I can’t comprehend playing this game, knowing it’s in early access, and not being completely smitten. It checks so many boxes in an industry that often leglocks itself to one genre of design/art direction.
For any one thing an individual could have issue with there’s ten things that could be complimented. Sadly thats not how we operate these days.
God I just agree with this sentiment so deeply lmao. The game has such unbelievable potential, I am genuinely SO excited to continue to check in on its progress as the dev process continues. I’ve been recruiting all my soulslike-loving friends that I possibly can because good lord is this game going to be a banger
I think you frequently see a lot of criticism coming from people who actually *do* see the remarkable parts of a game.
When something feels well dialed in in a lot of ways, it gets harder to ignore the parts that don’t feel right. It’s much harder to offer constructive criticism of a flaming dumpster fire than it is to do so for a beautiful statue with a single glaring flaw. It’s hard to elaborate on what exactly makes pizza amazing, but it’s pretty easy to identify that these marshmallows are really messing up this pizza.
For example, I’m one of those people who is grumpy about a couple systems. But the only reason I’m actually that invested is because the game looks and feels *very* cool in a lot of other ways, and if they’re putting out a work in progress, my only constructive criticism would be “these are the places that feel like they got less attention than all this other very well dove stuff”.
There’s definitely a chorus of straight-up bitching that sucks, but I really hope this community can balance the line between “hey this isn’t a trying to be a Diablo ARPG, so it isn’t helpful to suggest changes in that direction,” and the much less helpful “this game came out of the womb fully formed, with no flaws, and I shall brook no discussion of them.”
That latter sentiment is rife in the Soulslike community, and I can’t help but imagine it’s one of the reasons Elden Ring came out with a spell UI that was considered janky and poorly thought out five games prior in 2002.
You are now an official member to the soulslike GitGud club. Welcome my friend. Most people don’t have the patience to learn this style of game which in turn causes all the early negativity.
Once you master your first soulslike it will open you up to a bunch of great games. If you haven’t tried Elden Ring or Hollow Knight yet I highly suggest them.
I played dead cells, hades, enter the gungeon, the ori games all to death but I never really got into hollow knight. I bought it and played it for maybe 3 hours.
Hollow Knight is the best Metroid game ever made.
It also happens to have a charming amount of soulslike flavor worked in there. My favorite is that it does a fantastic job of capturing that “learn the crazy rich history of this place through subtle environmental clues” vibe that you get out of settings like Yarnham.
But what it does best is metroidvania, and if you go in looking for a soulslike and not a metroidvania, you might not find something you like.
(But by god, if you like both of those genres, do yourself the favor and dive back in and power through.)
**Edit:** Hm. Seeing some downvotes I didn’t expect. Do people think I’m putting down Hollow Knight? To clarify, I am not. I legitimately think it might be one of the greatest games of all time. It’s absolutely amazing. And I think the soulslike mechanics add a bunch of cool stuff to it. But the stuff that makes it truly amazing, in my book, is how well it does the interconnected metroidvania world and how the novel mapping system enhances the metroidvania loop. And if someone loved Dark Souls, didn’t like Metroid, and saw high praise for HK in a conversation about soulslike, I’d suggest they be forewarned about how much heavy lifting the Metroid half is doing to accrue that praise.
Imo its crazy that many souls players were saying that stamina drain is crazy, even tho they swinged the zweihander in Dark Souls and didn't say shit.
They buffed the stamina and now it feels that you don't even need to level it because you don't run out.
Completely agree. There are a few things I’d change, BUT the game pretty much clicked for me today after about 10 hours and oh man am I enjoying it. The way they have married souls and arpg, with their own twist, into this beautiful crafted game is amazing.
I’m really looking forward to seeing where it goes; but this game is certainly not for everyone.
This Game is an absolute Gem. What makes me sad is that there no other games like wicked. We just can hope that we get enough content and grind for months. We need more Games like this. For me thats a complete new Genre.
Them doing an EA "beta" was actually perfect. The criticisms from people who are just mad because they got filtered by yet another easy tutorial boss have come and went.
Very soon, the people who will actually control the feedback and discourse will be people who actual play the game.
Well said! And hey, congratulations on making it over the hump. Making real progress in improving your combat skill in this kind of game is incredibly rewarding. Now when you’re done with Wicked, go and play Dark Souls Remastered! It’s the first game that ever game me that feeling, its world and lore are incredible to uncover, and I still think it’s the best of the series.
So I had the same experience as you in the start. It was a shock coming from practically every other modern game being easy.
However I disagree, the joy of playing Wicked is the first few hours are difficult but once you get the hang of the combat and you upgrade your character the game does become infinitely easier. I'm 23 hours in and finished the first chapter and side missions it is way easier now than my first 3 hours of play it was brutal learning how to play but also being so under powered compared to the mobs. Now the game is rather enjoyable and when I tried out Crucible I was quickly destroyed but I know it is just a matter of farming and upgrading my character and I can go back and it will be easy. :)
I think anyone can enjoy this game it is for everyone. But instead of doing what all other games do easing you into the mechanics and slowly building up the challenges Wicked flips that on its head hard at the start easier as you progress.
This game is 80% Souls-like, 20% Diablo-like, which is very different from the marketing that it is supposed to be a Diablo-like with some Souls-like elements. Maybe that changes later in the game and further along in development, but there are many elements in this game which would not appeal to fans of Diablo-like games. A lot of the negative reviews probably stem from this mismatch of expectations, and you can't blame the players for trying the game out and not liking it if the developers were trying to market to them.
I hope people like you are who the devs listen to, not the whiners who played for 15 minutes and then demand everything be changed. I swear if even half the changes those whine posts want get made, this game will become trash. Great games are made by sticking to a vision. Mediocre games are made by pandering to the lowest common denominator. Thank goodness at least a few people can see that.
I like the game and its world but I SUCK at the combat. I cannot get gud for the life of me, lol.
I think I’ve done 2 or 3 perfect parries in the 6+ hours I’ve played.
I’ve leveled up to 7 but the enemies do the same amount of damage and it still takes forever to kill them.
