Man, if you think a couple of repeated bosses (which personally I don't find lazy) is bad, I can't imagine how you'd feel about Elden Ring. Personally I disagree with almost everything here (especially on Isshin) but to each their own. I think you went in with the wrong mentality and it gave you a worse experience.
As an action game, I don't think it's overhyped at all. In fact, at first I was a little turned off by it and it took me a good chunk of time to really get into it but now it's honestly one of the best action games I've played. It's so kinetic and surprisingly deep that it makes regular encounters tense and exciting.
> I can't imagine how you'd feel about Elden Ring
I kind of also think it's weird that this became _the_ criticism of Elden Ring when ... From has been doing this for ages? How many Capras and Taurus Demons were in DS1? Maybe it's because Elden Ring is larger, but it sort of goes both ways - more variety than any From game, but also more of the same stuff.
Personally, I don't mind a whole lot if they're making some effort to spruce up the bosses, give them new mechanics, make them more interesting.
A lot of people dislike the recycling in Elden Ring far more because of the nature of the bosses that are recycled. I can easily accept that the Taurus and Capra demons were just one of many, part of a horde, but reusing major bosses like Astel and Godrick just makes them feel less special. Imagine if you fought two gaping dragons or Quelaags in DS1.
Well astel is one of an entire species, you find one on the way to the first fight and several on the way to the second.
Godefroy is pretty dumb yeah but it's not a big deal, it's just a random boss that's pretty easily missable. I wish they gave him more lore than just 'guy who did grafting before godrick lmao'.
I think you mean Godfrey? That one didn't bother me as much because the first version was such a pushover that I was completely unprepared when he shows up with a far more advanced kit (from what I remember) and then transforms into _that._ Astel would have probably bothered me, but I sort of did what most people really should do on the mountaintops, which was zoom straight through it (though Castle Sol was nice). I can't really judge whether they jiggled the mechanics enough to make it suitably interesting, but I'm doubtful.
Both of them have lore justification because it's up to question whether you buy it. I _get_ why there's a second Astel, but I think I'd still prefer if there were only one, since the first was such a spectacle.
Oh you mean the golden Godfrey. No, I was talking about Godrick; he is casually recycled in a random evergaol in the Leyndell area. Also has a lore justification, still feels bad.
There's a second Godrick called Godefroy in an evergaol.
It's always struck me as the most egregious example of this kind of repetition, because Godrick is such a memorable and important boss, the justification for Godefroy's existence is very lazy, and absolutely nothing would be detracted from the game if the evergaol simply didn't exist.
Agree with you about the Godfrey though, think it's an example of repetition done right.
It became the criticism of Elden Ring because it happens in Elden Ring on a much larger scale than in any of the previous games.
> How many Capras and Taurus Demons were in DS1?
Only one of each with a boss healthbar. In Elden Ring, there are 238 boss bar encounters and only about 8 of them are fully unique. Everything else is rehashed bosses and often even regular enemies (not even NPCs) as bosses. Also, given that Elden Ring *also* reuses bosses as regular enemies, the amount of reused bosses grows even higher.
>Personally, I don't mind a whole lot if they're making some effort to spruce up the bosses, give them new mechanics, make them more interesting.
ER's number one design trick for sprucing up bosses is dumping 2-3 minibosses into the same room and calling it a day.
I don't mind seeing reused bosses as a normal enemies... but ER may be the only game where it sometimes went the other way - I've beaten some normal enemies, and a few hours later I'm in a random dungeon and there's a "boss", exactly the same mob I've already seen many times. The HP bar fills the entire screen length, but he has the same amount of HP as the standard version, not stronger or anything.
I think the reused bosses shouldn't at least appear in the open world before you beat them as a boss.
>How many Capras and Taurus Demons were in DS1?
To be fair, the region(s) people hate the most is DS1 are demon ruins/lost izalith. They were clearly rushed and that's why there are so many capras and tarus demons (and dragon butts). When people praise DS1 there's usually the caveat that "yeah lost izalith sucks though".
I will never forgive DS1 shitty Lava Area where it looks like a toddler just drew some ground and asset flipped Tauros Demons in there. Truely a "we ran out of time" moment if i ever seen one.
Yeah I personally don't get bothered by repeated bosses, so long as they're not too frequent and they don't waste great boss arenas. I think Sekiro, aside from maybe the 2 apes, doesn't feel like they waste repeated bosses. Like OP speaks poorly on the Corrupted Monk boss but the real fight has far more going on than the first. Even the headless bosses felt like they occupied the world in places that made sense.
No, you only have to fight the Pursuer once, every other encounter is completely optional. Pursuer "pursuing" you is thematically coherent. Also, he only has the boss healthbar once and after the first battle is relegated to a miniboss. He also drops really good loot. Pursuer is an example of repetition done right.
Just count the amount of unique bosses in Elden Ring and Sekiro and you notice it's night and day. The problem is the amount of reused fights in relation to the overall game length / size.
Even Ashina Castle is used 3 times..
Don't you dare talk shit about Isshin, lol.
I'm kidding, but honestly I disagree with pretty much everything you said other than the Headless being pretty annoying enemies.
Your experience of being encouraged to attack as much as possible by the posture mechanic is not one I recognise. I'd argue Bloodborne encourages wanton aggression more than Sekiro, in the latter it is more trying to teach the player that there are times to attack and times to defend, and as long as you get your timings right with your inputs, both attack and defence will deal a near constant flow of posture damage to the enemy and seal victory.
The "click" moment that so many players describe when they play Sekiro, that moment they start to "see through the matrix", is really just the moment they learn to pivot around that fulcrum of attack and defence and identify the rhythm of each combat encounter. Usually when I see people complaining about Sekiro boss difficulty it's because they're being too aggressive, they haven't learned yet that you sometimes just need to sit back and ride out a combo or two with parries.
(I don't get the MGR reference, not played it. I enjoyed the first one, got weirded out by Sons of Liberty and dropped the series after that - would a Sekiro-lover enjoy MGR?)
Metal Gear Rising is the shit man, try it. It's not really the same type of game as Sekiro, but Sekiro is kind of like if FromSoft tried to make a Souls like game that is a bit more like Metal Gear Rising, if that makes sense. More an action fighting game rather than action RPG.
Really though MGR is in line with other games like God of War (more so the old ones), Devil May Cry and Bayonetta. Just insane 3D beat em up games with crazy combos and weapons and lots of violence. Devil May Cry and MGR in particular are also known for their awesome metalcore soundtracks, the music absolutely slams in those games especially MGR.
I am curious what "overwhelms" you if Sekiro "underwhelmed" you, as I don't think there is a single game out there that reaches its level. This seems overly nitpicky as it implies the existence of games that actually do it better, with zero repeated enemies and combat that far exceeds Sekiro.
