>Souls combat should be more like DMC, where you pummel helpless sandbag enemies.
 Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
 DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
>Souls combat should be more like DMC, where you pummel helpless sandbag enemies.
>What I can say objectively is that Dark Souls 2 is a bad game, it sinks below par. It has several incompetent pieces of design throughout many of the most fundamental parts of the game and a hefty amount of them are in its most celebrated features. The game is far from finished, it's far from refined, it's broken in several areas, is far from a completed work, and that is after they got a second release of the game, which they considered to be the completed work, which is more than the terrible DS1 port got. The fact is by any reasonable and objective evaluation this game falls short, because if it doesn't, then hardly any games do. Because you have to really think to yourself: if you are going to argue why DS2 is actually an amazing game, then make sure your argument doesn't involve feelings, because I don't have time for them
I like how Mauler doesn't mince his words. He just outright says that the game is bad and for people to frick off with their feelings and subjectivity. The fact that reddit, twitter and even Ganker continuously seethe about him just proves how right he is.
Yeah he drowns his videos in too much evidence yet the actual argument is expressed in a blunt and direct way with no fense sitting or hald measure
better too much evidence than not enough
Objectively DS2 is better though
Hey I remember these guys!
Every Souls game has leashing
no it isn't though
DS2 has some things over DS1, but as a whole package, it's inferior.
That's just your emotional interpretative feelings. Objectively 1 is vastly inferior.
See how 2 heavily nerfed circle strafing backstab cheese through smarter ai and more challenging enemy placement? 2 is a big step up over 1. Objectively speaking. Now you can prefer 1 for emotional reasons. I don't want to take that away from you, maybe you were 12 i don't know, but if you're going to try and bring facts bring facts cause I don't have time for your feelings.
>See how 2 heavily nerfed circle strafing backstab cheese through smarter ai and more challenging enemy placement?
>smarter AI
>more challenging enemy placement
>big step up objectively speaking
lol, lmao, lmfao even
are you going to respond to
or just keep dodging because you have no argument? DS1 had mediocre AI, DS2 somehow made it worse, enjoy playing your dogshit unfinished game
You're too emotional. Stop arguing with feelings cause i dont have time for them. 2 objectively has superior, more challenging ai and enemy placement. They attack in groups, defend themselves, aggro from longer distances, follow you through levels, open doors, knock down walls, counter backstab cheese. 1's enemies are one trick pony stage props in comparison.
DS2tards can't into good game design, next you'll defend Frigid Outskirts.
If I cared to respond with an unfinished part of DS2, I would only have to post the cover art of the game.
>dogshit unfinished game
ds1 in a nutshell
>smarter AI
>every character just spins in place like the ground is moving underneath them
Now go try the same thing with the Taurus Demons right before that area. You can bring them to you individually from a fricking mile away
He was right. He got some things wrong which he later admitted. People just like screaming "It is long I won't watch" etc.
I will never understand the defending HBomberGuy gets. I don't like the dude, but he has made """okay""" videos. His DS2 video is pure crap tho, so I am confused why people like it so much. Is it because said people also like DS2 so they defend anyone who also likes DS2?
Is it really idpol thing?
in a really strange turn of events, liking dark souls 2 has become an almost political issue. hbomb is left wing and just happened to like dark souls 2, while most of the dark souls fanbase are right wing. therefore defending hbomb against the "chuds" is something that lefties do at this point, without even necessarily having an opinion on the games themselves.
Leftists ALWAYS had shit taste though
Dark Souls 2 is literally Resetera's favourite Souls game
no resetera likes cringeborne (even though it's an inferior ds3, it's sony exclusive)
>dark souls fans still pretending dark souls isnt mainstream as frick
>while most of the dark souls fanbase are right wing
>while most of the dark souls fanbase are right wing
HAHAHAHA
dark souls literally only became popular because of Ganker and most of the souls fanbase is gamergater type "true gamer" bros. it's right wing.
>thinking Ganker can make a franchise popular on its own
how delusional can you be
it's absolutely the case. nobody gave a frick about demon's souls except Ganker, and dark souls was only well known on release because of the cult following demon's souls had garnered.
>soultards are actually this delusional
no wonder you love these games
Please be trolling. Some of you frickers seriously spend too much time here.
come up with actual arguments or stop coping, lmao
Name literally one game that became popular because of Ganker so I can tell you how wrong you are.
lobotomy corporation
demon's souls
monster girl quest
sengoku rance
nioh
Not him but Ace Combat memes started here and people like max0r put them in his videos and now the internet is spewing Pixy and Torres memes made by Gankertards.
I was here for the Demon's Souls threads. It was fun.
But Demon's Souls got great reviews across the board, bro. The game didn't sell like 2 million copies thanks to Ganker.
nobody cared about the game or even talked about it outside of Ganker. without it it would have been an ultra niche title and would have maybe sold 500k, if even that.
i don't think i can take it anymore
i'm so sick and tired of morons
why don't you have a nice day over it?
>became popular because of Ganker
this literally never happens, stop having such delusional feelings of self-grandeur about shitposting on an internet forum
>most of the souls fanbase is gamergater type "true gamer" bros. it's right wing.
pls anon, my sides can't take much more.
look at the trailer for elden ring with the black guy and the like/dislike ratio, most souls gays are racist gamer bros. i don't care that you're in denial about it, anyone with a 3 digit IQ can see it
I will never forgive moot for creating /misc/ and bringing morons like this here.
you mean /new/? either way this place has always been a racist shithole.
Not like it is now. It wasn't "troony dilate Black person X game is right-wing".
Back in the day it was people getting mad about ISHYGDDT spam and summergays and shit. /misc/ and 2016 did irreversible damage to this place and the only reason it's not getting purged must be because they either don't care or it serves as a honeypot for the FBI.
remember when the biggest issue on the board was tripgays? how quaint those times seem compared to the autists we have now crying about trannies 24/7
Wow yeah. I think I saw Onsokumaru posting like a few years ago still. Well, if it's actually him anyway. I can't stomach this place more than a few times a year at this point. lmao
Double Black folk detected
Only way to fix this board is to bring back dubs and 4 AM threads
A like/dislike ratio for a single trailer is not indicative of the fans' political leanings mouthbreather.
>"it's just a single trailer!"
nevermind the fact that these attitudes are prevalent in every single part of the souls community, whether it's on reddit or youtube or here
yes, the incel to troony pipeline. you'll see a few of these types of people in every racist online community. look up "pinkpilling" lol
Well you jumped the gun and at the same time proved my point about people being addicted to idpol and id culture.