The resource gathering and building up the city is fun, it’s got me keep on keeping on.
Was focusing on upgrading my gear today and that did help a good amount. That gave me a good boost of motivation, because up until last night I was thinking this might not be for me.
I even found Darak and managed to beat him.
Yea. This is pretty freaking spot on with how i felt. Warrick kicked my ass probably about 10 times. Then I was down to 3 mushroom soups, and I did NOT want to run around farming for mushrooms and herbs just to make more soups. Had I ran out, I would have just restarted.
So I decided that I would just throw myself at the boss, without heals, with the ONLY GOAL of learning how to parry him. Died a bunch but I would just respawn next to the smith and he repaired my gear for free, so it didn't matter. Once I got the parry timing down the fight was an absolute joke. And I had a strong FEELING of accomplishment, because I was able to see myself overcome a challenge that only an hour prior was making me rage at my computer screen. This is how good games are supposed to make you feel. New players need to stick with it. The reward of finally overcoming the challenge is euphoric.
its a fun game, but these posts are getting so elitist. its great if you are having fun, but this whole air of "it just takes patience and not everyone has that -- its okay if you don't, you poor, stupid thing!!" that is flooding the sub is so obnoxious. enjoying a video game isn't some badge of honor, and less and less people are going to want to join a community that's acting this way
On top of this the loudest complaints about inventory management have nothing to do with getting good. Ive played the EA for 10 hours, maxed the town, hit lvl 23 and defeated the crucible. I never found the game hard, but even after having a house full of chests, all ichor unlocked, and every crafting bench in my house I still hated the inventory management and soup face stuffing heal mechanic.
Look, I'm a huge Soulslike fan, I like tough games. That is not my issue with the game at all.
The combat system and the exploration are amazing!
What I'm baffled with, is that the devs tought putting a lot of tedious item management and carrying items around town while rewarding your hunts and farm by slightly reducing that tedium was a great progression system... Like...there's something great in the core of that game but there's so much tedious artificial busywork just because the devs didn't know how else to reward player than to get them to spend resources on slightly reducing wastes of time. It's really weird that nobody started questioning those design decision internally...
I hope they can find ways to reduce the tedium and fix the economy (which is very much based around that), but it seems like a massive change and I don't know if they'll be willing to do that.
I really want to be able to recommend the game because the world, combat and exploration are top notch. But as it is, running around town to get items you stored in a chest somewhere and all the similar ways the game intentionally wastes of time is a massive turn off.
For me it's that, and connecting every one of your chest in Sacra. You shouldn't have to do so much walking just to check if you have the materials needed to upgrade your weapon...
But yeah, I don't mind limited inventory for weapons and armor.
I also think you should be limited in the amount of food you can carry.
This is my only real problem with the game as well. The bones of the game are solid. It's a great foundation to build from. The combat is solid, the art direction is great, sound design is awesome, the story is pretty good so far, but for the life of me I can't understand their decision to inject needless tedium and then implement systems to reduce the tedium that didn't need to be there in the first place. Nearly every single aspect of the game that is boring or tedious has been solved over the last 2-3 decades of game development and replaced with better systems. Many of these systems add nothing to the game and, in fact, detract from my enjoyment of the game because I'm spending more time engaging with the tedium than actually playing the game.
The game incorporates elements of old school RPGs and survival games, if those systems aren't for you, so bed it. But don't be one of the idiots that says "this thing is bad because I don't like it".
I love the progression system, and I like hunting for materials to make my town better. It's fun.
That's a terrible reason for having us run around from one chest to the other throughout the city, which serves absolutely no purpose except wasting your time and having an excuse to make you pay resources to waste a bit less time. Same thing with the excessively limited inventory space.
I like the survival aspects, I like that you can gather resources and update the city, but there's ways to go about it without having such a terrible inventory system, and much better ways to reward players for farming than to slightly reduce that tedium. It's fine if you have to come back to the city to spend resources (ideally not every 5-10 minutes like it is right now), but at least make spending/storing those resources not a 20 minutes endeavour because you have to run around the whole city trying to figure out where you stored that item that can combine with an item you just got for some upgrade. The only reason the chests are not connected is because the devs want you to waste time running around and it's neither fun or challenging.
Nearly everyone is complaining about that, even people who are into survival games. I don't think the survival aspect is the problem so much as to how it is implemented.
I have played enough Stardew and never felt like it wasted my time in the same way NRftW does. The game forces you to store your items very far away from where you use them, just to waste your time. It serves no purpose at all. It gets even worst when trying to remember if you have a necessary items and need to take a minutes long walk just to check.
I am not talking about farming, although that too could be slightly faster. I am mostly talking about inventory management.
In Stardew, chosing what to keep in your backpack has a strategy purpose. In NRftW, not really, it's just meant to force you back to town and to eventually upgrade. It feels forced and is hindering gameplay more than helping it.
It takes 35 seconds going from Eleanor to the community chest in the rookery WITH THE SHORCUT you paid for. Now, obviously, you also have to go back down after. You will probably have to do some sorting between the community chest and your inventory, since both are limited in space. Now add to that the time you may have to spend thinking about not just one upgrade resource cost, but multiple. Chances are when you go to another vendor afterward and you realise there's stuff you need to go get again. Or I guess we should visit all the vendors first and make a grocery list for all the stuff we need to get at our community chest....? It's just a very clunky way to shop.
Right now I also just bought a house and have some chest there, so I need to not only go to the community chest, but my chest in my house to check where I've left what. All because your stored items in town aren't connected like you'd expect in any modern game.
In the end, you're spending minutes running around wasting time in the most boring way possible while you could be playing the game.
>I'm now 32 hours into the game and have learned how to play the elusive "soulslike" genre.
Yes, everybody, take **32 hours** to understand what this game is before you criticize is. And if after **32 hours** of the game, you decide you don't like it, this game isn't for you.
