Why is the magic so shitty in Dark Souls...

>You have no objectivity
you're the one brushing off a game with "eugh" my man, or calling dragons dogma too basic in defense of "roll on the ground through the bosses attacks and then hit them 2-3 times as they don't react at all" souls

Went off on a tangent there but i agree. When Souls games focus on their combat elements at the expense of everything else they are not very interesting. I thought Sekiro was a mediocre game.

>balanced
>complaining about balance on SP games

>People think they like it but they dont!
You would be an excellent """gaming Journo""""

And you'd make a good politician with your ability to spin peoples words.
Nobody plays souls games because their combat is well balanced or in-depth, they play it because they get to invade other peoples games and fuck them up, because they get to explore a world and find hidden items or events, because they get to dual wield a katana and a claymore while also casting spells.
Nobody plays it to press circle at the time time and R1 a boss as it doesn't react, if that was the only thing souls games offered they wouldn't have become a subcultural phenomenon

What's the point in asking a question if you're going to answer it immediately?

>with your ability to spin peoples words.
>Instantly claiming victimization

>Nobody plays souls games because their combat is well balanced or in-depth
>Patronizing correct opinions and generalizations

>Nobody plays it to press circle at the time time and R1 a boss as it doesn't react
>Strawman """arguments""" and a Clear lack of understanding of games in general

Serious user you should try and write for kotaku

you talk like a fag. i'm sorry you feel like a hardcore gamer for playing dark souls where unlike skyrim mashing with a sword can get you killed; but you have to restrict yourself more than a smash bros player in order for the game to be anything resembling challenging

Attached: 1496776087726.webm (600x336, 2.94M)

Once upon a time there was a game called Demon's Souls. That game had magic. it was overpowered. It was the most overpowered anything has ever been in a Souls game. After that game, From said "Never again", and so magic was doomed to be shit forever more.

Attached: 1476776043726.png (600x866, 700.57K)

What the fuck are you even trying to say.

Attached: emofo.gif (480x166, 1012.9K)

>You have no objectivity, you're just going off your personal preferences.
>implying taste is objective in any sense

Attached: 1579830002057.jpg (413x570, 46.85K)

Attached: 1526999701040.jpg (900x900, 51.13K)

>mm yeah this shit tastes delicious
>what the fuck it's MY objective taste and i say this shit is fucking delicious

are you retarded?

dilate tranny

>be retarded
>resort to buzzwords

They have the best combat in game history

oh no no nofive games and you can still just run past all the enemies to the fog gate

No, YOU are retarded.
While your personal taste influences your judgment on video games, there's a difference between being a slave to your personal taste, and trying to measure things more objectively.

To say that one prefers other ARPGs to Souls games, is one thing.
To say that Souls games have bad combat, is straight up being a faggot that can't see past his personal preferences.
To be objective is being able to separate what you like, to what is the closest approximation of the objective value of something.
I know what games are the best in most series, in series I DON'T EVEN LIKE, in genres I DON'T EVEN LIKE, because i can sit down and realize "ok this mechanically is better than this" or "the overall game here is better than this overall game".

And essentially, even if you can't do this, the bare minimum expected of you is to realize when something can be described as "bad".
"bad" is for shit that truly doesn't function, that is fundamentally mechanically fucked.
Souls doesn't fall in "bad", is just being a complete contrarian cunt that is an utter slave to his base impulses, and confuses his naive, childish subjectivity with any form of objectivity, simply because he doesn't have control over his own brain to muster anything better than that.

This isn't just a problem with this faggot, it's a problem with a whole new subspecie of nu-Yas Forumstards coming here thinking their shitty personal opinions can even remotely pass for an effort of objectivity.
And then there's even bigger faggots such as yourself that have given up on objectivity completely, probably because you've had your shit opinion stomped into the ground so many times you've just resigned yourself to cope this way.

Attached: 7436364.jpg (346x344, 20.32K)

>writes a bunch of shit about seperating taste from objectivity
>still says dark souls has good combat

Attached: 1558195320465.png (643x820, 1.06M)

You can skip enemies in most games ever made. You ruin your experience by doing that, is your own fault. You'll miss all the items, shortcuts, secrets. Besides running past enemies drastically increases your chances of getting surrounded and killed. You do that on a first attempt in a new area? 100%guaranteed death, you are not making it to the dog door because you do not know where it is.

These games simply have the best game design so far in game history.

Imagine actually thinking this. Souls combat is basic NGB combat with all the depth stolen away and some stupid magic for children. Its an action game for retards. Sekiro is a shallow action game but atleast they tried. The rpg elements of Souls games are so weak its not even an argument.

Souls/BB are still decent games because of the content/world they offer but as for core combat you'd have to be insane dishonest or just inexperienced to say its the best combat in gaming.