Anyway:
I meant that people normally don't care about Hbomberguy and shit he puts out.
DS2 fans probably don't either.
HBomberguy makes a HORRID video where he gets shit wrong, takes stuff out of context from Matosis' video, and generally acts like a smug butthole
Mauler absolutely rips on said video word by word and proves how poorly made the video was
DS2 fans jump out to defend Hbomberguy and his shitty video because people laughed at Hbomberguy and the flaws of DS2
Based crushma-mind
brainrot
feeling called out?
Most people IRL think like you and it's demoralizing.
most people irl don't understand politics let alone weird moronic internet slapfights that only become political because people feel like they have to take "sides" in everything
>while most of the dark souls fanbase are right wing
I agree with hbomberguy politically more than most of this site but I can't trust any of his political video essays. If he's willing to edit someone out of context when discussing fricking dark souls 2, who knows what he's willing to manipulate to suit his political needs? At least I know enough about DS2 to know when he's lying about it.
Do objectivegays not realize that "bad" is inherently a subjective quality, and no amount of evidence or argument can make something "objectively bad" or "objectively good"?
>"bad" is inherently a subjective quality
no it isn't, it can be either objective or subjective depending on the context
This. Some shit is just bad though but context is everything. The people who want to spew everything is subjective do so because they like to eat shit well at the same time spewing "hot takes" that have no basis behind them and are usually fueled by malicious bias.
No it isn't. Show me a scientific method level of methodology for proving something is good or bad. Even if you could it still comes down to subjective bias. One thing that's "bad" may bother one person very little, while it could make or break the experience for someone else. The "bad" thing is objectively the same for both people, but their experiences are still subjective.
Not every phrase needs scientific backing, that's not what objective means.
>he "bad" thing is objectively the same for both people, but their experiences are still subjective.
Yes, a flaw in the game is objectively equal to all, and subjectively people have more or less issues with it, do you think I disagree with this?
>Not every phrase needs scientific backing
Yes it does. No other field of study would let you just get away with saying shit on a whim just because you feel that way, and then say it's objective. You actually need to back it up with demonstrably repeatable evidence beyond any doubt. You need to define your methodology. In what other way could objective mean? Something cant just be objective because you say it is.
>do you think I disagree with this?
Ok so how are we assessing if something is objectively good or bad than? If you tell me 'x' game has 'y' amount of levels than sure that's objective.
"scientific backing" and "evidence" aren't directly equivalent, you don't have to be a scientist to back up claims with evidence and define how to determine the quality
>how are we assessing if something is objectively good or bad
consistency is one example, a game without hitbox issues is objectively better than one with
>If you tell me 'x' game has 'y' amount of levels then sure that's objective.
This has nothing to do with quality and only talks about what is present in the games. "This is an apple." and "This apple is rotten." aren't the same thing.
Evidence can be subject to selective bias. If I define something as bad and then only show evidence that supports my claim that also isn't objective. If that was your approach studying gravity or whatever you'd be laughed at. That's now how objectivity works. How could you even define something as "bad."
>consistency is one example, a game without hitbox issues is objectively better than one with
So if I play a game for 60 hours and have say 5 examples of a bad hitbox that tells me the game consistently has pretty good hitboxes. But that again that is just an interpretation. It's unscientific, sloppy, methodlology either way that's only applicable to anecdotal experiences. Did you go in the code to study the hitboxes yourself? Did you repeat the hitboxes and record data of all the times the hitboxes worked and didn't? Or you got lucky or unlucky and that's how we're defining what's objective and what isn't?
What if that flaw is a bug that only rarely happens to some people but not others? How would you prove it as objective? People could lie about such a bug existing.
>How would you prove it as objective? People could lie about such a bug existing.
By providing evidence that it exists. Bugs are an issue with the game's code, and how it happens can be replicated. People lying means people lie, this has no relevance to any discussion regarding quality.
I think fully proving it isn't always possible. With games there can be too many variables to always replicate an issue (different PC hardware causing it or netcode if it's an online game).
Someone might even fake evidence to prove their point.
Of course it isn't easy. Most people who claim to be "objective" aren't really. I'm saying it's possible.
If it's hypothetically possible we haven't seen it and no one is doing it. You'd think there'd be a study somewhere that Jaws 1 is objectively better than Jaws 3D but it doesn't exist.
>we haven't seen it and no one is doing it
game essayists have been doing this for a while now, and I'd say
showcased well why DS2 is objectively bad. Unless you're talking about literal PhD-level scientists, then no.
lol
Why bother giving all these long responses if you're just gonna end up shitposting and ignoring me in the end? I thought this was a decent serious discussion until now, especially considering this is Ganker. If you're going to complain about the lack of care for proper objectivity, try to put effort into your arguments.
It doesn't warrant a proper response when you ignore everything i've said and still so matter of factly argue he's objective about anything. He's giving you an opinion. There's zero objectivity except to highlight what the mechanics are, but how he feels about them is all just opinion.
>you ignore everything I've said
Is this about the study thing? Because if you want to become a videogame scientist, feel free, but I imagine it wouldn't be a very lucrative job.
> there's zero objectivity except to highlight what the mechanics are
so he isn't being objective except when he is, great explanation
>but how he feels about them is all just opinion
do you think when scientists come to conclusions at the end of their papers, it's all just their feelings or are they trying to come to an objective conclusion?
As much as he'd like it but Mauler also isn't objective in his arguments. Just one example: Obviously hitboxes being close to the visual of the attack is good.
But how close it needs to be to be considered a 'good hitbox' is entirely subjective from person to person.
Someone might notice the attack is 10cm away from the players model and call it bad and another player wouldn't even notice that.
Dark Souls 2 having worse hitboxes than Dark Souls 1 is not an objective statement. Even though I agree with him on that point.
I don't think he's perfect, but he's done a better attempt than most vidya youtubers.
> how close it needs to be to be considered a 'good hitbox' is entirely subjective from person to person
Disagree, the objective ideal is as close as possible given the engine limitations. Obviously, this is hard, so games are given leeway on this, but when games do fulfill this ideal, they are rightfully praised.
>Someone might notice the attack is 10cm away from the players model and call it bad and another player wouldn't even notice that.
That's their fault for being blind I guess? If you take this logic to its endpoint, we can never criticize games because someone out there might claim these things aren't issues when they obviously are.