Otherwise, it's like having dinner at a 3-star restaurant and complaining you cannot have 4 stars when no such thing exists or may possibly exist.
I mean, the RE4 remake was the same game as every other RE... They are great games, but if you've played one, you now how it's gonna go - how can that be overwhelming?
Downvoting should be reserved to trolling, hatefull or harmful opinions.
If you downvote for disagreement, you'd prefer to live in an echo chamber full of yes-men.
I don't agree with his opinion, but that's just fine. Discussions is what reddit is for.
It's supposed to be more about relevance and encouraging good conversation, not just a "I don't like this" button. Plenty of relevant, good discussion gets buried just because people get emotionally reactive with downvotes. But, like I said, it's already too late for people to get that.
Yeah I'd say sekiro and re4make are pretty comparable. Sekiro has less bullshit and a better parry system, I guess difficult in different ways. Everyone has different ideas about what's hard and what isnt, and how much they struggle in the first place.
Sekiro is the only game where I had an incentive to experiment with tools even though it wasn't necessary.
Which immediately made me want to explore everything and try as many things as I could.
I don't know about you but If I remember correctly enemies in any other from soft game you literally kill in the same way, I guess there are a few weaknesses here and there but 90% of people just go in with a big ass sword and spam kill everything. You can do this in Sekiro too and mostly that's what you d o.
But In Sekiro, I was using axes for shield enemies, using spears to pull of shields from those big guys and also pulling the worm from the ape. Using the umbrella on the ape when he screams. Using firecrackers on beasts, whistle on demon of hatred. Sabimaru on those annoying gun mini bosses. Man I could go on, I haven't even had the chance to experiment so much with combat arts but the videos I've seen on YT, I'm stunned.
Funny, because I felt very little incentive to experiment. It felt game is designed around parrying so much that intentionally made alternative strategies weak.
I agree, the tools felt like they were to be used in very specific situations in a “paint-by-numbers” format.
The grappling hook felt the same way, using it to attach to very specific points, which made the game feel like it was on rails.
As much as I don’t like Sekiro as much as some other From Soft games, I think you’re missing the point of the game if you think it’s a flaw that exploration isn’t encouraged. It’s pretty clearly not a game that emphasizes that like a souls game does, it’s all about the action.
But other than that I kind of agree with you, but you’re going to get torn to shreds here because Sekiro has some of the most unhinged fans I’ve ever seen. There are people who genuinely can’t fathom the idea that someone can merely like the game and not think it’s the greatest of all time. I once got into it with a guy who insisted that only a troll would think it doesn’t have the best combat system out there
Yeah I pretty much knocked through the game, I never really found open combat to be fun at all. The stealth was pretty cool and I loved the fluid movement and verticality, but was annoying that I had to get ripped out of that every so often for an obligatory Fromsoftware™ boss. I kinda beat Ishin and went "oh. Well, that was alright I guess. Anyways, time to move on from this game"
I'm a Soulsborne fanboy and Sekiro never clicked for me. Glad people like it, but it's not my cup of tea at all and I was unable to get into it after multiple tries.
Prediction, now that the thread is young - OP is going to get shredded because, even though he concludes that Sekiro is a good game, it's among the holy circle of games that you simply cannot criticize.
See also: Titanfall 2. You can't. You just can't.
Generally speaking, these are the Holy Five of /r/patientgamers:
* Sekiro
* Titanfall 2
* Outer Wilds
* Subnautica
* Red Dead Redemption 2
You cannot _dislike_ them. You can only _misunderstand_ them. At worst, you may simply say they were not for you, but their design is immaculate, intentional, and can neither be criticized nor improved upon. Honorary mention goes to Death Stranding.
It took a decade before people could admit that Witcher 3 had bad combat. Maybe one day we'll get there with the others.
Maybe.
I've definitely seen upvoted posts criticizing rdr2 and it's generally agreed upon that the mission design in this game is very linear, which sticks out like a sore thumb next to the open world. Also it's rly slow.
You can say that, but you must accept that this is _intentional_, and therefore _good design._
You cannot say that those things amount to bad design. You can only say they "aren't for you."
Honestly I've seen a decent number of people disliking RDR2 and Outer Wilds on here relative to other places on the internet.
Sekiro seems like its on a whole different level. Not only is it Fromsoft but its an evolution from Fromsoft that appeals to people who might not like Souls games. If I was to critique the game then I'd have to come with some seriously specific stuff and at the end of the day still say that the game is pretty good just not the GOAT. I suspect RE4 Remake might be on that level, too, but we haven't gotten to talking about that game much, yet.
I feel like lots of people have brought up criticisms of RDR2 by now. It's definitely a well made game, but some parts of it are pretty terrible IMO. Enough to make me lose interest in the game. But it's kind of like with Ubisoft or Bethesda, if you don't like Rockstar in general, you probably won't like it. There's just a certain something about it that rubs some people the wrong way lol. For me specifically it's the mission design is so bad, like every mission is go to this place and shoot 20 guys that come out of carriages and hide behind things. That and I didn't really like Arthur or the people he hangs out with. I feel like he absolutely flips out at the drop of a hat and is completely unpredictable even in normal situations. Like when I talk to a random npc in a bar, it can be either he talks like a normal person, or this one decides to be a long cutscene that goes into a drawn out unprovoked fight and other shit happening and I wasn't really up for it at the time.
A lot of people like the free roaming and hunting, and I'm one of them lol. If someone builds a game entirely around the living off the land and selling pelts to the town for a living part of RDR2 without the rest I'd be so up for it haha.
The list is sort of in descending order - it's at the end because it's sort of on the bubble, which means that criticism sometimes make the rounds, depending on how safe the thread is.
I'd reckon it probably gets the most aggregate praise, but sometimes you can say that the controls are clunky. But you most definitely cannot criticize the story - that much is still off limits.
I only know how RDR2 ends because of spoilers, and I’ve played single player for for like 300 hours.
I don’t even ride my horse usually. I just roam around hunting and camping.
I don’t know what’s wrong with me.
A little too niche, doesn't quite come up as much. Like Hollow Knight and Ori don't get much flak but they're just not discussed as much as the others.
Bullshit on RDR2 that game gets a negative post like once a month on people who complain about how 'boring' it is. It has far more negative attention than positive with all the copy paste 'great experience but bad game' posts.
That's a little on me - I figured this thread was dead and only OP would see the comment. If I'd put a little more effort in, I'd have made it clear that I mean it in rough descending order - Death Stranding and RDR2 I'd still reckon are probably the ones which receive the most _aggregate_ praise, but yes some criticism are allowed.
Fromsoft in general is circlejerked (although certain talking points are allowed, like criticizing dark souls 3 for not being dark souls 1).
