim your projectiles. I've been on this spiel before and I wouldn't have as much of an issue with the mechanic as is if your bullets refilled at lanterns, which they only do if you have a supply in your stash. And while you do pick up ammo as you go and probably collect a nice amount so as not to run out most of the time, running out is definitely a risk, and you'll probably end up farming for them.

The gun was marketed as a replacement for the shield, the game even as a gag shield as a joke, as in 'why would you use this now that you have a gun', but the shield didn't use consumeables unlike the gun. The shield needed be repaired with the use of souls, so in a sense it did use consumeables, but since souls are the currency in the game you always picked some up. If the gun could use souls to convert to ammo, at a vendor or the lantern or whatever, I probably wouldn't have as much of a problem with it neither.

It comes down to the gun just not being fun to use. You don't feel empowered or skilled when using it, you just feel awkward. It's annoying and cumbersome, yet also your main mechanic for staggering enemies.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

It is a gun, it functions as a gun; you use it to shoot projectiles at targets. You just can't aim it. I'm hung up on the fact that it's a gun, because this is a recurring issue in the Souls games. In Dark Souls it already ticked me off that you couldn't manually aim spells, you were depended on the lock-on, which has a margin for error, and everytime that margin occured I was out a spell. This was mitigated by the fact that spells would refill at bonfires, but it was still annoying. Then we had the bow which you could aim, but it was an aim so bad you avoided it like the plague.

Yeah, like I said before, it's an intentional limit on your range to make it more difficult to pull enemies out of position. If you can hit the enemies they want the enemies to have the chance to hit you back.

Out comes Bloodborne which has a straight-up gun - no spells, no bow - a gun... and you still can't bloody aim your projectiles. I've been on this spiel before and I wouldn't have as much of an issue with the mechanic as is if your bullets refilled at lanterns, which they only do if you have a supply in your stash. And while you do pick up ammo as you go and probably collect a nice amount so as not to run out most of the time, running out is definitely a risk, and you'll probably end up farming for them.

You can also sacrifice health for more bullets, so a full health character with full blood vials gets an additional 120 bullets in reserve essentially. Can you run out? Yes, but if you do you're probably doing something seriously wrong.

If the gun could use souls to convert to ammo, at a vendor or the lantern or whatever, I probably wouldn't have as much of a problem with it neither.

You can literally buy bullets with blood echos (souls) from the bath messengers in the hunters dream right from the beginning of the game.

It comes down to the gun just not being fun to use. You don't feel empowered or skilled when using it, you just feel awkward. It's annoying and cumbersome, yet also your main mechanic for staggering enemies.

I think the gun is great and I find it incredibly satisfying. You may not feel empowered using it, but I definitely do.

The point of getting rid of the shield and replacing it with the gun was that they didn't want a "tanky" build in Bloodborne. They didn't want people standing around and blocking, they wanted people to move aggressively, and make offense be your defense. They don't want you turtling up, they don't want you trying to snipe enemies from range, they want you to actively engage them. It's the same reason that they got rid of heavy armor. There's nothing cumbersome about it. Your character is fast and nimble, your dodge is your defensive option. The reason you don't need the shield isn't because you have a gun now, it's because you have the ability to dodge everything in the game regardless of what "build" you're using. The parry timing with the gun is also less strict than the parry timing with the shield. Using the gun doesn't deplete your stamina the way blocking with your shield or parrying did. Missing with the gun is less punishing than missing a shield parry because of the health regen you get on attacks, and because healing is faster and safer than it is in the other soulsborne games.

I really just don't think you understood how to play this game.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Yeah, like I said before, it's an intentional limit on your range to make it more difficult to pull enemies out of position. If you can hit the enemies they want the enemies to have the chance to hit you back.

You already can though. And you could easily implement a range limit even with a manual aim.

You can literally buy bullets with blood echos (souls) from the bath messengers in the hunters dream right from the beginning of the game.

Then I stand corrected on that one.

I really just don't think you understood how to play this game.

Don't give me this bullshit though. I finished this game, I used the gun as the game intended, and staggered many an enemy. The mechanic was just unintuitive and shit.

I thought we we were past the 'criticizing a Souls game means you just don't get it', and criticizing an action game with a gun for not letting you aim said gun is a valid criticism. If people were to look at the classic Resident Evil games and claim not being able to manually aim your weapon fucking sucks, then I'm in no position to say they're wrong.