You can criticize games all you want but you aren't being objective. If you're just giving your experience that's just your experience. Define what a bad hitbox is, follow a strict repeatable methodology, record all your data, and present it without bias. Now follow that strict procedure for everything. Just talking into a microphone about how you feel while selectively editing in whatever footage to support your argument isn't objective. He obviously has a bias and once to present a one sided argument. And that's FINE if all you are is an essayist but when you tell people you're really being objective that's a problem.
Don't you see that there are a numerous points where you are making judgement calls based on your own beliefs?
>Obviously, this is hard, so games are given leeway on this
Who says how big the leeway is?
>That's their fault for being blind I guess?
Missing a 10cm hitbox issue makes them blind. Then what about a 5cm hitbox issue? It is you who calls them blind for missing something you would have likely picked up on. Thats where the line is.
The end result of all this isn't that we can't critize games just because someone has a different subjective opinion. This shit is all subjective, so who cares about objectivity?
You can and should critize games for doing things you don't like. Objectivity isn't necessary for that.
>You can and should criticize games for doing things you don't like. Objectivity isn't necessary for that.
I like to have standards for this stuff, not just a vague sense of disdain I can't explain properly, but whatever.
You can support your subjective argument by going into detail and showcasing your points. Thats also what Mauler does.
Being subjective doesn't mean you only make statements like "I dunno, I just like it".
>You can support your subjective argument by going into detail and showcasing your points.
You can also do this with objective arguments, don't see why you seem to think this isn't possible.
Because I really don't think you can make any statements about a games quality that could still be considered objective.
At every step of the way you are looking at something the game does and comparing that to your ideas of what a game should be like and whats fun to you.
I think you could only make self-evident statements like "Dark Souls 3 is the third game in the Dark Souls series". Thats objectively true.
>Because I really don't think you can make any statements about a game's quality that could still be considered objective.
A functionally broken game is objectively worse than one that isn't. If you disagree, I don't know what to tell you, you're literally just wrong.
>I think you could only make self-evident statements.
Oh, you're one of those "objective just means Game is X and Y, the end". Cool.
>Oh, you're one of those "objective just means Game is X and Y, the end". Cool.
Oh I'm even stricter than that. Genres are also subjective lol.
And I agree that a functional game is objectively better than a broken one. But the issue is proving that objectively.
>Genres are also subjective
No, they're relative. there are varioations in genres known as subgenres, but i.e. Super Mario Bros. objectively isn't an RPG.
> I agree that a functional game is objectively better than a broken one. But the issue is proving that objectively.
What is the issue, besides how long it would take to do? Do you not understand what hypotheticals are?
The issue is that I don't believe it's possible at all. At every step you are deciding how a mechanic is supposed to work and then making the claim that the mechanic in Game X deviates too far from that idea.
Subjectivity upon subjectivity.
>The issue is that I don't believe it's possible at all.
Yet you had no problem agreeing with what I said about functionally broken games, how do you rationalize this in your head?
> you are deciding how a mechanic is supposed to work
You don't have to decide on this, you can observe the game/code and figure out how things are supposed to work
>making the claim that the mechanic in Game X deviates too far from that idea
What idea? Of the game being functional? That isn't subjective.
>Yet you had no problem agreeing with what I said about functionally broken games, how do you rationalize this in your head?
The statement was something like "A functional game is better than a broken one". My reasoning is that in this statement it has already been figured out that one is broken and one isn't.
If that is given then yeah, good things are better than bad things.
>You don't have to decide on this, you can observe the game/code and figure out how things are supposed to work
I don't think you can. Objectively at least. What if it actually was the designers idea for the mechanic to work like this and from your perspective he is incompetent, because the mechanic appears broken to you.
You are also not perfect and another person might critize your correction of the mechanic.
>Dark Souls 2 having worse hitboxes than Dark Souls 1 is not an objective statement
Yes it is you fricking homosexual
>Someone might notice the attack is 10cm away from the players model and call it bad and another player wouldn't even notice that.
The subjectivity of POV is irrelevant
It's objective that DS2 hitboxes are inaccurate compared to the relative standard of the series
No it isn't. Prove it.
>relative standard of the series
It's a sequel to this game bro. What are you even talking about?
>It's a sequel to this game bro
But also a prequel to this
ok
And yet BB and DS3 have good hitboxes
Hitboxes don't even matter when you have iframes. Positioning and avoiding attacks doesn't mean anything when hitting the iframe button is the gameplay. Take away your iframes and you wouldn't dodge anything in DS3.
>Take away your iframes and you wouldn't dodge anything in DS3.
Yeah of course, because the game was designed with its own mechanics in mind.
You couldn't jump on platforms in a Platformer if you took away the vertical movement of the jump.
That tells me the hitboxes aren't actually that good if you're just iframeing through attacks instead of avoiding them. What does it matter what the hitboxes are? There's no evidence they're any better than the other games.
>just iframeing through attacks instead of avoiding them
That's literally the main way of avoiding attacks in Dark Souls, rolling is a core mechanic in the games, are you moronic?
DS3 baby you once could just avoid attacks by actually not getting hit...crazy. You dont need iframes for that. If you wanted to argue a game has good hitboxes iframeing through moves doesn't mean anything.
You are out of your mind if you claim that you can play the whole game like that. Lategame bosses have insane tracking. DS2 is built around I-frame dodging just as much as any souls game.
It's just that it's the easiest in DS3 because it has the most forgiving dodge roll.
2 is not built around iframe dodging. That why lowering equip increases roll distance. So you can actually dodge away from attacks. You sidestep attacks. The game even has a functioning backstep. Spacing and positioning is much more important. If you dodged this attack to the left you'll get hit, right and you're safe. You dont need iframes to dodge to the right and avoid the attack. 3 is where they dumbed all that down so you just hit the iframe button at the right time.
>2 is not built around iframe dodging
Then why is ADP in the game? Why not remove iframes altogether? Because this isn't true and just bullshit you made up in your head to justify the shitty design.
You've got it backwards. You have ADP in the first place precisely because it's not a game about iframes. Otherwise it would just be like DS3 where everyone has 13 because it's a game about iframes and the player cant afford not having them. You can play without leveling ADP. I prefer to play that way.
>Lowering equipment also increases dodge distance in DS3 + Elden Ring
It barely makes a difference. It's also dumbed down in comparison where you get only 2 barely perceptibly different rolls, vs DS2 where every percentage point effects roll distance as well as stamina regen speed. Leading to more playstyle variety and deeper customization. It also doesn't matter either way because you're iframing through attacks instead regardless. You're actually better off dodging into attacks so you can follow with a quick counter.
yet adp allows you to have even more iframes than DS3, making your point moot. It also doesn't help that the hitboxing is so awful that you will be hit regardless of if you properly "dodged" it
>yet adp allows you to have even more iframes than DS3
It doesn't. You can have 15 iframes 20 minutes into DS3. VS DS2 compromising every other part of your build investing into ADP so that by the end of the game you finally have as many iframes as you start off DS3 with. Playstyle variety doesn't make it a requirement. It's your choice to level ADP as little or much as you want. That doesn't make the game around iframes anymore than DS1 is a game around pyromancy.