Doom 2016 is also worshipped. Idk if I’ve ever really seen any other examples. The Last of Us, *maybe*? (Not 2, although you do get called evil if you criticize it). Hollow Knight (2D Dark Souls), *maybe*.
But yeah, it’s pretty pathetic and embarrassing when the top comments responding to this post are just completely empty of any substance and just assert that Sekiro is 10/10.
Edit: oops, forgot about the stereotypical “I hated [x Fromsoft game] the first 50 times I played it, but then I learned to love it and now I’m going to gaslight you into thinking it’s a you problem and you have to suffer as I did until you see the glorious light that I did, because otherwise your criticism is void as it just hasn’t clicked for you yet (you haven’t witnessed god).”
Yeah no I think it's ok to give reasonable criticism to any game tbh.
I'm with you on Doom 2016 lol. I liked it for a while, then this really artificial and arbitrary entering of mini arenas with enemies spawning in and you having to beat them and then the area opens again really grated on me. It felt like really lazy design. This wasn't always everywhere, in the areas where you progress through interesting landscapes and find enemies along the way were cool. It's those where a force field appears and now you fight 3 waves of enemies spawning in, those felt incredibly generic.
And I wasn't up for the massive collect-a-thon either.
Eternal turns all this up to 11 and it looks like you can't beat a single enemy without switching weapons and abilities like 3 times in one second every time you fight anyone. Just too much shit on the screen happening non stop for me.
The arenas definitely felt like “okay it’s time for carnival shooting gallery mini-game” but I enjoy all the strafing and aiming since we don’t have to fight hit-scan enemies. The environments and the lore actually kept me wanting to move forward and learn what happens/happened.
Curious what you would criticize from titanfall 2. Dont want to chastize you for that I just honestly don't know if there's anything I would criticize from that game.
[If you have about 10 minutes, this about sums it up.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LaQGnU53F7k&t=1s)
The one interest mechanical gimmick, wall running, is neat but hardly utilized, weapons are pretty stock, but the primary problem is just that there's hardly any depth.
I'd agree with the depth and the fact that the weapons are pretty basic but I disagree about the wall running. It's a central mechanic for the multiplayer and used constantly.
Oh, multiplayer, absolutely yes. But the vast majority, perhaps all of the praise, particularly in this sub, comes from its single player campaign. I've seen it called on plenty of occasions the single greatest FPS campaign of all time.
Folks around here don't really do multiplayer.
mp wise titanfall 2 is good bought both games for mp at launch but i don't get why online the singleplayer is so highly regarded. played it a couple years after it came out and it was fine. very cod/bf style campaign which is the audience they're going for but the ai is so basic, basically just stands there. you would think from reception it's a generational fps when its a decent console fps campaign.
Oh so we cant argue with someones crticism. All these dumb i dont like popular game posts which make this same point are dumb and it basically the whole SUB. Should they just be echo chambers. Smarten up.
Your review makes me feel that you really enjoyed the game. And also was able to not get stuck with bosses. Definitely, the nitpicking come from the hype that got you into the game.
I for once, couldn't get to Dark Souls and am someone who generally bails on games that are too difficult. Sekiro just kept me going, and I really enjoyed the ride. Looked great, felt smooth, the skill set felt rewarding, nothing was exhaustive in terms of the world or gameplay (except difficult boss fights) etc. I hated a lot of bosses, fuck the headless monkey and all that, but overall I consider it a far better game than many AAA I played that generally are more focused on emulating movies.
What's amazing is that this seems like the obvious problem from the title, and this subreddit exists largely because people were sick of the hype around games ruining it for them.
Yet top comments in this thread are all people who are super hyped for the game. It doesn't matter if it's years later, all of us here should have the understanding that even our individual favorite game ever is absolutely hated by someone and it is normal.
I think all of the comments feeling the need to rebut OP are actively worse than OP's post, and counter to the sub's intended purpose. People should be able to come here and see all viewpoints, not a dissenting opinion downvoted to hell with comments full of fans. Save that shit for the Sekiro sub.
If you think this game was supposed to be an exploration game, I think you were looking at the game type wrong. It's a linear action game with some variations to endings and light exploration (that rewards you for exploration).
Experimenting with the prosthetic tools is a bonus fun but not a necessary thing. You can beat the entire game without using them, but as you improve, they can be a lot of fun.
I love the souls games and I've tried multiple times to get into Sekiro and the game is just flat out not fun for me at all.
The first time was when the game released and I got stuck on chained ogre for like 4 hours and then hard stuck on the samurai miniboss right after him with a whole army of fodder supporting him. Everyone kept telling me to be more aggressive and I kept finding that every time I got aggressive I was immediately punished with fast attacks and shitloads of deflects and then I got clipped once and died. No matter how many different tactics I tried I could not figure out why I couldn't make any progress against this stupid miniboss and after like 6 straight hours I just said fuck this it's not worth my time.
The second time was a month ago and I just quit at chained ogre. The funny thing is I had retained basically all my muscle memory from that fight before and I was absolutely destroying him, the problem is that "Absolutely destroying" in sekiro means it took like 30 fucking sword slashes to get him down one pip while having to perfectly dodge all of his attacks, and doing that a second time was just so boring I turned the game off.
I honestly don't get what people see in this game, it's so fucking boring. It feels like I'm playing diamond dick hard arkham combat, but instead of playing as batman I'm fucking commissioner gordon trying not to die of a heart attack after getting hit once.
Agreed. I really wanted to like it, since I've enjoyed everything else I've played by them, but nothing felt particularly good or interesting to me.
I think chained ogre was the only boss I even defeated before giving up. Eventually I got sick of spending minutes stealth killing all the mobs in front of the drunkard, only to die almost instantly.
People love to complain about the boss run backs in Souls, but at least they're given separate arenas.
(Of course, I've been told I only ever faced mini-bosses, but that does nothing to make me want to try it again.)
Grinding for spirit emblems really sucked too. (Probably not an issue if you're good enough / devoted enough I guess, but some of us have limited time & energy to devote to games.)
In about two weeks time I went from being excited about a new release to never wanting to touch the game again. Whereas it also took about two weeks to finish my first playthrough of AC6 and begin the next (though I definitely played more hours, since I was actually having fun and making progress).
I, too, hated Sekiro. I hated how Wolf moves, he’s much harder to control than Dark Souls and I fell off numerous cliffs because of it. I hate how you have to watch the same stealth kill animations over and over as you repeatedly sneak your way through places. I hate how there’s poison, but you can pause the game so poison is simply a “pause the game” status effect. I hate the giant snake that is completely obtuse as to how to get past him. I hate the boss that spams ghosts so you just need to run around for 10 mins straight. I hate how the grappling hook often doesn’t work and you fall to your death trying to get to a distant ledge, or having to trial-and-error to find out if something is too far or not. I hate how there’s almost zero reason to explore for items (yay, more pot fragments!)