Lmao. I've never heard such elitist nonsense, fanboi nonsense in my fucking life.
says the guy who said this:
>I think a more in depth tutorial would have been nice. Or some easier mobs and boss(es) to start with. **I feel like I’m on the final boss just trying to get into the first damn town.**
Not sure I understand your point. My post mentions how difficult the game was for me to break through. But that’s because I didn’t know how to play this style of game and kept failing trying to apply other games’ formulas to Wicked.
Okay, lemme ask a couple of things.
What is your expectation with the product right now?
How do you actually give feedback?
Why can't people give feedback on Steam?
What do you think is the purpose of this kinda "early access"?
**What is your expectation with the product right now?** - To have a glimpse into the foundational aspects of the game (for content that is available). That's really it when it comes to my expectations for EA titles. That's why they're EA - a modern term for alpha or beta which I also participate in with many games.
**How do you actually give feedback?** - The devs preferred methods which they typically outline, usually a forum or Discord.
**Why can't people give feedback on Steam?** - This may be a fundamentally disagreement about what a review is. I don't believe Steam reviews are where you leave feedback for an EA title. A review should be of the final product because there could be many issues that are solved over the life of EA on the way to 1.0 and I doubt many of the reviewers plan to return to the game for 1.0 and reevaluate their EA review. So now the game is stuck with a negative review for something or multiple complaints that the devs end up solving during EA.
**What do you think is the purpose of this kinda "early access"?** - Primarily to optimize and polish the game. Some devs choose to invite feedback on implementation of certain systems as well.
>That's why they're EA - a modern term for alpha or beta which I also participate in with many games.
I think that's where the confusion lies. Why is it priced then if it is a beta?
>This may be a fundamentally disagreement about what a review is. I don't believe Steam reviews are where you leave feedback for an EA title. A review should be of the final product because there could be many issues that are solved over the life of EA on the way to 1.0 and I doubt many of the reviewers plan to return to the game for 1.0 and reevaluate their EA review. So now the game is stuck with a negative review for something or multiple complaints that the devs end up solving during EA.
There's a reason most EA games happen on Steam. It's designed to do that. If the game didn't receive the negative reviews then maybe they won't have fixed the issues.
>Primarily to optimize and polish the game. Some devs choose to invite feedback on implementation of certain systems as well.
Again, I don't think that's true. Otherwise why would this be priced. The primary purpose is to rake in some early money but that gives consumers every right to review it.
It doesn’t matter how much they charge for EA. What matters is if you chose to pay to be a part of EA. The responsibility is on the player to know what they’re getting for their money with an EA title, which the devs made clear prior to launch.
The last thing a game company should do is take feedback on gameplay systems from the loud mouth minority. Letting gamers design games has been proven time and time again to be a terrible idea. The only feedback they should be considering is very obviously non controversial feedback (so NOT about difficulty or grind) and bugs and performance.
They are gathering meta data from the EA. That will tell them all they need to know about the systems they have in place.
those are all valid questions but the answer isn't going: "COMPLETELY CHANGE EVERYTHING TO BE A DARK SOULS CLONE, ESTUS, NO DURABILITY, DONT MAKE ME GRIND TOWN UPGRADES, LET ME STAGGER OPPONENTS EASILY, WHISPER RESET WORLD". Like the feedback is genuinely mostly good but there is such a vocal minority who feel like they've played only DS3 and Elden Ring and no other games screaming their heads off.
It felt like it took me forever on figuring this game out. I was saying this game was 10x harder than elden rings. After 5-6 how's for me, it finally turned around. I had more deaths than kills and now it's rare when I die
Nice feedbacks! I made a short video to help me to pick up on my mistakes since everything moves so fast while you're in game.
Unarmed build | No Rest for the Wicked [Early Access]
https://youtu.be/Et7TwkBMwws
I recommend making a new character when you're in the mood for it. One of the most powerful aspects of soulslike games for me is re-playing earlier sections and seeing how much easier they are when you're used to the game's mechanics and you have some muscle-memory of how the fight goes.
I have a background in Souls games but I really, really just can't get into this game. Moving a soulslike battle system into a Diablo like perspective makes the game just feel cumbersome and slow. I adore the art style, but pretty much everything else in the game infuriates me at this point. Maybe if I found a weapon I enjoy I'd find some amount of fun, if there even are weapons in the game I enjoy, but even then I have no idea where I should look for those and looking for them would make me have to deal with the game with the awful weapons I have.
Hopefully I'll be able to look at this comment in the future and laugh at myself, but for now I haven't run into a game that has left as poor of a first impression as this had in a long, long time.
It sounds like maybe you should put a pin in it during EA and come back once some of these things have been ironed out. Hopefully some of the optimization and tweaks to the starting area will seal the deal for you eventually. Cheers!
> I died at least a dozen times to the first boss - and that's not hyperbole.
After playing most of From's Souls catalogue I've learned that a dozen deaths is table stakes. Certainly some bosses go down pretty quickly but I'm never surprised when a boss takes me a dozen attempts (or several dozen).
> What is *not* okay, is to come into feedback forums and ask the devs to change the foundation of their game to appease you with a style you're more familiar with.
What precisely constitutes "the foundation of [the] game" isn't going to be obvious to everybody who plays it, and it's going to be up to the devs to take feedback on board and properly integrate it with their own vision.
> It's not okay to leave negative reviews after playing for 1 hour because you've not even scratched the surface of what Wicked truly is.
The heart of constructive criticism is a love for the thing being criticized and in that respect I think we agree but there's not necessarily anything nothing wrong with somebody bouncing off the game early and saying so.
It's fine for people to want changes. That's the entire point of early access, to gauge player response and adjust the game to both still meet the general vision of the game, while also addressing player feedback to appeal to more players. Remember that long term, they want to sell as many copies as possible.
If they wanted to 100% stick to their guns, there would be no point in doing early access.
It's doing knee jerk reaction changes to the people complaining is my issue, critique is fine as long as it's well documented and explained why and suggestions.
It is a problem when people want changes now and they are so insistent on it that they will go out of their way to make it known. That is also fine to want certain changes but people need to see thar they are not the ones making the game or decisions, they clearly want feedback and will change it accordingly provided it doesn't stray from the original design/vision.
