Poll of the Day > Sekiro > Elden Ring

(+) Yeah! (+)

Fight me

I can't fight you, I suck at parrying

Just spam l1

I kind of agree, I hope Sekiro 2 is next for Fromsoft.

Mensis posted...

Just spam l1

it's remarkable how far that gets you in Sekiro, not sure how anyone can complain about difficulty, I found it the easiest Fromsoft Soulsgame to the point where I could do a no-death run unintentionally which is something I could never attempt in Dark Souls, maybe there wasn't enough cheese like in Dark souls so people gave up.

All of these games should have just been installments of Bloodborne.

I can't fight you, I think both games suck.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

I can't fight you, I think both games suck.

git gud

sekiro is terrible though. pure rage bait.

Elden Ring > Sekiro > Dance Dance Revolution

Haze > Brink > Too Human > all other games

But Logical Journey of the Zoombinis fucking slaps, too.

i am sad that there will never be a too human 2

i did really like that janky ass game

Honestly, I did, too. I have no idea why.

I liked that Sekiro had a tight narrative. I couldn't for the life of me tell you what the fuck is happening in Elden Ring. I liked piecing the lore together in Dark Souls but IMO that's the only game where FROM handled the piecy lore shit well and have been failing at replicating it since.

Also the posture system can be pure dopamine once you get good at timing those perfect parries

SoreChasm posted...

Honestly, I did, too. I have no idea why.

i think for me it was mostly getting into diablo style games and the only option for one on the 360 at the time was sacred 3, which wasn't very good

also future tech Norse Viking gods is a pretty neat setting

it's free on Xbox btw

Sekiro is the best game From Software has ever made. Elden Ring is overrated and overhyped as hell.

that's because it's great

sekiro is considered the worst soulslike because it's boring and has no variety in playstyle

Hard_Light posted...

sekiro is considered the worst soulslike because it's boring and has no variety in playstyle

Better to do one think great than one thousand things poorly.

SoreChasm posted...

Haze > Brink > Too Human > all other games

I have never heard anyone talk about haze ever. It was just another uninspired fps released into an already oversaturated market during the CoD hayday. Yes I played it.

Sekiro is too short and ER is too long. ER should give some of its content to Sekiro and then both games would be perfect.

Mensis posted...

Better to do one think great than one thousand things poorly.

fromsoft agrees, which is why they made elden ring and not sekiro 2

Hard_Light posted...

fromsoft agrees, which is why they made elden ring and not sekiro 2

They were trying something new. They wanted to make an exploration based game that punishes you for exploring. It's not truly an open world when enemies that two shot you act as a barrier if you don't go where the game wants you to go when it wants you to go there. Maybe they should have had difficulty scale? I really don't know, but the game is terribly unbalanced especially when they pushed the exploration and world so hard in marketing. Like I said they tried something new but if the only innovation I'm seeing is the exploration, they dropped the ball in making it accessible.

No innovation in the boss fights either, truly froms worst showing in this regard. Everything can be killed with wild swings on a bleed weapon, the thrill is completely absent. The only difficulty these boss fights provide come from the excessive adds.

Mensis posted...

I have never heard anyone talk about haze ever. It was just another uninspired fps released into an already oversaturated market during the CoD hayday. Yes I played it.

I can't recall if I've played it, but my memory is a bit...

hazy

Mensis posted...

They were trying something new. They wanted to make an exploration based game that punishes you for exploring. It's not truly an open world when enemies that two shot you act as a barrier if you don't go where the game wants you to go when it wants you to go there. Maybe they should have had difficulty scale? I really don't know, but the game is terribly unbalanced especially when they pushed the exploration and world so hard in marketing. Like I said they tried something new but if the only innovation I'm seeing is the exploration, they dropped the ball in making it accessible.

it sounds like you're just not good and are unable to accept it

Mensis posted...

No innovation in the boss fights either, truly froms worst showing in this regard. Everything can be killed with wild swings on a bleed weapon, the thrill is completely absent. The only difficulty these boss fights provide come from the excessive adds.

there is only one boss fight in elden ring that has adds. one. good job proving what i said above

also if you rely on bleed, then yeah

you just aren't good. besides, bleed was nerfed into oblivion pretty quickly on.

