The Shattered Elden Ring Thread: Tarnished Edition - (Shadow of the Erdtree p. 85)

[Elijin]

Hello yes, I am here to tell you all combat is just pressing inputs, then different inputs to avoiding getting hit. Also anything that isnt a boss is boring. Exploring is boring. Fighting is boring. Everything is boring. I hate all games from the last 20 years and it's very important to me that you all know this. Be amazed by my superior attitude and smugness, and know that by you liking any of the crud that calls itself the gaming industry, I am better than you. They say I have never once been offended by anything.

 

[BrawlMan]

@hanselthecaretaker

​

 

[CriticalGaming]

@hanselthecaretaker

​

I watched this and really don't understand Sterling's point. Because Elden Ring doesn't guide the player with map markers that's true, but it also doesn't have any variety to it's content. You will always be going to a place and fighting a thing. Always. Even if there are puzzles, those puzzles usually require you to fight a thing.

Look Ubisoft maps are litered with little things to do or find and there are only a handiful of varying things (climbing puzzles, combat, stealth puzzles, random treasures, whatever) but at least that content is more that 1 thing, and the map is filled with stuff all the time everywhere. Elden Ring's open world is filled with bad guys and nothingness.

I seriously don't know what crack people are smoking but the absence of map markers (at first), does not mean that ER is doing anything differently. If anything it only makes running around the map annoying. The whole time you run around in ER you have this weird paranoia that you missed the best hidden item in the game that you NEED in order to be able to defeat The Bullhole Destroyer, and if you try without that item you'll get your butthole destroyed.

Not to mention a lot of progression critical NPC's are missable and the player would have no idea. I never found the lady that levels your summons up, which means that summons are worthless to me and the game is that much harder because of it. Hell spirit summons in general are technically missable. Every other critical NPC in any previous game has been forced onto the player. You can't miss the doll in Bloodborne, you can't miss the Firekeeper in Dark Souls, you can't miss the Sculpter in Sekiro. If an NPC holds a vital mechanic then it should be missable by the player.

But that is what comes as a cost of Guidance-free game design. You risk the player missing critical things that would make their play-throughs easier, and therefore risk players bouncing off your game.

"Oh you didn't find the obvious super powerful NPC behind the false wall in the random cave 99 miles off any explorable path? Sucks to suck bro." It's bad.

I said this previously, but I don't think an open world of emptiness is any better than a world with too much garbage on the map. If anything it's worse becuase at least with too many things on the map the player has knowledge of what they are skipping versus not skipping. In Elden Ring you are not given that choice, you miss things and you can't do anything (in game) about it fuck you player.

Eldren Ring is going to be the most wiki'ed Souls game ever, because of how unfriendly the open world makes the game. With previous Souls games, players might struggle on bosses but it isn't because they didn't power up enough or didn't find the right magical item to take the boss down with, it's strictly a skill thing. Which is less the case in ER because the game is build around certain mechanics.

 

[BrawlMan]

I watched this and really don't understand Sterling's point. Because Elden Ring doesn't guide the player with map markers that's true, but it also doesn't have any variety to it's content. You will always be going to a place and fighting a thing. Always. Even if there are puzzles, those puzzles usually require you to fight a thing.

Look Ubisoft maps are litered with little things to do or find and there are only a handiful of varying things (climbing puzzles, combat, stealth puzzles, random treasures, whatever) but at least that content is more that 1 thing, and the map is filled with stuff all the time everywhere. Elden Ring's open world is filled with bad guys and nothingness.

I seriously don't know what crack people are smoking but the absence of map markers (at first), does not mean that ER is doing anything differently. If anything it only makes running around the map annoying. The whole time you run around in ER you have this weird paranoia that you missed the best hidden item in the game that you NEED in order to be able to defeat The Bullhole Destroyer, and if you try without that item you'll get your butthole destroyed.

Not to mention a lot of progression critical NPC's are missable and the player would have no idea. I never found the lady that levels your summons up, which means that summons are worthless to me and the game is that much harder because of it. Hell spirit summons in general are technically missable. Every other critical NPC in any previous game has been forced onto the player. You can't miss the doll in Bloodborne, you can't miss the Firekeeper in Dark Souls, you can't miss the Sculpter in Sekiro. If an NPC holds a vital mechanic then it should be missable by the player.