 

[hanselthecaretaker2]

Ok. Not liking the way a game does something is completely understandable. But saying it’s shit because it doesn’t play how *I* want and refusing to accept the difference is…completely the opposite.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

Sounds like user error. You need to be deliberate with your use of lock-on. It's a tool, there are times to use it and times to not use it. If you immediately turn on lock-on the moment you get into combat, and then don't disengage it until combat is over of course you're going to have a bad time, that's not how it's meant to be used. Also, if you're letting yourself get surrounded then you're going to have issues. Trying to fight enemies that are behind you and you can't see SHOULD be awkward.

Or the game could just not have lock-on and when I press the left stick towards an enemy and attack, my character simply will, you know, attack that enemy like 3 generations ago with like Prince of Persia: SoT or God of War or Bayonetta or like every melee combat game that isn't a Souls game or Souls-like.

 

[hanselthecaretaker2]

Or the game could just not have lock-on and when I press the left stick towards an enemy and attack, my character simply will, you know, attack that enemy like 3 generations ago with like Prince of Persia: SoT or God of War or Bayonetta or like every melee combat game that isn't a Souls game or Souls-like.

Souls isn’t just melee, but that can still be done if lock-on simply isn’t used. I think people wind up using it as a crutch too often for melee. My post #4421 at the top of the page is more elaborate on this.

 

[Mister Mumbler]

Yeah, like I said before, it's an intentional limit on your range to make it more difficult to pull enemies out of position. If you can hit the enemies they want the enemies to have the chance to hit you back.

Okay, so then why can you do the telescope trick (DS1 had this same trick, I'm pretty sure I used it on those asshole roof archers near Orstein/Smaugh) to get even better long range accuracy than you would have with a simple reticle? Hell, if the games really didn't want that, why design the levels to give you opportunities to do so (DS1 first Black Knight before the Taurus demon comes to mind).

I really just don't think you understood how to play this game.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Ok. Not liking the way a game does something is completely understandable. But saying it’s shit because it doesn’t play how *I* want and refusing to accept the difference is…completely the opposite.

Not really. I'm calling it shit BECAUSE I don't like the way it handles this particular mechanic. I'm not saying other people need to think it's shit. And while I didn't accept the difference I certainly tolerated it enough to finish it.

And let's not pretend that the Souls games at all make an effort to give the player comfortable action controls. This series revels in and its fanbase lauds how obtuse it makes the act of playing them. Saying that it sucks that I can't aim a projectile weapon - a standard for 3D actions games - really shouldn't be this controversial.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

And you could easily implement a range limit even with a manual aim.

And if they did that I feel like you would still be complaining that your gun can't shoot more than 20 feet by screaming "but it's a gun, they're supposed to shoot far!"

I mean, you've got a character using a smooth bore weapon with no sights, in their non-dominant hand, and shooting at moving targets while themselves moving and you're complaining that sometimes your character misses. Maybe you shouldn't be shooting at moving enemies and expecting to hit your shots.

Locking on in the souls series isn't synonymous with "targeting" it just means that the camera is going to keep that enemy in the center of your screen for you. Sometimes this is useful and sometimes it is not. The fact that you don't understand this shows that you don't understand the game on a mechanical level.

Don't give me this bullshit though. I finished this game, I used the gun as the game intended, and staggered many an enemy. The mechanic was just unintuitive and shit.

And I thought it felt a lot better and more intuitive than the parry mechanics with the shield from the previous games.

I thought we we were past the 'criticizing a Souls game means you just don't get it', and criticizing an action game with a gun for not letting you aim said gun is a valid criticism. If people were to look at the classic Resident Evil games and claim not being able to manually aim your weapon fucking sucks, then I'm in no position to say they're wrong.

The game has legitimate things to criticize. The hunter fights are terribly balanced because they have infinite resources. The healing mechanics made PvP a chore because it was impossible to punish healing. The Micolash boss fight sucks. The procedurally generated chalice dungeons are boring and have poor level design, etc. There are criticisms to be had, but you're criticizing something fairly silly. The way the gun works in the game works pretty much perfectly with the rest of the mechanics. What you want would require massive system overhauls and huge changes to enemy AI to work, all for something that almost no one saw as a problem. Would you still have this criticism if the gun wasn't a gun?