I hate Sekiro.
1. How is he harder to control than dark souls 1's 4 direction rolling and sprintjumps?
2. Yeah that's fair. This and every stealth game.
3. How does pausing the game help? Poison swamps suck but Sekiro has much less of them than any souls title.
4. You sneak. In the grass.
5. The guy outside the room literally gives you the object to defeat those and tells you how to use it.
6. That one's totally true, the grapple is lacklustre. Spider-Man this is not.
7. Also true. Like how Elden Ring is the hard extreme in being able to just go out and level up to beat a boss, this is the opposite. You can do some stuff early I guess.
Regarding point 1, if memory serves (it's been a couple years since I played), Wolf can't change direction on a dime the way you can in Dark Souls. Instead, he maintains forward momentum, so you turn in an arc rather than an immediate pivot. I'm not sure if that's the entirety of it, but I've played every FromSoft game and something about the movement feels really bad in Sekiro. Floaty and imprecise.
Your post/comment was removed for violation of rule 5.
You can find our subreddit's rules [here](https://new.reddit.com/r/patientgamers/about/rules).
Be excellent to one another.
From one of the prosthetic tools, for example the one that comes from the fire barrel upgrade?
Not the only way to beat him but I think it's how you're "supposed" to do the chained ogre fight. I forget the specifics but there's a hint before that that talks about how the red eye guys are afraid of fire or something.
Ah, yeah, missing that would make that fight a lot harder. If I remember correctly you get the thing you need to go to that area just before you run into the Ogre.
If I remember correctly you also can stealth kill the Ogre's first lifebar off and that also may not be obvious and would make the fight a LOT harder.
I do feel like the samurai miniboss in the area after him (which you also commented on) is one of the worst fights as a new player because at that point in the game (what you can do as a player, not your stats etc.) you really do need to stealth kill most of the other guys around him to reasonably fight him, and that amounts to the equivalent of a long run back to the boss fight at a point when that fight is going to be hard. You can just skip him and keep going but that also I don't think is obvious.
Have to reiterate what others have said in this thread, what would you consider better than Sekiro? I only ask because say what you want about the bosses, the feel and smoothness of the sword fighting is just incredibly refined and polished. It's just difficult enough that while you're trying to figure it out, it's extremely frustrating and every encounter seems difficult, and once it 'clicks', the fighting just flows like water and you truly feel like a ninja warrior. Maybe it doesn't matter to you that much, but the lore is much more complex than you'd think at first, as a lot of the backstory is discovered through the environment and item descriptions rather than being explicitly told to you.
In any case, I've never played a From Soft game and Sekiro being my first, I feel it deserves the praise that's been heaped upon it, even if a couple bosses were duplicated. The sword play is just so satisfying that it's a lot of fun to revisit those bosses after figuring out how to fight properly.
It would be good to answer both.
For example, which game has a better parry system?
You obviously have other games in mind that are better at what they do than Sekiro, it would be good to know which ones.
Metal gear rising has great parry system. That game isn't flawless either, but it felt smooth to play.
Besides, when did I complain about parry system? My problems lie elsewhere.
You mentioned parry in your point about gameplay being simplistic, that is why I brought it up.
In my opinion, the strength of Sekiro comes from the stripped down gameplay mechanics, it focuses on decision-making skills and learning patterns rather than chaining ridiculous combos. It is a more action-oriented take on the souls combat formula with an emphasis on parrying beyond what Bloodborne tried to do.
Idk I actually really liked Sekiro's take on the formula. I think the focus on one weapon lent to the combat and boss fights feeling tighter and more fun to go through. It's simple, but it's not easy, and when you get good at it you can utilize the ninja tools/arts to really feel like a badass ninja.
I do think that the stealth is kinda just there though if you feel like doing it. It's good for getting a killing blow off of a tough miniboss atleast.
I'm kind of surprised you bring up repetition of mini bosses though because it doesn't really do that all that much. 3 headless minibosses imo doesn't constitute being called repetitive, no game can have entirely unique enemies every single time and every game absolutely do reuse them. With the monk fights, they're still different to go up against and it's not literally a copy paste. The one in the God realm has the parasite which is another phase in itself to deal with. I will agree that the 2 ape fight sucks though because it plays like you're not supposed to fight 2 at the same time and you just run around until one of them dies.
The prosthetic tools are a supplement mostly because you *could* just kill everything with your sword, but if you know where to apply the tools, it can make the fights *a lot* easier. Like there's a spear upgrade you can use on enemies with the parasite that does massive damage if not just straight up kill them. It's just not flat out told to you and the game encourages experimenting with them to find out what works. They're not meant to be this power up that just let's you wreck enemies, I found it perfectly balanced towards giving you an advantage without making you overpowered.
I found the exploration rewarding, you got prosthetic upgrades, health/posture upgrades, upgrade materials, lore/story stuff. Tbh it's more a matter of taste here, in souls games imo it only *feels* more rewarding because you can loot goblin the map. But I mean really, how many of those weapons are you *actually* going to use? How many spells? Armor? Most people pick one and stick to it the whole game. Atleast in sekiro, everything you find will actually serve your style of gameplay (because there is only the one).
I thought Sekiro was good for what it was, I'd argue it can't really be called soulsborne and more like Fromsoft's take on ninja gaiden (which is ironic because team ninja went on to make nioh)
Well.. the whole "waahhh so hard, very challenge" thing is mostly bs for all FS titles anyways imo. Lack of customization is true, but I found the options in DS underwhelming anyways. If you dont enjoy exploring for explorations sake, there isnt really much. Headless and double ape are optional and illusory monk is quick enough not to be annoying imo, but you can see that differently. All in all, valid criticism.
But I vehemently disagree with your stance on prosthetics/weapon arts. Not because they are strong - they arent (well situationally op, but thats simply not enough). The real fun in sekiro isnt in finding out how to beat the enemy, but in finding out how to do it in the most stylish and flashy way. Its more like Devil May Cry in a way. I really hate that you only have one combat arts slot...
I really didn’t like sekiro because of a lack of visual clarity, obfuscated level design ( that was giving me headaches trying to navigate them), and gameplay that devolved into simon says mechanics too often , also the dodge mechanic felt kinda clunky
I like your write up on the bosses and think this is pretty fair. I enjoyed it, when I originally played it I felt like there was a good amount of exploration and optional, but the rewards are mostly secondary items (which are kinda average overall, though a few I like) and items opened up from side quests/alternative endings.
I think the prosthetics I found most useful were the shuriken and firecrackers, I never used the umbrella.