But that is what comes as a cost of Guidance-free game design. You risk the player missing critical things that would make their play-throughs easier, and therefore risk players bouncing off your game.

"Oh you didn't find the obvious super powerful NPC behind the false wall in the random cave 99 miles off any explorable path? Sucks to suck bro." It's bad.

I said this previously, but I don't think an open world of emptiness is any better than a world with too much garbage on the map. If anything it's worse becuase at least with too many things on the map the player has knowledge of what they are skipping versus not skipping. In Elden Ring you are not given that choice, you miss things and you can't do anything (in game) about it fuck you player.

Eldren Ring is going to be the most wiki'ed Souls game ever, because of how unfriendly the open world makes the game. With previous Souls games, players might struggle on bosses but it isn't because they didn't power up enough or didn't find the right magical item to take the boss down with, it's strictly a skill thing. Which is less the case in ER because the game is build around certain mechanics.

Sterling's entire point that was while ER is not perfect with its open world, at least attempt something different or make it interesting. Varies it up. It doesn't do the same copy and paste it formula Ubisoft and certain other companies have been doing for the past decade now. Considering how fast the game is selling, that's saying something. They have a big point. This game is definitely shaking up the industry or is going to at some point. Which is definitely sooner than later.

Like I said before in the past, because it's either copy Ubisoft or copy Rockstar, with little in between of distinguish. Majority of them I either don't find interesting or don't find good. I may not care much for ER, but if you had a gun to my head, I would take ER any day over whatever crap Ubisoft and Rockstar (and all the shameless imitators) puts out at least. I would still play both Spider-Man games, and Ghost of Tsushima over ER though.

 

[CriticalGaming]

Considering how fast the game is selling, that's saying something.

I think it's selling off reputation not the open world though.

It doesn't do the same copy and paste it formula Ubisoft and certain other companies have been doing for the past decade now.

Except that it does. The caves are all the same, and feature many of the exact same bosses changing only the element the boss uses or adds a second one to the fight. The sheer number of bosses that are just normal enemies beefed up a little, or hell the number of times they use the same enemy as yet another boss is staggering. The knight on the horse for example is used three times in the same zone, then you have to fight two at the same time later, before finally fighting a beefed up one later than that. You fight this same enemy no less than 5 times. The dragons are even more egregious fighting over 9 of the exact same enemy (with pallet swaps or elemental differences),

Elden Ring suffers greatly from the copy paste syndrome and the only reason that people don't notice it, is probably because it is very spread out because of all the open space of nothing that exists in this world. So IMO it's not any different from a Ubisoft game really, it's justmore subtle about it.

I would still play both Spider-Man games,

Still the best open world maps ever made. Them and possibly the Yakuza worlds are simply fantastic, striking a balance of not overwhelming the player with icons while also providing them with enough to do.

There is something to be said about ER's minimalism, but I feel that the minimalism doesn't work when combined with the obscurity of actually finding places to go. Perhaps an added system where you could buy maps from vendors with Points of Interest on them would have worked. This would allow players freedom to explore while at the same time also providing them with a way to find places they might be missing at the cost of exp to buy the map locations. Also it would allow players to not bother with the map as the memorize it during additional playthroughs.

I really don't see any casual player getting through the game without using at very LEAST a map guide. They may start that way, but I feel the game is frustrating enough that at some point people will look shit up. Elden Ring makes me feel bad that Strategy Guides aren't a thing anymore, because i would have bought one for sure.

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

*snipped for post size limit*.

As I’ve said before regarding open world stuff, mileage will vary. You said so yourself way back when that you’re a rabid completionist who can’t bear the thought of some stone left unturned. Others simply aren’t bothered by it that much if at all, and are completely fine experiencing a game as they play it sans any help. Most games like this are far too big to ever see and do everything anyways. The point of the variety is that there’s enough to appeal to every type of player vs Pokemon’ing the content.

There are like what, a dozen different map markers available in ER as it is that can be placed anywhere, along with a beacon guiding the way to a chosen spot if people so chose to use it. Most of the game is centered around character builds, and yes that makes up the bulk of content that people will find out in the world aside from lore bytes, but I wouldn’t call it lacking because of that.