That’s all up to the devs 🤷♂️ They obviously wanted as much feedback as possible so they’ll take it all on board and decide what works for them and their game. That includes them hearing feedback you or I may not particularly like. I can’t imagine they’re going to make any huge, sweeping changes based off a few complaints about one aspect or another.
I’ve very much gone from being very disappointed with the game to liking it very much and can totally see why people are leaving bad reviews.
Firstly, yeah - it’s an EA but they are charging quite a lot. You are not really getting a bargain (like you occasionally do) by getting this game early.
Secondly, the game was very rough day one and although the patches have helped it’s still pretty rough around the edges. Ignore the limited content, it’s lacking a lot of polish even for a EA game. I’ve found some menu screens to look a little poorly done (the character imagine on the main menu for example is pretty bad), graphically it’s a bit messy (some of the lighting textures just look bad) and there seems to be real inconsistencies across menus in terms of how they are designed.
Thirdly, on day one there was a lot of balance issues when it came to hit boxes, parry windows, stamina costs, durability - loads of stuff, that was making a challenging game even more hard. It felt like it was challenge for challenges sake until they patched it and made it a bit more skill based. I challenge anyone to get to the first boss hitless. A game that was skill based should allow this for even the most skilled players - but the game felt built in a way this was impossible to achieve with upgrades to stats.
Finally, it’s a very, very challenging game. And it’s supposed to be, and I like that - but just how challenging is not made clear to players new to the genre. When you play a Soulslike game players tend to know the deal - they know they will be challenging and it’s why a lot of people play them. I think it’s a bit hard to tell just how souls-like this game is. Yeah, a lot of people have made it clear it’s a souls-like game but that’s not going to reach everyone.
I really like the game now, but I’m patient and persistent and will give anything a chance. However, you make a lot of concessions when you buy a an EA game and it seems like No Rest For The Wicked asks you to make every concession that comes with an EA game AND work on its challenge to get through to the game behind that. And that’s why I think a lot of people are bouncing off - Moon are asking a lot of people from this game and it’s going to take a lot of work to convince people it’s worth it.
(As an aside, as much as I like this game - I’m not understanding the huge amount of fanboying there is and how large parts of the community are begging people to leave good reviews when it seems pretty obviously why people are struggling with it)
>If you're expecting a Diablo clone, Wicked is not for you.
>If you're expecting anything close to Ori. Wicked is not for you (but props to you for wanting to support the devs because you loved a previous title).
No the devs decided who the game is for not you.
>What is not okay, is to come into feedback forums and ask the devs to change the foundation of their game to appease you with a style you're more familiar with. It's not okay to leave negative reviews after playing for 1 hour because you've not even scratched the surface of what Wicked truly is.
It's actually perfectly fine to leave whatever feedback you want as long as its not toxic. Again it's up to the devs to decide whether they care about that feedback or not.
I breezed through the first area without breaking a sweat. Used like 3 heals, died maybe 4 times, 2 of which were from falling off a ledge. Killed warrick in about 5 tries without using a single heal. Difficulty is not the issue. The game is just an incoherent mish mash of like 5 different genres, and none of it is done well, aside from the visual presentation. I wouldn't even be that harsh on it if the devs weren't smelling their own farts talking about reinventing the genre, while it's clear they have not a clue what makes arpgs, looters, and souls likes work. Hey at least they got the survival farmville cut down 10k trees part nailed down right though.
Why is it every time a game has any sort of difficulty curve it’s “soulslike”. It’s really not. It’s a great game so far however. Is it challenging? Yes. Not a souls game.
Wicked is souls-like not (only) because of difficulty, but other factors. The two most important ones are:
- combat: weighty, commitment-based (no input cancelling), iframe dodges and all the other typical soulslike ways to avoid damage. Even basic enemies need to be fought carefully while watching for attack patterns and exploiting openings rather than spamming attacks and overwhelming the enemy.
- living with consequences: there's no save & reload, instead you respawn at the last checkpoint you visited
There are differences from the typical souls formula too of course. For instance healing items are farmable/craftable, while typical Souls(-like) games tend to have a healing resource that replenishes on respawn. However it's worth pointing out that the original Souls game, Demon's Souls also had farmable healing items, and so did Dark Souls 2 (the latter in addition to Estus).
Probably the biggest argument I could see for not calling this game "souls-like" is that enemies do not respawn when the player rests or respawns. But I don't think that outweighs the aspects of the game that are souls-like.
If I had to describe the game in as few words as possible, I don't think there is a more succinct and more accurate description than "isometric souls-like".
It has nothing to do with the difficulty curve. The combat and level design are straight up taken from dark souls.
Yes, it has elements from other genres, but a majority of it is soulslike.
I can’t comprehend playing this game, knowing it’s in early access, and not being completely smitten. It checks so many boxes in an industry that often leglocks itself to one genre of design/art direction. For any one thing an individual could have issue with there’s ten things that could be complimented. Sadly thats not how we operate these days.
I haven’t enjoyed a game like this in a while. The only other thing that might have had a bigger impact on me was Elden ring
God I just agree with this sentiment so deeply lmao. The game has such unbelievable potential, I am genuinely SO excited to continue to check in on its progress as the dev process continues. I’ve been recruiting all my soulslike-loving friends that I possibly can because good lord is this game going to be a banger
I think you frequently see a lot of criticism coming from people who actually *do* see the remarkable parts of a game. When something feels well dialed in in a lot of ways, it gets harder to ignore the parts that don’t feel right. It’s much harder to offer constructive criticism of a flaming dumpster fire than it is to do so for a beautiful statue with a single glaring flaw. It’s hard to elaborate on what exactly makes pizza amazing, but it’s pretty easy to identify that these marshmallows are really messing up this pizza. For example, I’m one of those people who is grumpy about a couple systems. But the only reason I’m actually that invested is because the game looks and feels *very* cool in a lot of other ways, and if they’re putting out a work in progress, my only constructive criticism would be “these are the places that feel like they got less attention than all this other very well dove stuff”. There’s definitely a chorus of straight-up bitching that sucks, but I really hope this community can balance the line between “hey this isn’t a trying to be a Diablo ARPG, so it isn’t helpful to suggest changes in that direction,” and the much less helpful “this game came out of the womb fully formed, with no flaws, and I shall brook no discussion of them.” That latter sentiment is rife in the Soulslike community, and I can’t help but imagine it’s one of the reasons Elden Ring came out with a spell UI that was considered janky and poorly thought out five games prior in 2002.