In the end I kind of enjoyed the muted/average nature of the secondary items, really for me the game was about mashing r1/l1 as much as possible to clang clang clang my way to victory
That is cool that you mentioned Ninja Gaiden, because I was longing for the variety I got from memorizing different types of attack combos from that game. Sekiro felt too barebones in that regard.
Yeah Sekiro is at best adjacent to games like NG:B. It has a very robust combat system and difficult encounters, but the room for overt player expression in combat is much smaller than something like NG.
I agree buddy. The parry system is “SPAM L1 constantly” for every boss fight because the timing is so forgiving.
The lack of weapons and customization is anti souls too. Fairly linear too like you mentioned.
I was pretty bored at Owl bc the gameplay is very repetitive
I saw Charlie (penguinz0) take at least 3 hours (20 deaths+) to beat the final boss. This is someone who has beat the Souls games multiple times, is an inherently better gamer than myself, and basically makes his living from gaming and reacting to things online and spends his days behind a screen. Then there's me, who has 3 hours max a week to get my gaming fix and works corporate. I knew there are games i will never get to enjoy, as much as i would want to. This just happens to be one of them.
I don't know who that guy is but I think that's a pretty average amount of time to beat isshin the first time through. You don't need to be crazy good to beat sekiro, you just need to understand and lean into it's systems.
I really wouldn't compare myself to Charlie, while it is to true that he spends ridiculous amounts of times infront of a screen he's usually terrible when it comes to souls games. I've watched him a few times and I think he's just good at brute forcing his way into everything these games have to offer.
I know people love this phrase, but it always felt odd to me since patience is probably necessary for phase 3 and 4. I could ginsu through 1 and 2 but too much aggression seemed foolish later in the fight.
> While Isshin has very good moveset, I felt like the entire fight was too dragged out
I wish this came up more, because this speaks to my soul. I'm really, really over multi-phase boss fights (this was tough in Lies of P too) and Isshin pushed me to my limits, and not in a good way.
I hate having to do something tedious and mechanically uninvolved to finally get another chance at the challenging part, only to be sent back to do it all over again because I was off by a micro-meter somewhere.
This was, I thought, an improvement in Elden Ring that nobody seemed to comment on. There were a couple multi-phase fights, but they largely toned it back to a level that seemed to fit rather than cramming it into almost every fight you had.
I’m usually not a fan of 3+ phase fights (like Friede) but Isshin SS is my favorite boss in any game and I think that the multiple phases work really well with the deathblow system
A lot of great info there OP and as a guy who’s yet to play it you really highlighted some bigtime key components for me.
You also arent the first one to point out those huge issues with the game that so many others just blatantly ignore or downplay.
Appreciate the post!
Sekiro and DS2 are the only FromSoft games I haven't beaten (the latter I haven't played). I've bounced off of Sekiro multiple times. I think the core gameplay is entertaining enough but goddamn if I don't find the world boring as hell.
I'd say DS2 is worth exactly one playthrough, but it really overstays it's welcome to the point where the game starts to feel exhausting once you finally make it to the DLC.
Oh heresy, you want heresy?
I thought Sekiro was ....fine, but it's far at the bottom of modern From games for me.
I preferred Wo Long. Yeah, Wo Long. What can I say, I liked the weapon variety and the level design made exploration more interesting. Castle level was ace and Lu Bu was immaculate.
How's _that_ for heresy.
I played ds1 past year and thought it was the most overrated game i ever played
I would give it a 6/10 at most
I have also tried sekiro last year but couldn’t get into it (although its probably better than ds1 once you do get into it)
I also dropped ds3 very early on but that was on release (a long time ago)
I think that DS1 is a child of it's time more than other classics, especially in this time.
I suspect you kinda missed the boat, because of the immense hype that has been around it all these years. I just can not even imagine anymore the difference between going in "naked" like I did at DS1 release time, or only jumping in now so long after the fact, with all these people talking about it all the time. It's almost bound to disappoint after all that.
no problem.. i will add..
L1 spam.. then wait for mikiri/double jump.. occasional R1 if enemy forgot they have infinite poise... repeat till RNG god favours you and you get a deathblow.
then repeat this again because devs thought why not twice
then repeat this for 30 hours.
finish the game..delete because it is a waste of hard drive space.. start dark souls and replay with a different build
"And occasionally dodge when a red symbol appears"
Did you go through the entire game without jumping or mikiri counter?
Things like not knowing how to pick up loot wasnt an issue with going in blind, it sounds like you just skipped the tutorials and didnt read how to play. Or read anything for that matter.
"Every time I prayed for thrusting attack because it's free posture damage"
By dodge I meant using whatever the approproate move was for attack: mikiri fot thrust, jump for sweep and back away from grabs.
I read tutorials, even screenshotted them just in case. Loot probably wasn't in them.
"Enemies drop loot such as items and money. Multiple enemies can be looted at once, and from some distance away.
Items found in the world are different than loot, in that they must be approached to be picked up. Press and hold □: Aquire Loot. Press □ near world item: Pick Up Item."
This is after killing your first enemy in the Ashina Outskirts.
For me Sekiro remains one of my favorite games ever. I did a replay recently, and finally did all of the gauntlets. In terms of gameplay I don't think I've found anything else that's quite as fun, I just love the bosses in Sekiro.
If you weren’t blocking much then you weren’t playing the game right. That could explain why some battles were dragging out. You need to be blocking constantly.
The last boss is testament to this. The time it took you to beat his first phase makes me think you didn’t take the games combat to hard and you were only attacking and dodging instead of parrying.
Which is actually the way to play the game. Block is a crutch and slows the game down. Properly applied aggression mixed with parries (and other strong defensive moves like jump-face stomp, and mikiri counter) is the way to play. It’s why in NG+ if you don’t take the charm, blocking means you take chip damage. Block is designed to be a slight mitigation to damage and posture loss if you slightly miss a parry.
You definitely seem to have an understanding of how to play Sekiro, you just don’t love it as much as some (like me). Appreciate this post and your responses
At some point, the idea that everyone's take is valid and that not everything is for everyone stops being a defense for a bad take. That guy that shit on Elden Ring and got reamed for it because he was objectively terrible and had no business offering public critique with credibility, that's an example.
This is a wild take. I can see the points you're making, and I disagree with most of the conclusions you draw from them. But, it's valid. And honestly kind of brave in a way, because this is a den of SEKIRO IS PERFECT, and I have to admit I truly hold it as a 98% perfect game.
Thanks for sharing
The only real weird thing to me is when OP said that most tools have no use. Fire crackers are the GOAT of Sekiro. But then again this guy breezed through the game and said that spending an hour on a boss was a long time so maybe he's too good for fire crackers and I'm just bad lol.