Equipment & Magic | Elden Ring Wiki

Elden Ring Wiki Guide: Weapons, Walkthrough, armor, strategies, maps, items and more.

eldenring.wiki.fextralife.com

If people would rather wiki everything to save time, there’s no harm in that of course. But it also kinda rescinds the right to complain later that there’s nothing to see or do. I chalk it up to the Information Age and the lack of time a lot of people have. It unfortunately leads people down a road where simply consuming content is more the norm than having the time or patience for allowing a sense of discovery.

 

[BrawlMan]

Except that it does. The caves are all the same, and feature many of the exact same bosses changing only the element the boss uses or adds a second one to the fight. The sheer number of bosses that are just normal enemies beefed up a little, or hell the number of times they use the same enemy as yet another boss is staggering. The knight on the horse for example is used three times in the same zone, then you have to fight two at the same time later, before finally fighting a beefed up one later than that. You fight this same enemy no less than 5 times. The dragons are even more egregious fighting over 9 of the exact same enemy (with pallet swaps or elemental differences),

Elden Ring suffers greatly from the copy paste syndrome and the only reason that people don't notice it, is probably because it is very spread out because of all the open space of nothing that exists in this world. So IMO it's not any different from a Ubisoft game really, it's justmore subtle about it.

Like I said before, and as Sterling pointed out, it's not perfect but they still try to divvy up some changes. If you don't like how the game functions, or not doing enough in that department, that's fine by me.

I think it's selling off reputation not the open world though.

I'm thinking it's both at this point.

I really don't see any casual player getting through the game without using at very LEAST a map guide. They may start that way, but I feel the game is frustrating enough that at some point people will look shit up. Elden Ring makes me feel bad that Strategy Guides aren't a thing anymore, because i would have bought one for sure.

And I bet you out of that 10 million copies sold, not all of them are hardcore players. I'd have to say at least that maybe 80% or 85% of the people that bought Elden Ring are casuals and not hardcore fans. Besides, that's what YouTube is for at this point, or the wiki. And I'm sure not every casual person will do this, but there are plenty that want to discover stuff on their own. Do not underestimate them. If that's the case, then Demon Souls nor Dark Souls in the last of this long, nor had this much staying power. These games are only getting bigger and bigger in sales each time, and gaining new audiences. There are more than plenty that can adapt. For one that cleans that this game doesn't need an easy mode, you're certainly going more out of your way to make things easier for the casual player. They can do it, if they choose to do so.

As for strategy guides, while I do miss them to an extent, I don't miss them that much. I know nowadays that they have special strategy guides for certain niche games or high profile stuff that comes in hardcover format with all the artwork and stuff. At least it's something. The reason why strategy guides went away, because of the internet, and games becoming more accessible. And of course, save that extra money.

 

[SilentPony]

Hello yes, I am here to tell you all combat is just pressing inputs, then different inputs to avoiding getting hit. Also anything that isnt a boss is boring. Exploring is boring. Fighting is boring. Everything is boring. I hate all games from the last 20 years and it's very important to me that you all know this. Be amazed by my superior attitude and smugness, and know that by you liking any of the crud that calls itself the gaming industry, I am better than you. They say I have never once been offended by anything.

Oh hi MovieBob, haven't seen you on the Escapist in awhile.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Sterling's entire point that was while ER is not perfect with its open world, at least attempt something different or make it interesting. Varies it up. It doesn't do the same copy and paste it formula Ubisoft and certain other companies have been doing for the past decade now. Considering how fast the game is selling, that's saying something. They have a big point. This game is definitely shaking up the industry or is going to at some point. Which is definitely sooner than later.

Speaking as someone who has yet to play the game, but has played Demon's Souls, Dark Souls, Bloodborne, and a significant portion of Dark Souls 3 and Sekiro, doesn't Elden Ring just as well sell itself on the usual Souls-iness, similar to how Ass Creed and Horizon sell themselves on the very familiar open-world, jumbo content? If for example it wasn't an open-world that could shake up the industry, wouldn't it have sold just as well? The amount of hype that was instantly palpable at the moment it got announced - before anyone knew it was going to be open-world - would suggest so. Back then it was still about George R.R. Martin writing it - Whatever happened to that? I haven't heard a peep about him in the post-launch hype.

I would be very surprised if Elden Ring managed to break the open-world genre out of its giant, overbearing funk, since Souls and open-world speak to very different audiences - One being more casual, bang-for-your-buck, and the other being hardcore difficulty and lore enthusiasts.