>Souls games are the only games with these kind of designs
Comical. I bet you also call anything not made by From that stonewalls you unfair well saying they set the difficulty right lmao

This. You play dark souls for the atmosphere and the level design. It's combat is functional, but it is very restrictive in what you can do (fitting for the series). If you don't give a shit about those things play monster hunter and nioh.

Did dark souls 1 sell more in the west than in japan?

You speak about objectivity, here are some objective flaws in the base combat mechanics of dark souls
>Bosses either don't stagger or only stagger for a few hits with the strongest weapons you can only swing a few times anyway while having gigantic hurtboxes, this means that your choice of weapon literally doesn't matter at all except for what does the most damage without leaving yourself exposed. range, poise damage, damage types, even stamina use almost never matters because you can't get more than 2-3 hits on a boss before they recover and start attacking again with uninterruptible attacks.
>Most enemies who aren't easily killed fodder also suffer from this issue. The differences between weapons only truly matters (outside of "I use this type of character so I do more damage with this kind of weapon") in PVP.
>The AI in every souls game is extremely bad. Even in DS3 and bloodbourne, the 4th/5th games in the series, enemies are easily cheesed by inclines or other differences in elevation, by kiting, by sniping them from outside the designated agro range.
>Another thing enemies historically have an extremely poor time handling are poise and strong shields, instead of having any kind of specific ability to counter these tactics, they just continue to mindlessly swing as if you weren't defending or ignoring their blows
>In short, the enemy design and AI in these games is consistently fails to take into account literally any playstyle besides a lightly armored character hitting people with a sword and rolling through attacks at the right time. zelda on n64 has more meaningful options in regards to the basic combat mechanics than any souls game, it just doesn't have the high damage, the checkpoints, the interesting world design and imposing boss fights that make souls combat interesting.

Ok, your turn. What is objectively well done about souls base combat mechanics. Keeping in mind that they made pretty much the same game five times.

I'm a bit annoyed by this also.
I generally like playing games on hardest difficulty, but I also enjoy playing as a mage. You can't reconcile these two in Dark Souls.

What's good magic then?

Attached: 1442107680977.png (389x421, 180.61K)

You can in Bloodborne, specifically in it's DLC.
But it's version of the most interesting magic build is...a bit unusual, i suppose.

Attached: Kin_Kos_Parasite_Milkweed_A.jpg (1920x1080, 379.76K)

Hexen using the HeXercise mod.
Sacrifice.
Dark Messiah of Might and Magic.
The original Magicka had some interesting ideas going on but sorta falls apart quickly.

Based.
Only retards and underage think Souls combat is good. These are the same retards who ruined the series by wanting more of a combat focused direction in newer games. Souls was never about the combat.

They hated him because he spoke the truth, but he was based.

Listen, buddy, I'm not gonna read all that shit in your post, but you're mad about something completely different. Dark Souls combat is bad, it's just how it is. It's serviceable but extremely simplistic. Saying Dark Souls combat is good is like saying 2D Castlevania games have good combat. They're based entirely on what weapon you choose and how much damage said weapon can do, which of TWO attack types you use at any given moment, and whether you block or dodge an incoming attack. That's literally it. The only other hint of 'depth' is positioning in the form of backstabbing for SOME enemies, but even then it's not much different than the cinematic "takedown" buttons you get in almost any action game these days.

This is the objective fact about it. Every game listed here has twice as much depth as DaS, and even worse overall games than DaS have better combat than it.

tl;dr
Cope.

Attached: 1413404125019.png (436x512, 230.8K)

I just like to explore and play dress up, really. Gives it a bit more flavor

Attached: 8E299CB3-D522-4EE4-87EC-A5186A5811DC.png (621x287, 72.11K)

Wrong, you're mistaking complexity of execution with quality of combat.

This is a big mistake, it's like thinking that the original Doom games have shit gameplay just because they're simple.
If anything, keeping things simple, but structurally sound, is exactly the best route to take when crafting good gameplay.
Complete basic bitch take right there.

Attached: 1.png (970x457, 534.14K)

doom has a lot of depth though, the weapons are actually distinct in meaningful ways (unlike dark souls), the enemy AI is coded to respond to the players strategies instead of just running preset patterns or "walk up to man, start attacking" (unlike dark souls) and you can't defeat every enemy in the game just by being on a higher elevation than they are (unlike dark souls)

>"roll on the ground through the bosses attacks"

See, if iframes didn't work like that and you couldn't use them to go straight through bosses attacks then it would solve so many things. Souls is weird in that it starts off hugely intimidating, but become less deep the more you understand it, unless you go full on 'high level' PvP.

>Why should they have an inferior experience
subjective and dumb. you should always have to work harder for magic.

Iframes are there to reward skilled players that understand their timing.
Back when DeS was first released, 90% of Yas Forums couldn't fuck with iframes at all.
Turtling behind a shell was extremely common.
These days everyone got gud, and somehow it's the game's fault?
It's a tool there to reward getting gud, everyone knows about it now, so they use that tool.