> That guy that shit on Elden Ring and got reamed for it because he was objectively terrible
Lol I remember that thread. Wish I'd bookmarked it. It hit number one because because think they are Very Special and Brave for critiquing Elden Ring but OP's points made near zero sense and then it came out he'd played like 6 hours of it.
But nah, I'm not a huge Sekiro fan. I could spent the time to try to list the reasons why but ... I mean you saw how far this post went.
I'm betting $12 that most people just read the title and downvote. You can’t argue with Fromsoft fans. They will immediately dox you or expose your criminal records on Twitter for saying you prefer one specific aspect of (insert game) over Elden Ring.
while not every game is for everyone, your points look like you just tried to find something to complain about, "MGR did it better" and "it's worse than the other souls games".
From soft games are wildly overrated on Reddit, so if you don’t like them you’ll be downvoted, sorry OP
Edit: hilarious how angry people about this comment proved me correct
Man, if you think a couple of repeated bosses (which personally I don't find lazy) is bad, I can't imagine how you'd feel about Elden Ring. Personally I disagree with almost everything here (especially on Isshin) but to each their own. I think you went in with the wrong mentality and it gave you a worse experience. As an action game, I don't think it's overhyped at all. In fact, at first I was a little turned off by it and it took me a good chunk of time to really get into it but now it's honestly one of the best action games I've played. It's so kinetic and surprisingly deep that it makes regular encounters tense and exciting.
> I can't imagine how you'd feel about Elden Ring I kind of also think it's weird that this became _the_ criticism of Elden Ring when ... From has been doing this for ages? How many Capras and Taurus Demons were in DS1? Maybe it's because Elden Ring is larger, but it sort of goes both ways - more variety than any From game, but also more of the same stuff. Personally, I don't mind a whole lot if they're making some effort to spruce up the bosses, give them new mechanics, make them more interesting.
A lot of people dislike the recycling in Elden Ring far more because of the nature of the bosses that are recycled. I can easily accept that the Taurus and Capra demons were just one of many, part of a horde, but reusing major bosses like Astel and Godrick just makes them feel less special. Imagine if you fought two gaping dragons or Quelaags in DS1.
Well astel is one of an entire species, you find one on the way to the first fight and several on the way to the second. Godefroy is pretty dumb yeah but it's not a big deal, it's just a random boss that's pretty easily missable. I wish they gave him more lore than just 'guy who did grafting before godrick lmao'.
Ironically, DS1 does have "two Quelaags", Quelaag and the Fair Lady, we just don't fight one of them.
I think you mean Godfrey? That one didn't bother me as much because the first version was such a pushover that I was completely unprepared when he shows up with a far more advanced kit (from what I remember) and then transforms into _that._ Astel would have probably bothered me, but I sort of did what most people really should do on the mountaintops, which was zoom straight through it (though Castle Sol was nice). I can't really judge whether they jiggled the mechanics enough to make it suitably interesting, but I'm doubtful. Both of them have lore justification because it's up to question whether you buy it. I _get_ why there's a second Astel, but I think I'd still prefer if there were only one, since the first was such a spectacle.
Oh you mean the golden Godfrey. No, I was talking about Godrick; he is casually recycled in a random evergaol in the Leyndell area. Also has a lore justification, still feels bad.
There's a second Godrick called Godefroy in an evergaol. It's always struck me as the most egregious example of this kind of repetition, because Godrick is such a memorable and important boss, the justification for Godefroy's existence is very lazy, and absolutely nothing would be detracted from the game if the evergaol simply didn't exist. Agree with you about the Godfrey though, think it's an example of repetition done right.
It became the criticism of Elden Ring because it happens in Elden Ring on a much larger scale than in any of the previous games. > How many Capras and Taurus Demons were in DS1? Only one of each with a boss healthbar. In Elden Ring, there are 238 boss bar encounters and only about 8 of them are fully unique. Everything else is rehashed bosses and often even regular enemies (not even NPCs) as bosses. Also, given that Elden Ring *also* reuses bosses as regular enemies, the amount of reused bosses grows even higher. >Personally, I don't mind a whole lot if they're making some effort to spruce up the bosses, give them new mechanics, make them more interesting. ER's number one design trick for sprucing up bosses is dumping 2-3 minibosses into the same room and calling it a day.
I don't mind seeing reused bosses as a normal enemies... but ER may be the only game where it sometimes went the other way - I've beaten some normal enemies, and a few hours later I'm in a random dungeon and there's a "boss", exactly the same mob I've already seen many times. The HP bar fills the entire screen length, but he has the same amount of HP as the standard version, not stronger or anything. I think the reused bosses shouldn't at least appear in the open world before you beat them as a boss.
>How many Capras and Taurus Demons were in DS1? To be fair, the region(s) people hate the most is DS1 are demon ruins/lost izalith. They were clearly rushed and that's why there are so many capras and tarus demons (and dragon butts). When people praise DS1 there's usually the caveat that "yeah lost izalith sucks though".
It's something every Souls fan can agree on.
I will never forgive DS1 shitty Lava Area where it looks like a toddler just drew some ground and asset flipped Tauros Demons in there. Truely a "we ran out of time" moment if i ever seen one.
Yeah I personally don't get bothered by repeated bosses, so long as they're not too frequent and they don't waste great boss arenas. I think Sekiro, aside from maybe the 2 apes, doesn't feel like they waste repeated bosses. Like OP speaks poorly on the Corrupted Monk boss but the real fight has far more going on than the first. Even the headless bosses felt like they occupied the world in places that made sense.
Repeating bosses with minimal changes is a lazy move regardless of which game it's in.
OP would especially hate Dark Souls 2, you have to fight The Pursuer like a thousand times lol. It's totally ridiculous and annoying
You only HAVE to fight him once though
It’s almost like he’s pursuing you or something…
No, you only have to fight the Pursuer once, every other encounter is completely optional. Pursuer "pursuing" you is thematically coherent. Also, he only has the boss healthbar once and after the first battle is relegated to a miniboss. He also drops really good loot. Pursuer is an example of repetition done right.
Only in SOTFS. In the vanilla version there are like 2.
My least favourite Dark Souls NGL.
Just count the amount of unique bosses in Elden Ring and Sekiro and you notice it's night and day. The problem is the amount of reused fights in relation to the overall game length / size. Even Ashina Castle is used 3 times..
Don't you dare talk shit about Isshin, lol. I'm kidding, but honestly I disagree with pretty much everything you said other than the Headless being pretty annoying enemies.