Open-world really seems to mean different things to different people. Most people can agree that anything from Ubisoft is just tired busy work, but beyond that the opinion on what is actually a good open-world and what isn't is pretty murky. Sterling mentions Elden Ring as an open-world that finally gets it, and hints at Breath of the Wild as an open-world that doesn't, but then at the time (and still) people pointed at that game as an open-world that finally got it right. And then it was Ghost of Tsushima because it had wind. It kind of reminds me of whenever a new, big cinematic game comes out, and you'll undoubedtly hear people saying 'okay, now this is really the Citizen Kane of gaming'.

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

@Casual Shinji I was curious about GRRM as well, and he did make a small statement post launch -

George R.R. Martin shares gratitude for Elden Ring's success & his part in its design

The Game of Thrones writer and Elden Ring collaborator had some humble thanks to share for both FromSoftware and its fans.

www.shacknews.com

Also some small insight behind his contributions-

George R.R. Martin May Be Shocked To See What His Elden Ring Characters Have Become

What's more fun than making heroic figures? Breaking them down into terrifying bosses, of course!

www.gameinformer.com

..

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

Some ideas -

Elden Ring: Best Builds For Every Class

Elden Ring offers a variety of viable ways to build your class, but these are some of the best builds fans have found so far.

www.denofgeek.com

 

[BrawlMan]

​

 

[Phoenixmgs]

Same goes for FROM games. Idk why lock-on has somehow ended up being regarded as a necessity of combat. It’s situational like practically any other game; or at least ones that allow high freedom of movement.



Again, mobs shouldn’t be an issue for anyone familiar with the games as they are given ways to deal with them, including just running the hell past a lot of them if need be. There are also different attack types for broader range, or ways to bait most enemies one by one, magic, pyromancers, miracles, etc. with larger AoE. Options are there and it’s the player’s fault if they’re ignored.

Every video I watch of people playing Souls, they almost always lock-on to everything. Looking at Ryu and Rurikhan playing ER, they are locking on to basically all enemies. Watching Yahtzee and Nick play ER on the Escapist streams and they lock-on to everything as well. There's a reason people lock-on in Souls and don't normally in other games that do have lock-on. Are all these gamers playing Souls wrong?

I know how to deal with mobs, I just don't find them fun to fight. They keep me from getting to the stuff I do enjoy. And yes, you can run around them but then that probably means I'm underleveled for content ahead of me. Like running away from all random encounters in a JRPG can be done but you ain't gonna have damage and defense numbers the dev expects you to be at for the boss fight.

I’d like what Horizon does with targeting different areas to be applied more in other games. Maybe MHW does it too but the gameplay itself looks far more awkward and tedious mechanically. I think what I want to see in melee focused combat needs more R&D to really work well.

Maybe you should try MHW or the new game instead of going based on what it looks like. At least in MHW (I haven't played any others), the actual combat is not awkward outside of not being able to perform another action until your current action's animation is complete, which is why many people complain it's slow or sluggish or clunky as almost no games nowadays don't let you interrupt your current action. It would be like me complaining Souls combat is sluggish because I can't dodge in the middle of a hammer strike. I know previous games were awkward as MH was on handheld for a bit and the controls were awkward cuz of the limitations of the PSP controls (only 1 stick). Also, every weapon in MH is basically a different game as every weapon is completely different with its own suite of mechanics. Even if you just like say 3 of the 12 weapons, that's basically 3 different games in a sense.

 

[BrawlMan]

​

 

[Dalisclock]

​

Haven't played ER but checks out.

"I found an elevator in the middle of the forest and it sent me to God".

And I'm 95% sure that's not a metaphor or a joke.

 

[BrawlMan]

Kratos has made his way in to Elden Ring. Warning: Major Spoilers for those who don't want see later game bosses.

Spoiler: Elden Ring - God of War

 

[Catfood220]

​

"I just opened a chest and it transported me to another universe..."

Yep, I fell for that one too. I don't trust treasure chests anymore.

 

[wings012]

I haven't played Elden Ring yet, but from what I can tell it's just a bigger 3D Metroidvania. Yeah it's an 'open world', but metroidvanias were basically the open worlds of the 2D platformer genre. You were free to go wherever you want, until you got stuck anyway and had to explore and figure out solutions to open up more of the world. Depending on the game in question, boss progression was sometimes non-linear. While some of the Dark Souls games had more compartmentalized design, DS1 did have the whole interconnectedness where you could literally walk everywhere and this just seems like just that but BIGGER.