>It also doesn't help that the hitboxing is so awful
They aren't though you can see you can dodge attacks .
No iframes are needed
>compromising every other part of your build
you get so many souls in DS2 that it'll never compromise your build
And you have more stuff to spend your souls on. If you wanna roll more than two times and attack you gotta raise Stamina. If you wanna wear good armor and keep equip load low you gotta raise vitality. And vitality matters because equip load governs roll distance and stamina regen speed. If you wanna powerstance that's a lot of levels too and two weapons are heavy so that's more points put into vitality that you have to consider. Things that were just simplified, or outright removed from DS3. You get all the stamina you need right at the start of the game. There's no investing into iframes because you get that too. Vitality doesn't mean anything anymore because your roll at 69% is already 99.9% as good as it gets and all you need. Everyone is just playing pretty much the same way and all this depth from before was replaced with just rolling around and mashing R1 a lot being the nature of the game.
>You have ADP in the first place precisely because it's not a game about iframes.
Moron.
Lowering equipment also increases dodge distance in DS3 + Elden Ring. The reason why it does in DS2 is not that the game isn't built around I-frame dodging.
The reason is that Adaptability already dictates your I-frames. If distance was all you need then ADP wouldn't exist.
"just don't get hit bro"
I'll enjoy waiting for when you start posting no-hit speedruns of these games when you say it's so easy.
People only believe this because they didn't really start paying attention to them until 2
>people only started talking about game quality with DS2
autism
Literally not what I said and everybody can see it for themselves so I don't know why you even bothered. Go have imaginary arguments somewhere else
>It's objective that DS2 hitboxes are inaccurate compared to the relative standard of the series
its really not. even the cherry picked webms on Ganker dont actually show bad hitboxes its just janky stuff like an enemy grab hitting a charaters tippy toes then pulling their body into the grab animation which looks janky but its not actually bad hitboxes.
>showcased well why DS2 is objectively bad.
>doesnt showcase anything. its making unsupported claims and doesnt provide any examples or back anything up. Its also really pretentious and tries to take the intellectual high ground by telling others not to bring up their feelings even though the entire paragraph is nothing but the authors feelings on the matter
At what point did you realize gamers and game critics are actual idiots? I mean, not a figure of speech, these people are actually stupid.
>its making unsupported claims and doesn't provide any examples or back anything up
He clearly shows evidence in the video series, I'm not talking about the post itself, did you even watch any of it?
>He obviously has a bias and once to present a one sided argument.
Talk about not presenting evidence for your statements.
>did you even watch any of it?
i watched like 3 mins and it was moronic.
talk about projection, you have no evidence for the bullshit you're spewing, yet are complaining about emotional bias and pretentious behavior, lucky for you you can't have most people call out your moronation
No, there are cases where things can actually be “objectively bad or good”, just like there’s such a thing as objective beauty. That being said, Mauler is an insufferable pseudo-intellectual and I can’t stand listening to him.
Sure you can. If you have a game that reads all your inputs perfectly when you hit the buttons and another that drops inputs randomly that would be objectively worse then the other game. Because anyone claiming they like the idea of a game not reading your inputs properly or even at all at times is lying or dysfunctional.
>Because anyone claiming they like the idea of a game not reading your inputs properly or even at all at times is lying or dysfunctional
Thats purely a judgement on your part. I agree with it of course, but we both just have an idea of what is fun and how games are supposed to work.
I don't think there are any objective statements you can make when it comes to judging games.
You're just being an idiot then. Math/structure exists for objective reasoning. You can make all the moronic mental "but is it really?" sorts of arguments all day but you ultimately offer nothing and the people who do that have nothing interesting to say.
Its a cowardly way to validate what you like or try to argue against what you don't because you never have to compromise anything or admit real flaws in anything because you can just hide behind it. People like you are the reason why "art" is no just garbage money laundering nonsense. Because you pretend strips of a single color are as deep/meaningful as the 16th chapel.
But like, nothing's really bad or good, man. It's like, all about the lens you view it through, duuude.
Objectivity can be used as a shield just as easily. When you say something is objectively better then you remove all room for discussion. It's like putting a /thread at the end of your post.
Of course everyone is gonna see past that shit and know that you are trying to pass off your subjective opinion as fact to make it seem more meaningful.
Why would you even bother discussing games if we truely had some objective measure for them? Just go to the resource that has those and then you know all the best games.
>When you say something is objectively better then you remove all room for discussion.
Absolute moronation, you can discuss how objectively good or bad something is.
Please run me through it. I have no idea what that would even look like.
If it's already proven to be objectively good or bad then there is no gradient. Anyone that sees it differently is wrong.
>If it's already proven to be objectively good or bad then there is no gradient. Anyone that sees it differently is wrong.
Have you ever had an actual discussion with someone on the merits of literally anything? The point is that it isn't figured out on it's own, that's why people argue about it. A statement can be objective and still wrong.
>A statement can be objective and still wrong
Do you have an example of that?
"I think the Earth is flat" is a subjective statement. It's wrong.
"The Earth is flat" is an objective statement. It's also wrong. The truth of a statement isn't what determines objectivity, because there are such things that cannot ever be true, like 2+2=5.
>"I think the Earth is flat" is a subjective statement. It's wrong.
no, not if the person truly thinks the earth is flat
So it's really just about the 'I think' part that determines objectivity/ subjectivity to you? To me both are subjective statements, just one of them has clearly stated it as such.
If someone says to me that Bloodborne is the best From Software game I use my brain and know that the full statement is that they think Bloodborne is the best From Software game.
>I think the Earth is flat
This actually isn't subjective either lol
>it's my subjective opinion that I like that my car doesn't leak oil
Read Plato.
I wouldn't call it objective, but there are things you can demonstrate about a game, and there are premises that a game needs to fulfill, so if they fail at them and you can prove they do, it is perfectly reasonable to call them a bad game.
For example if an enemy's AI doesn't work as intended. It's not unlike pointing out contradictions in a story.
subjective in the grand sense? Yes. But objective quality exists within a relative frame of reference
>"bad" is inherently subjective
literally im 13 and this is deep mentality
it has yet to be refuted
nicomachean ethics
You can define a standard of what qualifies as bad and then measure something to see whether or not it objectively meets the criteria for something bad.