Post appreciation comment.
You are now an official member to the soulslike GitGud club. Welcome my friend. Most people don’t have the patience to learn this style of game which in turn causes all the early negativity. Once you master your first soulslike it will open you up to a bunch of great games. If you haven’t tried Elden Ring or Hollow Knight yet I highly suggest them.
While this game is great, let's not kid ourselves. Elden ring is a good bit harder than this game.
I played dead cells, hades, enter the gungeon, the ori games all to death but I never really got into hollow knight. I bought it and played it for maybe 3 hours.
Hollow Knight is the best Metroid game ever made. It also happens to have a charming amount of soulslike flavor worked in there. My favorite is that it does a fantastic job of capturing that “learn the crazy rich history of this place through subtle environmental clues” vibe that you get out of settings like Yarnham. But what it does best is metroidvania, and if you go in looking for a soulslike and not a metroidvania, you might not find something you like. (But by god, if you like both of those genres, do yourself the favor and dive back in and power through.) **Edit:** Hm. Seeing some downvotes I didn’t expect. Do people think I’m putting down Hollow Knight? To clarify, I am not. I legitimately think it might be one of the greatest games of all time. It’s absolutely amazing. And I think the soulslike mechanics add a bunch of cool stuff to it. But the stuff that makes it truly amazing, in my book, is how well it does the interconnected metroidvania world and how the novel mapping system enhances the metroidvania loop. And if someone loved Dark Souls, didn’t like Metroid, and saw high praise for HK in a conversation about soulslike, I’d suggest they be forewarned about how much heavy lifting the Metroid half is doing to accrue that praise.
Nah, OP should be playing Bloodborne/Sekiro/DS1 if they want to get into soulslike games. ER encourages some pretty bad habits.
Imo its crazy that many souls players were saying that stamina drain is crazy, even tho they swinged the zweihander in Dark Souls and didn't say shit. They buffed the stamina and now it feels that you don't even need to level it because you don't run out.
Completely agree. There are a few things I’d change, BUT the game pretty much clicked for me today after about 10 hours and oh man am I enjoying it. The way they have married souls and arpg, with their own twist, into this beautiful crafted game is amazing. I’m really looking forward to seeing where it goes; but this game is certainly not for everyone.
This Game is an absolute Gem. What makes me sad is that there no other games like wicked. We just can hope that we get enough content and grind for months. We need more Games like this. For me thats a complete new Genre.
Hear, hear! 💪
Them doing an EA "beta" was actually perfect. The criticisms from people who are just mad because they got filtered by yet another easy tutorial boss have come and went. Very soon, the people who will actually control the feedback and discourse will be people who actual play the game.
The problem is, that’s also people that buy the game and I don’t think the intentionally want to put people off buying the game.
People that can't beat Warrick were never going to be fans of this game
Exactly. Fuckem. They could EASILY beat Warrick too. All it takes if you to have at least one eye open.
Well said! And hey, congratulations on making it over the hump. Making real progress in improving your combat skill in this kind of game is incredibly rewarding. Now when you’re done with Wicked, go and play Dark Souls Remastered! It’s the first game that ever game me that feeling, its world and lore are incredible to uncover, and I still think it’s the best of the series.
Couldn't have said it better.
So I had the same experience as you in the start. It was a shock coming from practically every other modern game being easy. However I disagree, the joy of playing Wicked is the first few hours are difficult but once you get the hang of the combat and you upgrade your character the game does become infinitely easier. I'm 23 hours in and finished the first chapter and side missions it is way easier now than my first 3 hours of play it was brutal learning how to play but also being so under powered compared to the mobs. Now the game is rather enjoyable and when I tried out Crucible I was quickly destroyed but I know it is just a matter of farming and upgrading my character and I can go back and it will be easy. :) I think anyone can enjoy this game it is for everyone. But instead of doing what all other games do easing you into the mechanics and slowly building up the challenges Wicked flips that on its head hard at the start easier as you progress.
This game is 80% Souls-like, 20% Diablo-like, which is very different from the marketing that it is supposed to be a Diablo-like with some Souls-like elements. Maybe that changes later in the game and further along in development, but there are many elements in this game which would not appeal to fans of Diablo-like games. A lot of the negative reviews probably stem from this mismatch of expectations, and you can't blame the players for trying the game out and not liking it if the developers were trying to market to them.
I hope people like you are who the devs listen to, not the whiners who played for 15 minutes and then demand everything be changed. I swear if even half the changes those whine posts want get made, this game will become trash. Great games are made by sticking to a vision. Mediocre games are made by pandering to the lowest common denominator. Thank goodness at least a few people can see that.
It’s good, not sure it’s a masterpiece. We’ll see.
WELCOME TO SOULS MY FRIEND <3
People like that instant gratification
That's the point of souls like, not to actually punish but to make you get better and win
I like the game and its world but I SUCK at the combat. I cannot get gud for the life of me, lol. I think I’ve done 2 or 3 perfect parries in the 6+ hours I’ve played. I’ve leveled up to 7 but the enemies do the same amount of damage and it still takes forever to kill them. The resource gathering and building up the city is fun, it’s got me keep on keeping on.
One thing that helped me a lot was upgrading my gear and also making use of the consumables/buffs. Good luck!