While Ubisoft/Rockstar open worlds are now what people think of as open world games(something I think is incredibly unfortunate) - they are kinda pretty bad open world games? The open world is largely divorced from the game's main questlines and functions as just a glorified quest-hub with regards to that. Yeah sure there's collectibles and minigames and side nonsense, but so much of it is padding. A lot of the time when you engage with a main quest, you're kinda stuck doing it till the end in a rather linear fashion. Sometimes you'll even get a gameover screen if you stray off the path, which is pretty garbage. The Ubisoft/Rockstar are kind of a strange amalgamation of a bunch of different games smushed together than a coherent whole. The main story tends to be a linear cinematic experiences that got chopped up into bits and sprinkled over a so called 'open world' which forces you to traverse it to get through it. The open world itself is just a sandbox of collectibles and dicking around and for all the freedom you have in it, it's all lost when doing any story mission or side activity. You could probably take a lot of these games, yank the main story out, rebalance things a little and you'd be left with some linear Unchartered-esque experience.

I think I prefer a big metroidvania approach to things. You go wherever, you can piss off whenever, you don't activate quests and don't really get locked into it. A boss kicks your ass, but you're free to just piss off. It's a style of open world where you actually play the actual content in the open world, it isn't just a overbudgeted sideshow.

But it's kinda comparing apples and oranges. Both may be 'open worlds' but they are very different games in the end. Heck, when did 'open world' even become a genre unto itself? It's really more how the game is framed innit? Like Halo Infinite is an 'open world' I guess and does have a bunch of the Ubisoft style side activities but is also a very different game from something like RDR2 or Assassin's Creed.

Anyhow my ideal open world type is how Bethesda does things. If only they can do something about the bugginess, janky gameplay and release schedule....

 

[BrawlMan]

While Ubisoft/Rockstar open worlds are now what people think of as open world games(something I think is incredibly unfortunate) - they are kinda pretty bad open world games? The open world is largely divorced from the game's main questlines and functions as just a glorified quest-hub with regards to that. Yeah sure there's collectibles and minigames and side nonsense, but so much of it is padding. A lot of the time when you engage with a main quest, you're kinda stuck doing it till the end in a rather linear fashion. Sometimes you'll even get a gameover screen if you stray off the path, which is pretty garbage. The Ubisoft/Rockstar are kind of a strange amalgamation of a bunch of different games smushed together than a coherent whole. The main story tends to be a linear cinematic experiences that got chopped up into bits and sprinkled over a so called 'open world' which forces you to traverse it to get through it. The open world itself is just a sandbox of collectibles and dicking around and for all the freedom you have in it, it's all lost when doing any story mission or side activity. You could probably take a lot of these games, yank the main story out, rebalance things a little and you'd be left with some linear Unchartered-esque experience.

Exactly why I stopped caring about GTA in between IV and V. Saints Row 2 was peak GTA style, but actually fun and over-the-top. I never bothered with the 3rd game, and I have not touched another Far Cry since 2. Which I hated. I though about getting FC3, but kept putting it off and loss interest. There is a reason I called the Crysis series the better Far Cry.

I think I prefer a big metroidvania approach to things. You go wherever, you can piss off whenever, you don't activate quests and don't really get locked into it. A boss kicks your ass, but you're free to just piss off. It's a style of open world where you actually play the actual content in the open world, it isn't just a overbudgeted sideshow.

But it's kinda comparing apples and oranges. Both may be 'open worlds' but they are very different games in the end.

I don't care much for most metroidvanias either, but I'll take most of those over a "sandbox" any day of the week.

Heck, when did 'open world' even become a genre unto itself?

When every two bit AAA exec jack ass got it in their pants that GTA/Far Cry 2 style is the only way to go, and kept shoving and gaslighting people down in everyone's throats.

Like Halo Infinite is an 'open world' I guess and does have a bunch of the Ubisoft style side activities but is also a very different game from something like RDR2 or Assassin's Creed.

A lot good that did 343. The game becomes weak sauce Crysis (secondary objectives) and only slightly better than the Far Cry sequels.

 

[MrCalavera]

First time in years regretting i don't have a rig/console that could run the new hot shit* video game.

By "hot shit" i mean the good shit.