Mensis posted...

I have never heard anyone talk about haze ever. It was just another uninspired fps released into an already oversaturated market during the CoD hayday. Yes I played it.

People talked about it at the time because it was the Timesplitters devs and it had a lot of advertising.

Now people generally only bring it up when listing expensive failures

Hard_Light posted...

there is only one boss fight in elden ring that has adds. one.

Well, only one main boss (Renalla), as far as I can recall.
Commander O'Neil and some of the field bosses have adds, too.

Mensis posted...

It's not truly an open world when enemies that two shot you act as a barrier if you don't go where the game wants you to go when it wants you to go there.

hmmm, I think this is only the case in the early game. once your character gets going, this is much less of an issue.

and note that being two-shot is not necessarily bad in a game where you can beat bosses without taking a hit.

and it's an RPG, where it basically has dynamic difficulty (which is why this kind of game is so popular). any encounter, (except for the last ones), are only as hard as your character (and you) is/are weak.

Hard_Light posted...

there is only one boss fight in elden ring that has adds.

are you defining "adds" as specifically mobs added during the fight? because there are definitely more than one that start with extra mobs; not sure if we call those "adds". and there are a lot more bosses than that that are 2v1s or 3v1s.

He says so much while stating so little. I'm bad at it? Ok. I used bleed? Why wouldn't I, it was easy af. This was not a fromsoft experience imo. I literally ran past all the enemies and brute forced the bosses. It was pretty to look at.

SoreChasm posted...

Well, only one main boss (Renalla), as far as I can recall.
Commander O'Neil and some of the field bosses have adds, too.

oh i blocked oneil from my memory

fuck that dude

Fuck that dude mainly because of where he lives. That Millicent invasion caught me off-guard on NG+, too.

Mensis posted...

I used bleed? Why wouldn't I, it was easy af.

You've answered your own question. You didn't like how easy it was. Why would you use an option when you don't like how easy it makes the game?

Mensis posted...

This was not a fromsoft experience imo. I literally ran past all the enemies and brute forced the bosses.

Every Souls game has cheese builds that let you do that. That's nothing new.

No, wild swings is a broken mechanic. You've failed to list a example.

I made it too easy? Didn't realize that was my responsibility, I figured out how to break the game before the first main boss. Why would I intentionally make it harder?

Please tell me how you brute forced Sekiro bosses. I'm on the edge of my seat

I liked Elden Ring, but just got bored and frustrated at the 50 hour mark.

Mensis posted...

Why would I intentionally make it harder?

You specifically made this topic to complain about how it wasn't hard enough. Clearly, you didn't like it not being harder. Not only is that a good reason to intentionally make it harder, intentionally making it harder is the only logical response to that experience.

adjl posted...

You specifically made this topic to complain about how it wasn't hard enough. Clearly, you didn't like it not being harder. Not only is that a good reason to intentionally make it harder, intentionally making it harder is the only logical response to that experience.

No I didn't you simpleton. Reread the topic

You were to fight me on my stance and you have said literally nothing about Sekiro

Well then you included complaints about how Elden Ring's bosses weren't hard enough in justifying the position you made this topic to state. Same end result: You don't like how easy the bosses were, and that's reason not to use the cheese strategy that made them so unenjoyably easy.

As it happens, I've played neither Sekiro nor Elden Ring, so I don't actually have a horse in this race. I'm just here to point out your faulty reasoning.

Then I'll again state that this is on the developer not the player. If I need to intentionally handicap myself to have an enjoyable experience(which is what you've suggested three times despite not contributing to the actual debate) then it's bad game design pure and simple.

If I ever feel the need to play through again I'll use a different approach but on my playthrough all I was really enjoying was the exploration so of course I would beat the bosses as easily as I could because they were uninspired to fight and I literally just had to stand there holding L2 until they died.

And this is a build I stumbled into completely on my own using items from the opening areas. It's not like I looked up some "cheese build" as you keep calling it. It's just the path my playthrough took.

Mensis posted...

If I need to intentionally handicap myself to have an enjoyable experience(which is what you've suggested three times despite not contributing to the actual debate) then it's bad game design pure and simple.

