The internet DISScourse surrounding stuff like this kinda makes me wish we were back in the early 90’s when we literally had to buy an EGM or Gamepro from the bookstore to read a review. Seems like it was a bit easier on everyone back then, before the echo chambers full of howler monkeys and whatnot.
Not really, because even those magazines have their own problems and biases every now and then. Especially if it was a magazine dedicated to a specific consoles. While I miss certain aspects of those days, they weren't perfect paradises. Either had their own issues and ommission of truths, half-truths, and straight up lies at times, or plain brought in the wrong person to review a game where they don't even like the genre. Game Informer....this kinda makes me wish we were back in the early 90’s when we literally had to buy an EGM or Gamepro from the bookstore to read a review. Seems like it was a bit easier on everyone back then, before the echo chambers full of howler monkeys and whatnot.
True, but in general there was a hell of a lot less noise to sift through.Not really, because even those magazines have their own problems and biases every now and then. Especially if it was a magazine dedicated to a specific consoles. While I miss certain aspects of those days, they weren't perfect paradises. Either had their own issues and ommission of truths, half-truths, and straight up lies at times, or plain brought in the wrong person to review a game where they don't even like the genre. Game Informer....
I can happily ignore that noise like I did back then with no issues. Everyone should've realize by a certain point that a big world means big noise too. There will always be positive and negative consequences. How you choose to react to them accordingly is all that matters now.True, but in general there was a hell of a lot less noise to sift through.
Honestly, there's way too many streamers and youtubers making more entertaining and informative content. Plus, you can choose creators with similar tastes, making their reviews a better predictor whether you'll enjoy a game or not. The only purpose these big sites have left is getting pre-release copies and pointing out glaring flaws on day 1. Other than that they're good at tricking people into buying critically acclaimed games.
Souls doesn't have soft-lock like basically every other melee combat game since like PS2. I don't care if the game uses face or shoulder buttons for attack/defense honestly. My point is that like you say Souls uses the shoulder buttons so your thumb can be used for the right stick (camera), then why is there even a lock-on system to keep the camera in place if your right thumb is free to move the camera (since not using the face buttons to attack)? How am I misinterpreting this? Nobody complains that in Bayonetta they have trouble following enemies with the camera because they are using the face buttons to attack, and the enemies are much much faster in Bayo than Souls. Bayo's hard lock is only there because like 2 or 3 moves actually work better when lock-on to the enemies, but 90+% of attacks there's no need to lock-on and you'll see hardly any lock-on being used in videos whether it's some expert doing ridiculous combos or a normal player just playing through it the 1st time. Whereas in Souls, you'll find tons of people using lock-on for like every enemy. There's a reason for that and it's because Souls doesn't have any soft-lock at all.You kept talking about how unless you’re perfectly facing an enemy you’ll miss by like five feet or some exaggerated bs if not locked on, conflating it with using shoulder vs face buttons and how it shouldn’t matter. I’ve already explained in detail why Souls uses shoulder buttons instead of face buttons for offense and defense and it’s about camera function more than anything to do with accuracy during combat. Somehow this gets misinterpreted to the point of insanity.
Other lines of thought or experience with something can exist even if something didn’t work for you, or how you’re used to. You’re also adamantly comparing being able to attack without lock-on to completely different genres and combat systems. It reminds me of an old article I probably brought up on the old forums about this very same topic -
![]()
Lock-On Styles in Action Games
3D action games with freely rotating cameras need a way to focus on objects of interest, otherwise characters moving around enemies can cause the camera to lose sight of their target. It’s di…critpoints.net
Excerpts regarding Souls -
…For this reason there is a draw to combat without lock-on. It’s enjoyable to play Dark Souls without lock-on, and it’s technically more efficient for a lot of tasks as it allows the player to run and dodge in any direction unlike during lock-on.
I think Dark Souls is very fun when fighting multiple enemies without using lock-on or when fighting bosses without the use of lock-on, but keeping lock-on as an option makes some actions and situations easier, so it’s more of an optional tool to be utilized rather than something necessary to keep the combat functioning at all (though it probably would be unreasonable to not include it).
Between this and the Reddit replies it’s clear people can have differing opinions and experiences with something. Let’s just leave it at that shall we, or agree to disagree if nothing else.
That says all I need to know of why you’re left asking -Souls doesn't have soft-lock like basically every other melee combat game since like PS2. I don't care if the game uses face or shoulder buttons for attack/defense honestly.
How am I misinterpreting this?
In God of War, Bayonetta, Devil May Cry, and pretty much any other character action game your positioning in a fight typically doesn't matter. You're mostly fighting in pretty open and pretty flat arenas. When you attack with "soft lock" those games turn or move your character to make your attacks connect (or they just give your attacks really big hit boxes do that you don't have to turn your camera very precisely, but that's a lazy fix from a much older generation of games).Souls doesn't have soft-lock like basically every other melee combat game since like PS2. I don't care if the game uses face or shoulder buttons for attack/defense honestly. My point is that like you say Souls uses the shoulder buttons so your thumb can be used for the right stick (camera), then why is there even a lock-on system to keep the camera in place if your right thumb is free to move the camera (since not using the face buttons to attack)? How am I misinterpreting this? Nobody complains that in Bayonetta they have trouble following enemies with the camera because they are using the face buttons to attack, and the enemies are much much faster in Bayo than Souls. Bayo's hard lock is only there because like 2 or 3 moves actually work better when lock-on to the enemies, but 90+% of attacks there's no need to lock-on and you'll see hardly any lock-on being used in videos whether it's some expert doing ridiculous combos or a normal player just playing through it the 1st time. Whereas in Souls, you'll find tons of people using lock-on for like every enemy. There's a reason for that and it's because Souls doesn't have any soft-lock at all.
Regardless if I'm playing something like Bayo or Souls or God of War or Sekiro or Prince of Persia or any melee combat game, if I'm really close to an enemy and press the left stick towards the enemy and press attack, I shouldn't miss outside of the enemy actually dodging away in some fashion. That should be a very basic function of any melee combat game.