>but you have to restrict yourself more than a smash bros player

Smash has way, way more advanced combat mechanics than Souls does, and deliberately provides you the options needed to turn off shit you don't want, because it lets you choose how you want to play without the kind of "well, just don't level up too much" faggotry you otherwise need.

>Back when DeS was first released, 90% of Yas Forums couldn't fuck with iframes at all.
because the game doesn't explain it's mechanics well/at all. this is what makes souls games interesting. the actual mechanic of "press circle to become invincible" is not interesting, which is why the later games focusing more on the action itself and not the discovery that the action is useful was a mistake.
at any rate this is missing the point. there are many games with depth to their combat that have similar or even stronger dodge roll type moves. the difference is that every single boss in best fought in the same way - by rolling on the ground into their attacks to safely end up on the other side and get a few hits in, then after a while the boss falls over

>zelda on n64 has more meaningful options in regards to the basic combat mechanics than any souls game

This is technically true but only really meaningful in speedruns where you can afford to just wait for enemies to expose themselves.

>zelda on n64
>just doesn't have
>interesting world design

Holy fucking cow.

compared to souls not really. finding hidden areas in dark souls can reward you with rare or powerful items, npc vendors or even entire areas.
in ocarina of time you find a piece of heart, or a buisness scrub selling you items you don't need because enemies drop them for free anyway, or an increase to how many nuts you can hold. it's not exciting even if the overworld isn't just a central field with all the other areas broken apart. majora is a bit better about having the world be more dynamic but it's also a smaller game that uses a lot of assets so they had more time to polish what new stuff they did have

These are my favorite games but I don't think the combat is very good, its passable in that it doesn't take very long to kill/die because health bars are low and its very responsive and consistent (once you're used to the jank). DeS > DaS1 > BB >>>>>> DS2 >>> DS3, on account of the latter two having very poor/boring atmosphere and aesthetics unlike the rest. Demon's Souls doesn't have great art, but it also relies the least on its combat to be interesting.

The reward for people who git gud though is just to make the game trivial, which isn't fun. Its much more fun to try and dodge out of the way of attacks than it is to exploit i-frames, but there's no need if you're good at the game.

tf?
I'm still one shotting fools on DS3 with sorceries.

>Iframes are there to reward skilled players that understand their timing.

This makes positioning unimportant and reduced the skill and variety possible in combat massively. It rewards you superficially for knowing the timing of your enemy's attack patterns, but that's most of the actual difficulty, as the actual timing is extremely lenient if you just roll naked.

>Back when DeS was first released, 90% of Yas Forums couldn't fuck with iframes at all.

That's my whole point. The game is more challenging when you don't know how to dodge through shit and have to desperately try to find an opening. Relying on Iframe rolling makes bosses bitches to fight at first, then results in them being piss when you memorize their attacks.

>These days everyone got gud, and somehow it's the game's fault?
It's the games fault for pandering to people who want 'getting good' to be formulaic; feeling challenging but trivialized through knowledge that already know how to obtain. It pisses me off that you fags treat i-Rolls as a basic mechanic that much be given to the player at full effectiveness unconditionally.

i see someone who cannot call himself a gourmand and pretends he likes food yet doesn't enjoy the full range of flavours yet assumes just be cause he sees me enjoy what he perceives as unsavory makes the ill informed assumption that is all i enjoy

>finding hidden areas in dark souls can reward you with rare or powerful items

You do realize how many magical items are optional? And on top of the heart piece system means that health upgrades rely on you finding secrets instead of being able to level up. Souls generally has much simpler solutions to its quests, which typically amount to hitting a given wall with any weapon, given a covenant a ton of the same item, or going to a random location after a specific event.

What is with this meme. Challenge is the core of video games, SP games need to be balanced

All action games have iframes on dodge, Souls just gives you way too fucking many

anything within the past decade? not asking to be a smartass, but simply because I think good magic and combat in games has taken a back seat for a long time

dragon's dogma doesn't have iframes on dodges afaik. few skills do have them though but they aren't meant to be mobility skills. haven't played DDDA though

>It just allows you to cheese the enemies and isn't at all balanced for the game's combat.
Kind of like in D&D. Or old D&D anyway.

>because the combat in souls games isn't good

The combat is good (as in satisfying), it's just not complex and it shouldn't have to be.

Attached: 43719691_p11.jpg (750x500, 470.72K)

The longsword/sword skills that make you step back have some, you could also argue that perfect blocks and sword/dagger parries are effectively i-frames, but you can also play the game without any of those skills and still reliably avoid damage. I would even argue that there are at least 3 better skills than all of them for each weapon so playing with i-frames is something of a crutch.

>not using sword & sorcery

Attached: 0.jpg (1195x666, 267.19K)