Defining a standard isn't some vague interpretation. And measurements aren't just this thing happened to me once or twice either so i'll put it in the video and selectively omit everything else that doesn't fit my argument.
>Defining a standard isn't some vague interpretation
What the frick does that even mean?
>Literally im 13 and this is deep mentality
You're trying to defend somebody saying a beloved video game is objectively shit. What a spastic hypocrite.
No, they don't realize. That's the funny part.
All that something being objectively good means is that it is good inside a particular measurable framework. However, there are multiple frameworks that one can use to evaluate if something is good/bad. Consider the following one: "all movies longer than 2 hours are bad". This is measurable because both you and I can time how long a movie takes and we'll get roughly the same answer. But what our system is arbitrary; you could easily define another system that says: "all movies longer than 1.5 hours are bad". Both systems are objective but they lead to completely different conclusions on some movies.
He is fat, therefore his arguments are invalid
It's why I hate the internet. I used to feel bad for being judgemental of israelites, fats, blacks women and gays, but through reading opinions blind and free of prejudice I realized all prejudices were right. Now I'm an actual racist, sexist, fat and bawd-shaming nazi. Ds2 is superior to Ds1 in every way which counts. Gameplay, multi-player and customization.
You post on Ganker, you only consume propaganda and have a narrow view of the world
Based and Greco-Roman philosopher pilled
>haha I was gonna respond to your argument but your physiognomy deviates from the Golden Rectangle get fricked haha
Actual autism, but DS2 does suck and Hbomberguy should dilate.
so true!
>doesn't involve feelings, because I don't have time for them
Proceeds to have time to make a several hour long series of videos responding to some dude that liked DS2. What a gay. He's the biggest and most emotionally-driven b***h around.
You don't make posts like this without being entirely up your own ass caring about your own fee-fees. What a hypocritical assfrick.
>Still making DS2gays shit their pants
This is my favorite recurring nightmare thread. Just a bunch of outright frickers who seethe about a smarmy guy's criticism of their favorite game by making up quotes, and morons who're too stupid to notice that they never actually learned what objective means.
>then make sure your argument doesn't involve feelings, because I don't have time for them
imagine being this self important lmao
Correct.
>The game is far from finished,
I don't mind if you don't like Dark Souls II.
I understand if you think some of its mechanics, like the new movement, Adaptability and hitboxes are really poorly implemented.
But the game is finished. It's a complete product. To say it's "unfinished" because you feel something could be "added" or "revised" is just childish arrogance and speaks volumes about how little the speakers knows about actually making...well, anything, really.
the only game Fromshart has released in the last decade that has felt finished was Sekiro. they spent 5 years doing WHAT in eldung ring? copy pasted dark souls combat, copy pasted dark souls story, copy pasted dark souls hud, worse covenants again, and the game is still insanely unfinished
>felt finished
>felt
Post invalidated.
He’s wrong though, DS2 is the best game in the franchise.
he never said that
never brought up dmc in that souls video
never said anything about character action mechanics
he only said souls combat is "nothing remarkable" and nothing more
shit thread
he specifically says that he's not saying you should be to juggle hollows yet we have this gay thread every day that gets 400 REPLIES because you morons are above listening to "ecelebs" but somehow aren't above talking about them.
MM isn't an eceleb he's an Irish economist who likes to review games. Read up or square the frick up kid, and get some taste
>economist
that's news to me and I thought I knew him pretty well. wasn't he a programmer? where are you getting economist from?
For being so popular, so very little people understood Souls combat and its design
>This is good combat to morons
Souls combat fails the moment someone with braincells learns not to mash
>Souls combat fails the moment someone takes the right decisions at the right time on the fly and wins
Yeah, that's how combat works
Fighting games are about decisions and interacting with the opponent. Souls combat is about a preplanned approach that is a coin flip due to netcode. You don't even react to your opponent you just flowcharted what you had in your kit. It's so mindless and devoid of strategy and it works because the Souls community sucks at video games
How are true combos not interacting with the enemy?
The combos themselves aren't interaction they're a tool used after you convert from neutral. The problem is the neutral doesn't have a balance of risk/reward. You're just doing what your kit has and hope it works. It's completely braindead.
>The problem is the neutral doesn't have a balance of risk/reward.
It does, but you would have to actually play the game to know how it works
Ganker can barely defeat Margit
You think they can play multiplayer? Why do you think the majority here gets a stroke raging at invaders?
Do you think whiffing jump heavy is good gameplay?
>Opponent made a mistake
Yeah that's how combat works
You made a mistake, but not any mistake, but a basic level bronzie mistake that would get highly punished in any other pvp game. There was no thought behind your attack, your opponent was running away and clearly going to be out of range. This is what I'm talking about when I say you just foowchart preplanned attacks and don't interact with your opponent.
Then again, the opponent should have capitalized on that, right? He didn't
Because you play with idiots. The entire Souls PvP community is a low level bronze fest.
We are waiting for you to dominate the leaderboards anon
Devs opted out of a ranking system because they knew how stupid it would be.
Care to tell me your logic behind yolo jump attacks that whiff? What's the strategy behind it? Every Souls player I met can't think beyond "I feel like it" or "it sometimes works"
elden ring is nothing like dark souls, homosexual
It is and has the same community. There has been a bigger mechanical difference between CoD games than ER and DaS3
You whiffed a slow attack while the opponent was running away and weren't fricking punished. Either your opponent is moronic or the lag was unbearable for him and he didn't see it.
You play like an idiot and you only live because Souls pvp is for idiots. You suck at video games
Problem?
quickstep is bh step without the distance and is used by "no this is not bs step, it requires skill" people
it's arguably better than bs step simply because it put you in a better spot to counter
It has half the I-frames. What are you on about?
name a single other game where you can have duels with direct combat or any build you like against OTHER PLAYERS
that's right homosexual, ZERO, how have you trannies not figured out that it's the only thing out there? Not just a PvE game with dozens of builds you can apply them to PvP as well, it's the sole reason souls have the "muh combat", there's plently other games that have unique PvE combat with scripted A.I but NONE have PVP like souls, homosexual.
>name a single other game where you can have duels with direct combat or any build you like against OTHER PLAYERS
name a single game where that's done well
that's right homosexual, ZERO
Just as I thought, shahzamtrannies.
>Make a statement
>Get proven wrong
>Fall into fallacy
Soulless brainlet
>post random trash just for the sake of wanting to post random trash because you got BTFO'd.