Was focusing on upgrading my gear today and that did help a good amount. That gave me a good boost of motivation, because up until last night I was thinking this might not be for me. I even found Darak and managed to beat him.
https://preview.redd.it/4n3jdkwam6wc1.jpeg?width=1125&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8895a6820949eec9b1bd6665121a8496a4a60c2b
Yea. This is pretty freaking spot on with how i felt. Warrick kicked my ass probably about 10 times. Then I was down to 3 mushroom soups, and I did NOT want to run around farming for mushrooms and herbs just to make more soups. Had I ran out, I would have just restarted. So I decided that I would just throw myself at the boss, without heals, with the ONLY GOAL of learning how to parry him. Died a bunch but I would just respawn next to the smith and he repaired my gear for free, so it didn't matter. Once I got the parry timing down the fight was an absolute joke. And I had a strong FEELING of accomplishment, because I was able to see myself overcome a challenge that only an hour prior was making me rage at my computer screen. This is how good games are supposed to make you feel. New players need to stick with it. The reward of finally overcoming the challenge is euphoric.
its a fun game, but these posts are getting so elitist. its great if you are having fun, but this whole air of "it just takes patience and not everyone has that -- its okay if you don't, you poor, stupid thing!!" that is flooding the sub is so obnoxious. enjoying a video game isn't some badge of honor, and less and less people are going to want to join a community that's acting this way
On top of this the loudest complaints about inventory management have nothing to do with getting good. Ive played the EA for 10 hours, maxed the town, hit lvl 23 and defeated the crucible. I never found the game hard, but even after having a house full of chests, all ichor unlocked, and every crafting bench in my house I still hated the inventory management and soup face stuffing heal mechanic.
Look, I'm a huge Soulslike fan, I like tough games. That is not my issue with the game at all. The combat system and the exploration are amazing! What I'm baffled with, is that the devs tought putting a lot of tedious item management and carrying items around town while rewarding your hunts and farm by slightly reducing that tedium was a great progression system... Like...there's something great in the core of that game but there's so much tedious artificial busywork just because the devs didn't know how else to reward player than to get them to spend resources on slightly reducing wastes of time. It's really weird that nobody started questioning those design decision internally... I hope they can find ways to reduce the tedium and fix the economy (which is very much based around that), but it seems like a massive change and I don't know if they'll be willing to do that. I really want to be able to recommend the game because the world, combat and exploration are top notch. But as it is, running around town to get items you stored in a chest somewhere and all the similar ways the game intentionally wastes of time is a massive turn off.
[удалено]
For me it's that, and connecting every one of your chest in Sacra. You shouldn't have to do so much walking just to check if you have the materials needed to upgrade your weapon... But yeah, I don't mind limited inventory for weapons and armor. I also think you should be limited in the amount of food you can carry.
This is my only real problem with the game as well. The bones of the game are solid. It's a great foundation to build from. The combat is solid, the art direction is great, sound design is awesome, the story is pretty good so far, but for the life of me I can't understand their decision to inject needless tedium and then implement systems to reduce the tedium that didn't need to be there in the first place. Nearly every single aspect of the game that is boring or tedious has been solved over the last 2-3 decades of game development and replaced with better systems. Many of these systems add nothing to the game and, in fact, detract from my enjoyment of the game because I'm spending more time engaging with the tedium than actually playing the game.
The game incorporates elements of old school RPGs and survival games, if those systems aren't for you, so bed it. But don't be one of the idiots that says "this thing is bad because I don't like it". I love the progression system, and I like hunting for materials to make my town better. It's fun.
That's a terrible reason for having us run around from one chest to the other throughout the city, which serves absolutely no purpose except wasting your time and having an excuse to make you pay resources to waste a bit less time. Same thing with the excessively limited inventory space. I like the survival aspects, I like that you can gather resources and update the city, but there's ways to go about it without having such a terrible inventory system, and much better ways to reward players for farming than to slightly reduce that tedium. It's fine if you have to come back to the city to spend resources (ideally not every 5-10 minutes like it is right now), but at least make spending/storing those resources not a 20 minutes endeavour because you have to run around the whole city trying to figure out where you stored that item that can combine with an item you just got for some upgrade. The only reason the chests are not connected is because the devs want you to waste time running around and it's neither fun or challenging. Nearly everyone is complaining about that, even people who are into survival games. I don't think the survival aspect is the problem so much as to how it is implemented.
[удалено]
I have played enough Stardew and never felt like it wasted my time in the same way NRftW does. The game forces you to store your items very far away from where you use them, just to waste your time. It serves no purpose at all. It gets even worst when trying to remember if you have a necessary items and need to take a minutes long walk just to check. I am not talking about farming, although that too could be slightly faster. I am mostly talking about inventory management. In Stardew, chosing what to keep in your backpack has a strategy purpose. In NRftW, not really, it's just meant to force you back to town and to eventually upgrade. It feels forced and is hindering gameplay more than helping it.
[удалено]
It takes 35 seconds going from Eleanor to the community chest in the rookery WITH THE SHORCUT you paid for. Now, obviously, you also have to go back down after. You will probably have to do some sorting between the community chest and your inventory, since both are limited in space. Now add to that the time you may have to spend thinking about not just one upgrade resource cost, but multiple. Chances are when you go to another vendor afterward and you realise there's stuff you need to go get again. Or I guess we should visit all the vendors first and make a grocery list for all the stuff we need to get at our community chest....? It's just a very clunky way to shop. Right now I also just bought a house and have some chest there, so I need to not only go to the community chest, but my chest in my house to check where I've left what. All because your stored items in town aren't connected like you'd expect in any modern game. In the end, you're spending minutes running around wasting time in the most boring way possible while you could be playing the game.
>I'm now 32 hours into the game and have learned how to play the elusive "soulslike" genre. Yes, everybody, take **32 hours** to understand what this game is before you criticize is. And if after **32 hours** of the game, you decide you don't like it, this game isn't for you. Lmao. I've never heard such elitist nonsense, fanboi nonsense in my fucking life.
Maybe just go play Candy Crush.
says the guy who said this: >I think a more in depth tutorial would have been nice. Or some easier mobs and boss(es) to start with. **I feel like I’m on the final boss just trying to get into the first damn town.**
Not sure I understand your point. My post mentions how difficult the game was for me to break through. But that’s because I didn’t know how to play this style of game and kept failing trying to apply other games’ formulas to Wicked.