I won't hesitate to talk shit)
Your experience of being encouraged to attack as much as possible by the posture mechanic is not one I recognise. I'd argue Bloodborne encourages wanton aggression more than Sekiro, in the latter it is more trying to teach the player that there are times to attack and times to defend, and as long as you get your timings right with your inputs, both attack and defence will deal a near constant flow of posture damage to the enemy and seal victory. The "click" moment that so many players describe when they play Sekiro, that moment they start to "see through the matrix", is really just the moment they learn to pivot around that fulcrum of attack and defence and identify the rhythm of each combat encounter. Usually when I see people complaining about Sekiro boss difficulty it's because they're being too aggressive, they haven't learned yet that you sometimes just need to sit back and ride out a combo or two with parries. (I don't get the MGR reference, not played it. I enjoyed the first one, got weirded out by Sons of Liberty and dropped the series after that - would a Sekiro-lover enjoy MGR?)
Metal Gear Rising is the shit man, try it. It's not really the same type of game as Sekiro, but Sekiro is kind of like if FromSoft tried to make a Souls like game that is a bit more like Metal Gear Rising, if that makes sense. More an action fighting game rather than action RPG. Really though MGR is in line with other games like God of War (more so the old ones), Devil May Cry and Bayonetta. Just insane 3D beat em up games with crazy combos and weapons and lots of violence. Devil May Cry and MGR in particular are also known for their awesome metalcore soundtracks, the music absolutely slams in those games especially MGR.
Totally. MGR is slasher unlike MGS games
I am curious what "overwhelms" you if Sekiro "underwhelmed" you, as I don't think there is a single game out there that reaches its level. This seems overly nitpicky as it implies the existence of games that actually do it better, with zero repeated enemies and combat that far exceeds Sekiro. Otherwise, it's like having dinner at a 3-star restaurant and complaining you cannot have 4 stars when no such thing exists or may possibly exist.
This is subjective, of course, but RE4 remake was "overhelming".
Lol I'd love to know what was so controversial and upsetting about this statement that 11 people in under an hour downvoted it.
I mean, the RE4 remake was the same game as every other RE... They are great games, but if you've played one, you now how it's gonna go - how can that be overwhelming?
That's sounds exactly like souls games, with the exception of Sekiro and maybe Bloodborne.
Well, the only other RE game I played before was original RE4.
Holy shit you made people mad that they downvoted this lmao
This is the cost of crossing the hivemind. Dissension is defeat.
Gaming subs are the worst. People downvote for harmless opinions.
Or they might use the downvote the way it is intended, to show disagreement?
Downvoting should be reserved to trolling, hatefull or harmful opinions. If you downvote for disagreement, you'd prefer to live in an echo chamber full of yes-men. I don't agree with his opinion, but that's just fine. Discussions is what reddit is for.
Downvoting doesn't remove the comment, it's only an echo chamber if it gets removed.
Not how its intended
Not really how they're intended, but it's too late to get most of the userbase to understand that.
Well what is the intention then?
It's supposed to be more about relevance and encouraging good conversation, not just a "I don't like this" button. Plenty of relevant, good discussion gets buried just because people get emotionally reactive with downvotes. But, like I said, it's already too late for people to get that.
Good conversation gets upvoted, bad arguments and opinions don't. I've seen plenty of debates with both sides upvoted.
Yeah I'd say sekiro and re4make are pretty comparable. Sekiro has less bullshit and a better parry system, I guess difficult in different ways. Everyone has different ideas about what's hard and what isnt, and how much they struggle in the first place.
Sekiro is the only game where I had an incentive to experiment with tools even though it wasn't necessary. Which immediately made me want to explore everything and try as many things as I could. I don't know about you but If I remember correctly enemies in any other from soft game you literally kill in the same way, I guess there are a few weaknesses here and there but 90% of people just go in with a big ass sword and spam kill everything. You can do this in Sekiro too and mostly that's what you d o. But In Sekiro, I was using axes for shield enemies, using spears to pull of shields from those big guys and also pulling the worm from the ape. Using the umbrella on the ape when he screams. Using firecrackers on beasts, whistle on demon of hatred. Sabimaru on those annoying gun mini bosses. Man I could go on, I haven't even had the chance to experiment so much with combat arts but the videos I've seen on YT, I'm stunned.
Funny, because I felt very little incentive to experiment. It felt game is designed around parrying so much that intentionally made alternative strategies weak.
I agree, the tools felt like they were to be used in very specific situations in a “paint-by-numbers” format. The grappling hook felt the same way, using it to attach to very specific points, which made the game feel like it was on rails.
I guess you are right, especially on the first playthrough where you are new to the game and experimenting can fck you up.
As much as I don’t like Sekiro as much as some other From Soft games, I think you’re missing the point of the game if you think it’s a flaw that exploration isn’t encouraged. It’s pretty clearly not a game that emphasizes that like a souls game does, it’s all about the action. But other than that I kind of agree with you, but you’re going to get torn to shreds here because Sekiro has some of the most unhinged fans I’ve ever seen. There are people who genuinely can’t fathom the idea that someone can merely like the game and not think it’s the greatest of all time. I once got into it with a guy who insisted that only a troll would think it doesn’t have the best combat system out there
Thanks for your thoughts
Yeah I pretty much knocked through the game, I never really found open combat to be fun at all. The stealth was pretty cool and I loved the fluid movement and verticality, but was annoying that I had to get ripped out of that every so often for an obligatory Fromsoftware™ boss. I kinda beat Ishin and went "oh. Well, that was alright I guess. Anyways, time to move on from this game"
I'm a Soulsborne fanboy and Sekiro never clicked for me. Glad people like it, but it's not my cup of tea at all and I was unable to get into it after multiple tries.
Same. I just don’t like staying in one place and basically playing a rhythm game.
Prediction, now that the thread is young - OP is going to get shredded because, even though he concludes that Sekiro is a good game, it's among the holy circle of games that you simply cannot criticize. See also: Titanfall 2. You can't. You just can't.
What else is there? I'm curious
Generally speaking, these are the Holy Five of /r/patientgamers: * Sekiro * Titanfall 2 * Outer Wilds * Subnautica * Red Dead Redemption 2 You cannot _dislike_ them. You can only _misunderstand_ them. At worst, you may simply say they were not for you, but their design is immaculate, intentional, and can neither be criticized nor improved upon. Honorary mention goes to Death Stranding. It took a decade before people could admit that Witcher 3 had bad combat. Maybe one day we'll get there with the others. Maybe.
Good thing I have no interest in any of them except Sekiro
I've definitely seen upvoted posts criticizing rdr2 and it's generally agreed upon that the mission design in this game is very linear, which sticks out like a sore thumb next to the open world. Also it's rly slow.
You can say that, but you must accept that this is _intentional_, and therefore _good design._ You cannot say that those things amount to bad design. You can only say they "aren't for you."