Keep spamming the same narrative, not a single other game whether it's linear, open-world triple AAA or not does PvE and at the same time PvP combat better with dozens of builds specifically tailored to your needs than Souls games, have a nice day already for not having figured this out and why literally all of your arguments are meaningless against it.
Absolver does this and better because weapons are t just superficial stat pads and your basic attacks aren't recycled through various weapon types/martial arts.
Elden Ring is such a shallow repetitive shit show you can't even build specific archetypes effectively.
I've seen a lot of desperate attempts but a sequence locked hand-to-hand smash bros mortal combat type fighting game? how far you trannies have fallen
>a sequence locked hand-to-hand smash bros mortal combat type fighting game?
You really don't play many pvp games, do you? You have no idea what Absolver is like. It's basically a customizable multiplayer Sifu heavily inspired by Souls, For Honor, and Tekken.
>specifically ask for games that have both PvE/PvP builds with weapons (not even magic, spells or other forms of combat)
>suggest a smash bros game you've never played
moron
You've never played
Literally Absolver
Xenoverse
Def Jam games
Custom Robo
Hisoutensoku
Street Fighter EX 3 Ace
What do you even mean by direct combat?
But people not understanding Souls combat is the only reason why your dogshit games were memed into relevancy.
I like these fake matthewmatosis quote threads! My favourite bit is when people don't realise the quote is heavily edited to say something unreasonable that was never implied by the original, and they get really worked up about it!
Ironically he said souls combat shouldn't be like dmc.
>where you pummel helpless sandbag enemies.
i hate that so fricking much
no matter how flashy and cool your comobs are when the enemies are sandbags your game is fricking boring
why cant they just make godhand 2
every single person who claims enemies in DMC are helpless sandbags hasn't played them. there is even a mechanic on DMD that makes them harder to interrupt and juggle, and there are always enemies that you can't reliably stagger or juggle.
i only played DMC1 and i couldnt make myself play the rest because of how sandbagy the enemies were
i WISH the other games are better becuase it might be really fun if they had non room temp IQ enemies
then play Ninja Gaiden, it has actual enemies that want to kill you as opposed to DMC enemies that just stand doing nothing
ive been planning to
which one is the best?
should i buy the ones on steam
the naming is pretty weird
the one on Steam is the Sigma versions. Some like them, some don't. However imo Sigma 1 is still very good despite the changes and Razor's Edge 3 is good. Sigma 2 is the one everyone shits on due to the changes which bastardized it. But there's a mod called Sigma 2 Black which tweaks it to make more like the original 2. If your pc is decent enough, you can try emulating the xbox originals via Xemu for Ninja Gaiden Black ( first game) and Xenia for Ninja Gaiden 2.
>i only played DMC1 and i couldnt make myself play the rest because of how sandbagy the enemies were
These thing are introduced in the fourth fricking mission and not only can the not be juggled, they're largely immune to melee weapons.
Stop lying. You didn't play it.
nta but it doesn't matter. just shoot them until orb appears and then attack, repeat. Boring as frick and DMC1 didn't age well; its dogshit. DMC didn't get good until 3.
That's irrelevant.
He's right, you know.
DMC1 had the best punchingbag enemies because lots of them had inbuilt means of escaping or suddenly countering your attacks, which kept you on your toes. The fodder enemies of all the later games just don't compare to the marrionettes.
That's bullshit
>what are Fetishes
>every fricking mari
He played on easy lol
please explain to me how trashy enemies like prides or scarecrows are better.
DMC3 is still a better game than DMC1 and Vj or any of Kamiya's games. Kamyia shit has a bunch of gimmicky nonsense that has NO place in an action game. frick outta here, DMC3 is KING
>jump attacks constantly
frick off
>Plain open circular arena
>No walls or environmental interaction
>disorienting fixed camera
Dark Souls combat is 10x the combat of this shit
>roll, roll, roll, roll, r1 x5
lol gtfo soulstroony
>A B A B B A A B x100
>Jump left Jump front left back rigth front Jump x1000
sure showed them moron
>DMC3 is still a better game than DMC1 and Vj or any of Kamiya's games
lol you wish, itsunogay.
What are you trying to prove with that image? That Itsuno is an untalented hack with no creativity? I see nothing but sequels and shovelware.
bullshit. Kamiya is a bigger hack.
Itsuno
>Can actually stay within budget unlike Kojima
>Can actually make good characters unlike Nomura
>Not a fraud like Inafune (and even got him fired)
>BTFO Ninja Theory and western game journalists
>Isn't reduced to working at Bethesda basement like Mikami
>Doesn't resort to cheap design, pandering to "le dark souls is hard maymays" and making the same game 5 times in a row like Miyazaki
>Isn't a one trick or one genre pony directing everything from Power Stone to CVS2 to Dragon's Dogma
>Will redefine the world's existence with Dragon's Dogma 2.
Submit to the best video game director.
I want another Auto Modellista. Love the artstyle
I'd rather do any gimmick shit in any Kamiya games than some of the absolute dogshit DMC missions on DMD. You can literally absolutely NO ONE on the DMC3 played the game on DMD. All of the shittiest Kamiya shmup sections are preferable experiences than Arkham on DMD. And if you're just going to play Bloody Palace/Angel Slayer/Ninja Trials/Operation 101 the frick is the point of even complaining about the gimmicks when they're never in the pure combat modes. Kamiya also understands difficulty curves better than most. DMC1 still has the best difficulty curve in the series going on 20 years later while DMC3 has the most tedious dogshit DMD mode of which the devs clearly did not play test. 4 and 5 are laughable on DMD mode difficulty wise. Here's hoping DD2 has a much harder hard mode than Dark Arisen since difficulty modes are clearly not something Itsuno either excels at or just does not care to do them better. Hard Mode in DD:DA ends up being easier than Normal until you get to Bitterblack Isle then classes like Mage and Warrior fall off completely because the Hard Mode is so poorly balanced. Warrior gets shafted into oblivion because stagger/knock down thresholds are buffed into the stratosphere letting Fighter/Assassin/Mystic Knight shit all over it. Mage just falls off completely because you NEED Sorcerer magic damage on Hard Mode and BBI gives you alot of strong curative items.