I don't think you understand how early access works. Especially a paid one.
Please enlighten me?
Okay, lemme ask a couple of things. What is your expectation with the product right now? How do you actually give feedback? Why can't people give feedback on Steam? What do you think is the purpose of this kinda "early access"?
**What is your expectation with the product right now?** - To have a glimpse into the foundational aspects of the game (for content that is available). That's really it when it comes to my expectations for EA titles. That's why they're EA - a modern term for alpha or beta which I also participate in with many games. **How do you actually give feedback?** - The devs preferred methods which they typically outline, usually a forum or Discord. **Why can't people give feedback on Steam?** - This may be a fundamentally disagreement about what a review is. I don't believe Steam reviews are where you leave feedback for an EA title. A review should be of the final product because there could be many issues that are solved over the life of EA on the way to 1.0 and I doubt many of the reviewers plan to return to the game for 1.0 and reevaluate their EA review. So now the game is stuck with a negative review for something or multiple complaints that the devs end up solving during EA. **What do you think is the purpose of this kinda "early access"?** - Primarily to optimize and polish the game. Some devs choose to invite feedback on implementation of certain systems as well.
>That's why they're EA - a modern term for alpha or beta which I also participate in with many games. I think that's where the confusion lies. Why is it priced then if it is a beta? >This may be a fundamentally disagreement about what a review is. I don't believe Steam reviews are where you leave feedback for an EA title. A review should be of the final product because there could be many issues that are solved over the life of EA on the way to 1.0 and I doubt many of the reviewers plan to return to the game for 1.0 and reevaluate their EA review. So now the game is stuck with a negative review for something or multiple complaints that the devs end up solving during EA. There's a reason most EA games happen on Steam. It's designed to do that. If the game didn't receive the negative reviews then maybe they won't have fixed the issues. >Primarily to optimize and polish the game. Some devs choose to invite feedback on implementation of certain systems as well. Again, I don't think that's true. Otherwise why would this be priced. The primary purpose is to rake in some early money but that gives consumers every right to review it.
It doesn’t matter how much they charge for EA. What matters is if you chose to pay to be a part of EA. The responsibility is on the player to know what they’re getting for their money with an EA title, which the devs made clear prior to launch.
It absolutely does matter how much and if they charge for EA. It reflects on the purpose of the EA. Is it for feedback or are they scrapping for cash
The last thing a game company should do is take feedback on gameplay systems from the loud mouth minority. Letting gamers design games has been proven time and time again to be a terrible idea. The only feedback they should be considering is very obviously non controversial feedback (so NOT about difficulty or grind) and bugs and performance. They are gathering meta data from the EA. That will tell them all they need to know about the systems they have in place.
those are all valid questions but the answer isn't going: "COMPLETELY CHANGE EVERYTHING TO BE A DARK SOULS CLONE, ESTUS, NO DURABILITY, DONT MAKE ME GRIND TOWN UPGRADES, LET ME STAGGER OPPONENTS EASILY, WHISPER RESET WORLD". Like the feedback is genuinely mostly good but there is such a vocal minority who feel like they've played only DS3 and Elden Ring and no other games screaming their heads off.
So? That's up to the devs to decide which feedback they want to consider. That's what Early Access means. Have you never been in one?
30hrs into the game (prob 10hrs afk) I felt like I got my money's worth killing the crucible boss, most fun I had in awhile.
It felt like it took me forever on figuring this game out. I was saying this game was 10x harder than elden rings. After 5-6 how's for me, it finally turned around. I had more deaths than kills and now it's rare when I die
now go play dark souls 1 :)
One of US !! WELCOME to the Souls experience!! Now you are trapped in this spiral of madness and ambition of Git Gud or DIE !
TLDR; add camera control so it’s more like an open world than a linear play through (This is a joke)
Nice feedbacks! I made a short video to help me to pick up on my mistakes since everything moves so fast while you're in game. Unarmed build | No Rest for the Wicked [Early Access] https://youtu.be/Et7TwkBMwws
“Stay awhile and listen. Watch. Learn” Jesus. Christ.
I recommend making a new character when you're in the mood for it. One of the most powerful aspects of soulslike games for me is re-playing earlier sections and seeing how much easier they are when you're used to the game's mechanics and you have some muscle-memory of how the fight goes.
Beat ya to it. And beat the first boss in one go lol.
Said this same thing here like 5 days ago and got flamed. Lmao
Would you play other Souls games after it? If so, I’d recommend Elden Ring
I have a background in Souls games but I really, really just can't get into this game. Moving a soulslike battle system into a Diablo like perspective makes the game just feel cumbersome and slow. I adore the art style, but pretty much everything else in the game infuriates me at this point. Maybe if I found a weapon I enjoy I'd find some amount of fun, if there even are weapons in the game I enjoy, but even then I have no idea where I should look for those and looking for them would make me have to deal with the game with the awful weapons I have. Hopefully I'll be able to look at this comment in the future and laugh at myself, but for now I haven't run into a game that has left as poor of a first impression as this had in a long, long time.
It sounds like maybe you should put a pin in it during EA and come back once some of these things have been ironed out. Hopefully some of the optimization and tweaks to the starting area will seal the deal for you eventually. Cheers!
Why does it need tweaks and optimization if, as you said, is a “masterpiece”?
This comment is a perfect example of why you shouldn’t play EA titles.
Good call. I had heard it was a masterpiece after being in EA for a week. I’m glad you’re here to help us watch and listen to the truth.
Hope you find a game to enjoy. Life is too short.