Since you brought up Resident Evil, there's a massive mechanical difference between RE1, where you can't manually aim, and RE4, where you can. RE4 is an action game, RE1 is a horror game. Giving the player that level of control completely changes the dynamics of the game. Leon becomes an action hero ready to take on anything rather than someone fearing for his survival. There are mods for RE1 that let you actually aim the guns and let me tell you, the game is a fucking joke if you're able to just shoot every zombie in the head with every bullet. The game is balanced around you not having full control of the aiming, and when you can aim it quite literally breaks the game.

 

[BrawlMan]

People, can we not turn this into another Dark Souls thread? We got like 5 of them on this forum now. To break up the mold, here is Sebastian with another Cold Take.

​

Phantom Blade 0 is going to be my GOTY and blow Black Myth out of the water.

 

[BrawlMan]

Since you brought up Resident Evil, there's a massive mechanical difference between RE1, where you can't manually aim, and RE4, where you can. RE4 is an action game, RE1 is a horror game. Giving the player that level of control completely changes the dynamics of the game. Leon becomes an action hero ready to take on anything rather than someone fearing for his survival. There are mods for RE1 that let you actually aim the guns and let me tell you, the game is a fucking joke if you're able to just shoot every zombie in the head with every bullet. The game is balanced around you not having full control of the aiming, and when you can aim it quite literally breaks the game.

Reminds me of this video from 2022. I got it time stamped.

​

 

[hanselthecaretaker2]

Reminds me of this video from 2022. I got it time stamped.

​

Souls games are like a spa vacation compared to that!

 

[BrawlMan]

Souls games are like a spa vacation compared to that!

You should see his self-imposed challenge runs on various Souls games. They are a spa vacation with hot lava in place of water.

 

[hanselthecaretaker2]

You should see his self-imposed challenge runs on various Souls games. They are a spa vacation with hot lava in place of water.

Yeah that’s a different story of masochistic hell for sure.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

Souls isn’t just melee, but that can still be done if lock-on simply isn’t used. I think people wind up using it as a crutch too often for melee. My post #4421 at the top of the page is more elaborate on this.

Souls is mainly melee. I don't see why my character in a Souls game just can't hit an enemy I'm pointing at with the left stick just because I'm using R1 instead of square or something. Having to directly point my character like perfectly at an enemy so they can hit them with a sword vs missing 2 feet to the left of them is stupid. There's really no reason to need lock-on besides for very circumstantial situations.

 

[hanselthecaretaker2]

Souls is mainly melee. I don't see why my character in a Souls game just can't hit an enemy I'm pointing at with the left stick just because I'm using R1 instead of square or something. Having to directly point my character like perfectly at an enemy so they can hit them with a sword vs missing 2 feet to the left of them is stupid. There's really no reason to need lock-on besides for very circumstantial situations.

That’s not what I meant.

The thing about lock-on that’s overlooked in these games is it’s not meant to function like with pure action/hack n slashers. In those games the control scheme is most effective using the face buttons for offense, and the environments are a non issue which frees up the camera and lock-on function to fully facilitate effectively using them. With Souls, the player needs camera control at all times for navigating environments, avoiding stray arrows, fire bombs, etc. which often needs to be done independently of active combat. That way the player can have 360 degree movement at any point with say a shield raised on a narrow ledge without having to worry about lock-on screwing up their pathing.

Hence, offensive/defensive controls work best on the shoulder buttons. Otherwise the player would need to constantly be fuddling between the face buttons and right stick, which would make targeting of any kind a complete shit show. Knowing when/what to lock onto or not is possibly the most essential part of making the games work for player instead of against them.

There’s no other way to explain it, and I’m not getting dragged into a pointless argument again over this.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

That’s not what I meant.


There’s no other way to explain it, and I’m not getting dragged into a pointless argument again over this.

So it's good controls to have to lock onto those lizard people in Sen's Fortress on narrow ledges to be able to hit them?

 

[hanselthecaretaker2]

So it's good controls to have to lock onto those lizard people in Sen's Fortress on narrow ledges to be able to hit them?

Lock-on doesn’t change your weapon’s attack pattern or hurtbox. Actually in some cases it might make things more difficult to hit other than when strafing is needed. Although I would’ve liked an ability to free aim melee attacks better similar to some spells.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

Lock-on doesn’t change your weapon’s attack pattern or hurtbox. Actually in some cases it might make things more difficult to hit other than when strafing is needed. Although I would’ve liked an ability to free aim melee attacks better similar to some spells.

Lock-on makes it so you don't miss an enemy standing right in front of you by swinging like 5 feet to the left/right of it. You can have a system that will do that without the player needing to lock-on.