Doesn't matter, DMC1 is dogshit and hasn't aged well and Itsuno saved the series and DMC3 shits on troonynetta and anything Platinumshit related
DMC3>>>>>>DMC and troonynetta
Capcom>>>
Itsuno>>>>>>>>>>
>troonynetta sent to die on a shitty handheld after literally 0 good games in its lifespan
>Hackmiya fumbling for cash and unable to go 5 seconds without his ADHD brain spazzing out for a QTE
>Platinum shit never made a good game
>God of War turned into onions with pozzed characters
>Ninja Gayden DOA (thats dead on arrival for you coomers) since Team Ninja makes more money off weeb souls
>inferior Sugmas will be Gaydens legacy
>Shitobi forgotten even by Sega
>Mikrapi has forgotten how to make a good game for nearly two decades.
DMChads stay winning and no amount of cope from you crying homosexuals will ever change that
>troonynetta
>Ninja Gayden
>weeb souls
>inferior Sugmas will be Gaydens legacy
>Shitobi
>Mikrapi
DMC3 has a way better difficulty curve than DMC1. It does an infinitely better job at training the player than DMC1 with its two weapons and missions that consist of pure backtracking. Not to say it has an actual story to keep you entertained.
Kamiya wishes he'd had made DMC3. So hard, in fact, that he poached the cutscene director and story writer straight from it for Bayonetta. But he can't because he's the kind of moron that needs to be forced to put a jump in his games instead of QTEs.
>them had inbuilt means of escaping or suddenly countering your attacks, which kept you on your toes. The fodder enemies of all the later games just don't compare to the marrionettes.
>launch marionette/fetish into air
>juggle them with guns until they die
>Launch hell/scarecrow into air
>juggle them with guns until they die
????
Black person did you even play dmc1
Why do you gays keep making these threads when the homosexual doesn't even release videos anymore.
not vidya
people get off rewriting history, Ganker is one of the best places to do this anonymously
it's precisely because he stopped making videos that makes him a prime target
see: sewerslvt threads non-stop on Ganker
if someone's life is boring then they can get some satisfaction feeling like they altered the course of history even in a tiny little way
>history
matthew is important enough to be called "history"
sexo
How is talking about Dark Souls not talking about video games? Surely you realize that people cite other people's arguments when making similar arguments? You aren't just pretending to be moronic, are you anon?
Owen is a better Irishman.
And he hates your guts for comparing him to other Irishmen.
popularity is the only worthwile metric to judge a game's quality. i've been completely redpilled on this, video game "critics" are absolute jokes and don't understand what makes games worth playing, on a fundamental level.
Never understood why people are trying to compare DMC and Souls. Just two different combat systems- aggressive and passive. Both require dedication and skill to be good at.
75333333288333358633333315335260413333334833333564
74337800403340331033406451339778513304200633053324
17332579223361284033948070338517503377986033273369
09333337213300446233333902332765453333379433333759
81339160893321921133962957334862583364676433093305
99332499743306331133567150334026183301689133893394
84333333089333307233333348333333923333330033333186
56677017672748467966817207459515942676108695546120
7683333451133335103357803397433336713333339133333791
9833923355330933613336473364331133263385222633273346
6433891620331133163333163350337672903352858733203374
5433775929333333063353313374332574213333340733333990
1833519491338833793365333311335781283366184633563378
7133663327330133653374833368330833663392568133553318
9953333118338933793300963345233336573333338633603327
2905870010611929804268511164016666781945054695076056
86332983341331725335943333926
52336633828933193315033003348
09330335219493333798533619706
11333302912421335922493333407
68331332987400338886826853305
40336733247860335570433553372
213316 3324165337776863333652
18970067145517615570855645119
Highlight (Ctrl + F) 3 😉
matt accurately predicting elden ring 5 years ago really completely mindbroke fromtrannies, it's amazing
he predicted that souls games would become massively successful mainstream games on par with CoD or something? why would you seethe about that?
>he predicted that souls games would become massively successful mainstream games
they were already that when he made his video you braindead fromdrone
not really, the sales numbers of souls games are relatively pathetic until elden ring tbh
around ten million copies on average, that's better than shit like kingdom hearts, souls hasn't been niche since at least 2012
ds3 sold 10 million. bloodborne sold 4 million at most. those are rookie numbers compared to actual popular western games.
bloodborne sold bad because snoys don't play game, I'm talking about the souls trilogy, those games sold a combined 27 million copies, a complex mathematical operation tells me this is an average of 9 million by games, not niche at all
Souls enemies are already helpless and at the get go where as DMC enemies usually require the player to understand how to exploit them to beat them easily. The only way to die to 99% of Souls enemies is to over extend and otherwise you are guaranteed to win.
I don't think Matt ever liked Souls
It's just not his type of game
I don't think that is a fair thing to say. You can criticize his remarks on DaS2/3 etc but its clearly the Souls games began to focus on other elements/strengths and other stuff more the focus in DeS/DaS became less common or nonexistent in later From games. The whole "you never liked it" nonsense going around Ganker lately just feels stupid. Plenty of series change into other things and some people liked the thing it used to be so much and not the new thing. Alot of people just make due or even enjoy new focuses but that doesn't mean you can pretend nothing changed for some autistic i'm a better fan then you button.
>but its clearly the Souls games began to focus on other elements/strengths and other stuff more the focus in DeS/DaS became less common or nonexistent in later From games.
Nothing changed and that's why you can't even explain this stament
Nah, Souls games are the same except bosses aren't shit
he's made hours long commentary videos about them, the only other games he's made this type of videos for are viewtiful joe and devil may cry which are some of his favorite titles, he definitely loves demon and dark souls
Nevertheless, I don't think he likes them. His commentary is full of takes about how they would be better off without many of its core elements and he denies how entirely focused on combat those games are.
I think his appreciation of Demon's Souls over the rest is entirely due to how that game was watered down by leftovers that the majority of actual Souls fan consider unifitting mechanics and weak aspects of the game
>Nevertheless, I don't think he likes them.
you're a moron
That's not nice
I still don't think he likes them
Saying you like pizza but then claiming it would be better if it was pasta is not really appreciating pizza
you can like something and still be critical of it, this is self evident for human beings but I understand it's a puzzling concept for a fromdrone
That's not true, you can't like something but also think it should be completely different
Matt doesn't like that Souls games are RPGs, and doesn't like that they are focused on combat. Those two are fundamental aspects of the game. Thus he is no fan of these games, he simply doesn't like them
>think it should be completely different
he never said, that's your autism speaking
>he never said
He did
Matt literally praises the RPG elements in DeS and DaS1, like the robust character building options, the world tendency mechanics, and the dungeon crawling aspects as well.
>like the robust character building options, the world tendency mechanics
You see? Matt even has no idea of what RPG elements are!
>and the dungeon crawling aspects as well.