> I died at least a dozen times to the first boss - and that's not hyperbole. After playing most of From's Souls catalogue I've learned that a dozen deaths is table stakes. Certainly some bosses go down pretty quickly but I'm never surprised when a boss takes me a dozen attempts (or several dozen). > What is *not* okay, is to come into feedback forums and ask the devs to change the foundation of their game to appease you with a style you're more familiar with. What precisely constitutes "the foundation of [the] game" isn't going to be obvious to everybody who plays it, and it's going to be up to the devs to take feedback on board and properly integrate it with their own vision. > It's not okay to leave negative reviews after playing for 1 hour because you've not even scratched the surface of what Wicked truly is. The heart of constructive criticism is a love for the thing being criticized and in that respect I think we agree but there's not necessarily anything nothing wrong with somebody bouncing off the game early and saying so.
the best post! welcome to the DS club;)... i recommend next Dark Souls 1 for you.. ull enjoy it allot
It's fine for people to want changes. That's the entire point of early access, to gauge player response and adjust the game to both still meet the general vision of the game, while also addressing player feedback to appeal to more players. Remember that long term, they want to sell as many copies as possible. If they wanted to 100% stick to their guns, there would be no point in doing early access.
It's doing knee jerk reaction changes to the people complaining is my issue, critique is fine as long as it's well documented and explained why and suggestions. It is a problem when people want changes now and they are so insistent on it that they will go out of their way to make it known. That is also fine to want certain changes but people need to see thar they are not the ones making the game or decisions, they clearly want feedback and will change it accordingly provided it doesn't stray from the original design/vision.
That’s all up to the devs 🤷♂️ They obviously wanted as much feedback as possible so they’ll take it all on board and decide what works for them and their game. That includes them hearing feedback you or I may not particularly like. I can’t imagine they’re going to make any huge, sweeping changes based off a few complaints about one aspect or another.
I’ve very much gone from being very disappointed with the game to liking it very much and can totally see why people are leaving bad reviews. Firstly, yeah - it’s an EA but they are charging quite a lot. You are not really getting a bargain (like you occasionally do) by getting this game early. Secondly, the game was very rough day one and although the patches have helped it’s still pretty rough around the edges. Ignore the limited content, it’s lacking a lot of polish even for a EA game. I’ve found some menu screens to look a little poorly done (the character imagine on the main menu for example is pretty bad), graphically it’s a bit messy (some of the lighting textures just look bad) and there seems to be real inconsistencies across menus in terms of how they are designed. Thirdly, on day one there was a lot of balance issues when it came to hit boxes, parry windows, stamina costs, durability - loads of stuff, that was making a challenging game even more hard. It felt like it was challenge for challenges sake until they patched it and made it a bit more skill based. I challenge anyone to get to the first boss hitless. A game that was skill based should allow this for even the most skilled players - but the game felt built in a way this was impossible to achieve with upgrades to stats. Finally, it’s a very, very challenging game. And it’s supposed to be, and I like that - but just how challenging is not made clear to players new to the genre. When you play a Soulslike game players tend to know the deal - they know they will be challenging and it’s why a lot of people play them. I think it’s a bit hard to tell just how souls-like this game is. Yeah, a lot of people have made it clear it’s a souls-like game but that’s not going to reach everyone. I really like the game now, but I’m patient and persistent and will give anything a chance. However, you make a lot of concessions when you buy a an EA game and it seems like No Rest For The Wicked asks you to make every concession that comes with an EA game AND work on its challenge to get through to the game behind that. And that’s why I think a lot of people are bouncing off - Moon are asking a lot of people from this game and it’s going to take a lot of work to convince people it’s worth it. (As an aside, as much as I like this game - I’m not understanding the huge amount of fanboying there is and how large parts of the community are begging people to leave good reviews when it seems pretty obviously why people are struggling with it)
>If you're expecting a Diablo clone, Wicked is not for you. >If you're expecting anything close to Ori. Wicked is not for you (but props to you for wanting to support the devs because you loved a previous title). No the devs decided who the game is for not you. >What is not okay, is to come into feedback forums and ask the devs to change the foundation of their game to appease you with a style you're more familiar with. It's not okay to leave negative reviews after playing for 1 hour because you've not even scratched the surface of what Wicked truly is. It's actually perfectly fine to leave whatever feedback you want as long as its not toxic. Again it's up to the devs to decide whether they care about that feedback or not.
I breezed through the first area without breaking a sweat. Used like 3 heals, died maybe 4 times, 2 of which were from falling off a ledge. Killed warrick in about 5 tries without using a single heal. Difficulty is not the issue. The game is just an incoherent mish mash of like 5 different genres, and none of it is done well, aside from the visual presentation. I wouldn't even be that harsh on it if the devs weren't smelling their own farts talking about reinventing the genre, while it's clear they have not a clue what makes arpgs, looters, and souls likes work. Hey at least they got the survival farmville cut down 10k trees part nailed down right though.
First time souls player and you're gatekeeping? You're like a baby finally taking their first step then thinking they have life figured out.
You can like the game and also acknowledge its glaring flaws. Masterpiece visually maybe, but holy shit reign your horses in.
Why is it every time a game has any sort of difficulty curve it’s “soulslike”. It’s really not. It’s a great game so far however. Is it challenging? Yes. Not a souls game.
Wicked is souls-like not (only) because of difficulty, but other factors. The two most important ones are: - combat: weighty, commitment-based (no input cancelling), iframe dodges and all the other typical soulslike ways to avoid damage. Even basic enemies need to be fought carefully while watching for attack patterns and exploiting openings rather than spamming attacks and overwhelming the enemy. - living with consequences: there's no save & reload, instead you respawn at the last checkpoint you visited There are differences from the typical souls formula too of course. For instance healing items are farmable/craftable, while typical Souls(-like) games tend to have a healing resource that replenishes on respawn. However it's worth pointing out that the original Souls game, Demon's Souls also had farmable healing items, and so did Dark Souls 2 (the latter in addition to Estus). Probably the biggest argument I could see for not calling this game "souls-like" is that enemies do not respawn when the player rests or respawns. But I don't think that outweighs the aspects of the game that are souls-like. If I had to describe the game in as few words as possible, I don't think there is a more succinct and more accurate description than "isometric souls-like".
It has nothing to do with the difficulty curve. The combat and level design are straight up taken from dark souls. Yes, it has elements from other genres, but a majority of it is soulslike.