That just sounds like adjustable difficulty to me, and adjustable difficulty is excellent game design.

i tried sekiro on kb+m and the experience was absolutely miserable

don't really wanna test elden ring till i find out wherever the fuck my elusive ps3 controller has been hiding

adjl posted...

That just sounds like adjustable difficulty to me, and adjustable difficulty is excellent game design.

Finally we agree on something, Elden Ring's difficulty is very unbalanced and could use an option. Unfortunately it lacks this making that another moot point on your end. You said you never played this game so I don't quite get your angle.

adjustable difficulty is best in every game

maybe give them a badge or something for achievements. like fire emblem three houses pure maddening (1st run) changing the title screen

Sahuagin posted...

Sekiro is too short and ER is too long. ER should give some of its content to Sekiro and then both games would be perfect.

There's like 9 mandatory bosses. ER isn't long at all.

Mensis posted...

It's not truly an open world when enemies that two shot you act as a barrier if you don't go where the game wants you to go when it wants you to go there.

The only examples of that I can think of are optional areas. Have you considered it is just that you aren't very good?

Every single ER encounter is made easy if you follow the Souls mantra of "don't get greedy". You can make every encounter trivial by being hyper cautious, but nobody would argue that makes ER easy. The principle applies to any cheese. You can't call the Manus or Maneater fight easy because you cheesed them with a bow past the fog gate either. If you do stupid shit to make things easy but boring, you're just cheating yourself

I wouldn't even call my method cheese, more like brute forcing. I still had to avoid attacks and use some skill but my damage was so insane that they'd drop in seconds sometimes.

Mensis posted...

Unfortunately it lacks this

It lacks an easy/hard mode option in the menu. It does, however, offer a substantial range of different builds and strategies of varying effectiveness which in turn make the game easier or harder according to your wishes. Formal difficulty settings aren't the only way to introduce optional challenge into a game, after all.

"I have no dog in this race" *comes back over 12 hours later to have the last word
You're just trolling now.

I get you got your feelings hurt, but don't use words like specifically in such a specifically wrong way.

Mensis posted...

comes back over 12 hours later to have the last word

that's how sleeping works

agesboy posted...

that's how sleeping works

I've addressed the issue ad nauseum and said i was moving on. Please tell me how his post brought anything new to this discussion?

Mensis posted...

I made it too easy? Didn't realize that was my responsibility, I figured out how to break the game before the first main boss. Why would I intentionally make it harder?

why wouldn't you intentionally make it harder? that's what these kinds of games are about. (usually one would do that in an additional playthrough. if you steamroll your first playthrough, then you try something different next time.)

in effect what you're saying here is that you're playing a game whose major selling point is diversity of playstyle, but then you're complaining that you chose an unsatisfying playstyle. yes, it IS your responsibility in this kind of game to chose a playstyle that you enjoy. I didn't make a character I despise to start off, I focused on one of my favorite playstyles. this involves specifically choosing which gameplay mechanics to allow and disallow.

(I used miracles, shields, any armor, blunt weapons (usually I pick one weapon and stick with it the whole way unless something really sticks out as being better), with no summons of any kind (exception was made for Godskin Duo). I allowed myself to use frenzy magic (that crazy-fire stuff) too. I would disallow dark magic, though I can't recall if ER has any. I would use heavy armor if I could manage to get my character levelled the right way for it to be effective.)

Sekiro on the other hand does not really have varied playstyles; it's actually relatively shallow in that way (which is fine, it's a different kind of game). There's very little picking and choosing, it's mostly about you and your abilities as a player (ie: it's an action game). (There are the prosthetics and items so it's not 100%.)

what you seem to be saying is that you prefer to be forced to play a game a certain way, as long as that way is challenging, and that being forced in that way is what makes a game good?

your position seems to distill down to preferring "action" games to "role-playing" games. that's fine, and from that point of view Sekiro > ER would be true. but people who prefer RPGs to action games aren't going to agree with that.

(note that if you have indeed stumbled into a playstyle that trivializes the game, that may well be a problem with the game. I think we mostly doubt that you found something quite that extreme, but would welcome a demonstration.)

(I hope I don't regret posting this, it has turned into a pretty long post...)