But also says that estus is a more fitting system than grass, which is a dungeon crawler element
Matt doesn't like Souls games, he just thinks he does but doesn't even know what they are
you aren't even arguing with what he said, you're arguing with what some guy said he said. Do you homosexuals have any self awareness?
I'm not arguing with anyone
I stated that he clearly doesn't like Souls games
They are not his kind of games
>makes hour long commentaries praising demon's souls and dark souls and says he likes to replay bloodborne the most
ok but he doesn't REALLY like them because he doesn't like them like you soulsBlack person miyazakidrones do holy shit can you homosexuals just kys souls fanbase is the gayest religion of all time
Matt himself doesn't know what he likes or wants
Grass healing is bad but also Souls games are dungeon crawlers
He praises """"RPG"""" mechanics like a shitty barebones character creator you can find for any multiplayer game but also Souls game shouldn't have stats allocation and builds
Matt's arguments are schizophrenic
yeah so i'm just going to go ahead and tell you again that you're not arguing with what he said, you're arguing with what some guy on Ganker thinks he said and how he decided to paraphrase it. Why do you homosexuals do this every week? Go post on his youtube so you can actually listen to what he says instead of what some homosexual here says he said, or better yet, don't, because it would be just as much of a waste of time.
I watched the video and know perfectly what he said. The only one not arguing against arguments is you. Leaving aside that Matt's arguments are an inconsistent schizophrenic mess where he would both praise and them criticize several elements, you are trying to convince people that someone who hates every single core element of Demon's Souls actually likes Demon's Souls
he definitely didn't say stat allocation was bad, that's you just making shit up in your head
>he definitely didn't say stat allocation was bad
He praises Dark Souls for letting players effectively block and parry as that added "depth", even though that was a major issue due to balance problems and unintended as medium shields were too strong in DS1 and small and great shields are each supposed to be good at each task. His criticism that the series is leaning on action elements is completely unfounded, as each game is completely focused on killing and killing only. He never mentions magic, and disregards weapon and moveset variety as irrelevant because the effect is just "damaging the enemy", ignoring range, stagger and hyperarmor potential,... which shows a very casual, largely PVE only oriented and very basic build-wise approach to Souls games.
TL,DR: he is a noob
>Stab the air
>Hit
Great game
Yes.
literally anything's better than roll+r1
Video games, homosexual, VIDEO GAMES.
now that maettchew maetosis is a games developer his thoughts on vidya are allowed here
He hasn't done a video in forever, does this guy just rant about Fromsoft games on Twitter all day or something? How is he still relevant?
>does this guy just rant about Fromsoft games on Twitter all day or something?
No. It's literal autism. He made video years ago talking about design philosophies in DeS that were abandoned. Someone made invented a fake quote from something he said in the video and it's basically become some kind of pseudo-general now.
fromdrones are still butthurt about a video from 5 years ago pretty sad honestly
Flipping the switch
>Well if you flip the switch you're complicit!
So, who cares?
And now?
Nothing to do
Nothing.
isn't this the one where the fat guy stops the 5 people from getting run over? push him and save the 5, easy
killing the one guy and saving the 5, this isn't meant to be difficult
Flipping, assuming you know nothing about the people, saving more would be the best option.
>t.Bayonetta cuck
Besides DS2, what are some games with advanced AI that can chase enemies and climb ladders?
Dark Souls 3
Not flipping because life is a net negative and those peoples' lives probably sucked anyways
OP should kill “her”self
There's plenty of middle ground between the two.
Enemies shouldn't be helpless, they should react properly rather than being punching bags or relying on hyper armour to tank hits. If they were smart enough to block, dodge and counter instead then both would be perfect. As of now souls enemies can just punish you for landing a hit on them which feels broken and anti-fun.
I do not understand these threads. Dark souls is one of Matthews favorite games, why do Gankertards think he hates it?
>Dark souls is one of Matthews favorite games
Not really, he just thinks he likes it. He actually can't stand them
It should be like vermintide
Anyone who thinks DMC enemies are sandbags, especially on DMD, are delusional and think combo videos are representative of the games as a whole. Griffin 3/DMD Mundus are harder than anything in a souls game.
I push a fat man to prevent a fat man
He really needs to come back and do more review/commentary videos.
The industry desperately needs more people to pick apart AAA nonsense in a calm and honest fashion.
You really think Sony Santa Montica are going to change anything about God Of War 2-again because of some youtube gay's criticisms?
Barlog actually watched his critique of GoW 4 and agreed with most of it. I'm guessing he wsntedto make some radical changes after that which is why he got booted from te sequel.
People suck at games and they dont want to get good, the worst thing is even when the game has an easy mode they want to play hard mode and cry for nerfs rather than admit they are too casual to play hard mode. People suck dick.
elden ring opened my eyes to just how bad most people are at souls games.
The game isnt perfect but a lot of the fundamental misunderstandings people had really made me lose hope for humanity and gamers. People crying about the dumbest shit just because they cant figure it out, thye dont even try and figure it out, just oops its kinda difficult and thats not ok, please nerf! and fromsoft did nerf a lot of enemies and bosses, its ridiculous. The crystilians for example, they attack one at a time now. it used to be a cool fight where you used positioning and multitasking skills, now its completely trivial and easy just dodge and r1 spam like a mongoloid and dont worry about positioning or anything. same with the godskins, they used to be a constant presence even when they were just staring at you they were deadly, nerfed so hard you get free heals almost anytime.
anyone know where in the latest stream he did he starts talking about dmc5
i swer i've seen these same webms for about a couple years
is this all a same anon trying to defend a shitty sequel to the last breath for all those years making the exact same cherrypicked points?
Is DS1 the shitty sequel to DeS?
yes, and ds2 is the shittier sequel
ds2 is much better than ds1. It's more like des only better and a lot more hardcore
how many years have you been defending DS2?
>Souls combat should be more like DMC, where you pummel helpless sandbag enemies.
Juggling helpless healthsponge enemies was only ever fun because you got the wacky woohoo pizza man, a good soundtrack, and the flashy letter telling you how much more currency you got from not using the same best move a dozen times in a row.
If you want a game with ""better"" combat, please, for the love of god, look towards Monster Hunter.
Dmc combat in dark souls would be more fun
I see the action game shitposting has gotten worse. And by worse I mean you're all fricking bad at it jesus christ at least put some effort in.
its not that hard to understand what hes arguing, hes right. also DS2 is garbage stop trying to meme people into thinking its good.
>Mention Dark Souls
>Entire thread is nothing but chimps throwing shit at each other
Glorious
That’s every thread on Ganker