Activision are full of scumbags. So I hold no blame to the families of the victims. They did nothing wrong. I didn't know about this and thank you for sharing.
He did not. That term was already in use before he even got started.
Congratulations, now you know why I don't care for dark souls much.
For most action games, it's [O] or B for XBOX to parry. It's also why I changed to the face buttons with the norse god of war games. I will never use r1 or r 2 light and heavy attacks.
That's... weird, lol. I mean whatever works for you I guess but it's one of the Dark Souls changes to gaming I like, because it makes sense logically- our index fingers are faster and more dexterous than our thumbs. So you want to be doing the most important, frequent actions with them.
Call me crazy but I’m thinking the camera function being often critical in these games with environmental hazards compared to typical action games set within “arena” style level design is why the shoulder buttons are the primary attack/defend. That way, the player can still move the camera independently if needed instead of constantly having to thumb back and forth, which can also mess with aiming.
But you can still move the camera with the right joystick in games where the attack buttons are face. Or are you talking about simultaneously moving the character WHILE moving the camera WHILE attacking? I guess... I dunno I never thought about it like that.
Yup, basically that. Having primary combat inputs on the shoulder buttons makes sense in those cases where you don’t want your thumb off the right stick, including switching targets when fighting a group with lock-on.
It's not really weird when that's been the standard since the 2000s. That's how it was for most action games back then. That's how it is now for nearly any melee focused non-Dark Souls style action games. [SQR] + [TRI] For light & heavy attacks respectively. X + Y for XBOX. The only time I ever use the triggers for attacking, is equipping Nero's shoot button to R2/RT.
He has a very open and frequently cited bias towards auteur-generated art including games. It's a similar bias we see in music and film and it's been a point of examination for decades there as well.
You saw the Windbreaker episode on AAA Identity from Monday, didn't you? I agree with you 100%. As long as the game or ip is good, the identity will be fine, or doesn't matter much in the long run. Things always change, and change is not inherently bad or good, but it does happend. The only time change is bad is when you're going after a target audience that didn't care for your franchise to begin with, and you're trying to CoD/Gears fans who already got what they wanted for example.
Nearly everything about Yahtzee in that episode screamed: "Old Man Yells At Cloud" energy. I will give him some credit actually defending Sonic somewhat and saying how franchises like Sonic and Mario will never go away, as one user hypothesized/wanted. Both franchises are too ingrained into the system and have crossed over into other media for years. Sonic especially. Even if or when a bad/lackluster title happens, all the company has to do is announce and release the next title and all is forgiven usually. The game has to be good too. Though Yahtzee still seems to forget that the people online nor old Sonic fans aren't the target audience. The kids have always been the target audience for the Sonic games, and I don't know why he sees it as such a mystery, "anomaly", nor conundrum. It's not rocket science.
I can agree with him to an extent, but I don't mind it so long as the auteur does not have a head up their asses, and at least credits their team's hard work. It's why I prefer Suda 51, Hideki Kamiya, and Shinji Mikami so much.
I don't get why "Souls" became a new genre when they are dungeon crawlers. Thus, instead of developers just doing their own take on that, they copied Souls games. The main problem I always had with Souls games is that they are way too combat heavy because their combat is really just alright. It's the other aspects of the games I enjoy far more than the combat. I would've have liked the Souls games a lot more if they were like environmental puzzlers with like say 10% of the enemies.
I did. Was a bit disappointed by how softball everyone feels they have to be in debate with him, but I understand it. Thing is it ain't even applied consistently. The steamworld games are pretty much indie and they've gone through more genres in the last decade than some platforms' entire libraries. Last one I bought from them was a city building genre! Also their chosen definition of auteur-requirement for identity just doesn't hold up in any reality I've dabbled in, it's anchored only on an ideal hyper-focused narrow 'memberberry interpretation of the whole entertainment industries history of his. It's this chip he's worn on his shoulder for so many years, like with the weird kneejerk reaction to Song of the Sea being a lower budget game made by a high budget studio, when it was the lead developer just wanting to make a game their daughter could relate to and enjoy - but to yahtzee it was an affront, an "impersonation of indie" he could not accept.
Darks Souls is not a dungeon crawler lol.
About only 5% of the time. Any more than that and it's just glorified nostalgia wank.
That's the problem. He's been a dick about it more than once and for the past decade.
AC should have ended years ago. The only reason I am interested in Shadows is because they're actually trying something different once. I know/heard Mirage is good according to word of mouth and my older brother, but I have no interests at the moment. I wanted CoD to end, but I stop giving a rat's ass about worrying on that franchise since BLOPS2. I stopped playing since MW2 released anyway. At this point, I only focus on the things I am interested in or gives me joy, instead getting upset at franchises I don't like that still exists.
It's not so much that, as it is this new Doom game is taking its visual style and aesthetics from Quake I. There are a lot of old-school Quake fans that want new 3D single player title, and feels the new Doom is robbing that chance. I don't have a problem with it, but I understand their perspective. The most recent Quake title from 2020 is multiplayer only.
Yep; called it. Nothing but memberries and nostalgia goggles. Mind if I quote you? I had this idea/post for the Space Battles controversial gaming opinions thread? If so, I can leave you anonymous if you wish.
In essence, most Dark Souls style games or the games from that franchise are 3D Metroidvanias. Always has been.
I've seen people make complaints about "too much fighting" in Streets of Rage 4. WTF were you all expecting?
Yeah that's no problem, quote away, I abandon all ownership of my posts as soon as they're posted anyway heh
Idk, it always feels like his whole angle is essentially being a bit of a prick relying on a schtick. Not quite as much as an Angry Joe but yeah that’s the impression I get whenever watching his “reviews”.
Every "section" of Dark Souls is a different dungeon in essence. A dungeon is not just a small tight rooms/hallways/prison. A dungeon can be a forest for example. In Souls, you are going through areas filled with enemies to get to the boss to "beat" the area (aka dungeon).
Shadow of War was a fine game... entirely ruined by monetization schemes. At release it was actually pay2win. In its release form it would have taken thousands of hours to get the "final" ending of that game without engaging with the microtransactions. The combat + Nemesis was as good or even better than ever. The problem was they also tried to integrate monetization as well. And it was the exact wrong time to try that as they caught a high point in backlash to monetization square in the face. Strip out all of the microtransactions and rebalance it as they have in its current form... a little padded but otherwise a good game.