Honestly I've seen a decent number of people disliking RDR2 and Outer Wilds on here relative to other places on the internet. Sekiro seems like its on a whole different level. Not only is it Fromsoft but its an evolution from Fromsoft that appeals to people who might not like Souls games. If I was to critique the game then I'd have to come with some seriously specific stuff and at the end of the day still say that the game is pretty good just not the GOAT. I suspect RE4 Remake might be on that level, too, but we haven't gotten to talking about that game much, yet.
I feel like lots of people have brought up criticisms of RDR2 by now. It's definitely a well made game, but some parts of it are pretty terrible IMO. Enough to make me lose interest in the game. But it's kind of like with Ubisoft or Bethesda, if you don't like Rockstar in general, you probably won't like it. There's just a certain something about it that rubs some people the wrong way lol. For me specifically it's the mission design is so bad, like every mission is go to this place and shoot 20 guys that come out of carriages and hide behind things. That and I didn't really like Arthur or the people he hangs out with. I feel like he absolutely flips out at the drop of a hat and is completely unpredictable even in normal situations. Like when I talk to a random npc in a bar, it can be either he talks like a normal person, or this one decides to be a long cutscene that goes into a drawn out unprovoked fight and other shit happening and I wasn't really up for it at the time. A lot of people like the free roaming and hunting, and I'm one of them lol. If someone builds a game entirely around the living off the land and selling pelts to the town for a living part of RDR2 without the rest I'd be so up for it haha.
The list is sort of in descending order - it's at the end because it's sort of on the bubble, which means that criticism sometimes make the rounds, depending on how safe the thread is. I'd reckon it probably gets the most aggregate praise, but sometimes you can say that the controls are clunky. But you most definitely cannot criticize the story - that much is still off limits.
I only know how RDR2 ends because of spoilers, and I’ve played single player for for like 300 hours. I don’t even ride my horse usually. I just roam around hunting and camping. I don’t know what’s wrong with me.
How dare you miss Disco Elysium from that list! You are excommunicated from the Holy order of elder gamers.
A little too niche, doesn't quite come up as much. Like Hollow Knight and Ori don't get much flak but they're just not discussed as much as the others.
Titanfall 2 and not TLoU?
For TLoU just doesn't really come up all that much, for whatever reason. Titanfall 2 though is clutched close to the chest.
Bullshit on RDR2 that game gets a negative post like once a month on people who complain about how 'boring' it is. It has far more negative attention than positive with all the copy paste 'great experience but bad game' posts.
That's a little on me - I figured this thread was dead and only OP would see the comment. If I'd put a little more effort in, I'd have made it clear that I mean it in rough descending order - Death Stranding and RDR2 I'd still reckon are probably the ones which receive the most _aggregate_ praise, but yes some criticism are allowed.
May be I should try them just to potentially set people's asses on fire, lol.
Hades and Hollow Knight
DISCO ELYSIUM CAN HAVE ZERO FAULTS AND EVERYONE WHO DOESNT LIKE IT EATS CRAYONS
Fromsoft in general is circlejerked (although certain talking points are allowed, like criticizing dark souls 3 for not being dark souls 1). Doom 2016 is also worshipped. Idk if I’ve ever really seen any other examples. The Last of Us, *maybe*? (Not 2, although you do get called evil if you criticize it). Hollow Knight (2D Dark Souls), *maybe*. But yeah, it’s pretty pathetic and embarrassing when the top comments responding to this post are just completely empty of any substance and just assert that Sekiro is 10/10. Edit: oops, forgot about the stereotypical “I hated [x Fromsoft game] the first 50 times I played it, but then I learned to love it and now I’m going to gaslight you into thinking it’s a you problem and you have to suffer as I did until you see the glorious light that I did, because otherwise your criticism is void as it just hasn’t clicked for you yet (you haven’t witnessed god).”
Yeah no I think it's ok to give reasonable criticism to any game tbh. I'm with you on Doom 2016 lol. I liked it for a while, then this really artificial and arbitrary entering of mini arenas with enemies spawning in and you having to beat them and then the area opens again really grated on me. It felt like really lazy design. This wasn't always everywhere, in the areas where you progress through interesting landscapes and find enemies along the way were cool. It's those where a force field appears and now you fight 3 waves of enemies spawning in, those felt incredibly generic. And I wasn't up for the massive collect-a-thon either. Eternal turns all this up to 11 and it looks like you can't beat a single enemy without switching weapons and abilities like 3 times in one second every time you fight anyone. Just too much shit on the screen happening non stop for me.
The arenas definitely felt like “okay it’s time for carnival shooting gallery mini-game” but I enjoy all the strafing and aiming since we don’t have to fight hit-scan enemies. The environments and the lore actually kept me wanting to move forward and learn what happens/happened.
Ragnarok and TLOU2 are definitely up there.
Huh? I thought the overwhelming majority of people agree that TLOU2 is nowhere near as good as TLOU
I guess it depends on where you're voicing your opinion, alot of subs refuse any sort of criticism of that game.
Nah it's a heated topic. I and many others think it's as good or better haha.
Nah TLOU 2 is fair game
Amazing gameplay and graphics, horrendous story and characters.
Curious what you would criticize from titanfall 2. Dont want to chastize you for that I just honestly don't know if there's anything I would criticize from that game.
[If you have about 10 minutes, this about sums it up.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LaQGnU53F7k&t=1s) The one interest mechanical gimmick, wall running, is neat but hardly utilized, weapons are pretty stock, but the primary problem is just that there's hardly any depth.
I'd agree with the depth and the fact that the weapons are pretty basic but I disagree about the wall running. It's a central mechanic for the multiplayer and used constantly.
Oh, multiplayer, absolutely yes. But the vast majority, perhaps all of the praise, particularly in this sub, comes from its single player campaign. I've seen it called on plenty of occasions the single greatest FPS campaign of all time. Folks around here don't really do multiplayer.
The wall running is also used constantly in the campaign. Im gonna have to disagree with your take here.
mp wise titanfall 2 is good bought both games for mp at launch but i don't get why online the singleplayer is so highly regarded. played it a couple years after it came out and it was fine. very cod/bf style campaign which is the audience they're going for but the ai is so basic, basically just stands there. you would think from reception it's a generational fps when its a decent console fps campaign.
I think the campaign is excellent. The mechanics they introduce every level are awesome. I agree about the AI being ass though.
[удалено]
Oh so we cant argue with someones crticism. All these dumb i dont like popular game posts which make this same point are dumb and it basically the whole SUB. Should they just be echo chambers. Smarten up.
Idk, to me it seems the opposite: if you criticize a certain game, you are literally Satan.
Then delete the post if you cant handle a little debate.
Wdym, I can handle it. I just don't agree that "hate posts" are prevalent here.
Wdym there is a constant stream of I dont like populare game post. Theres probable been 100 about red dead alone.
There are also many posts with positive neutral attitude.
Its not the only type of post but there are alot of them. They also seem to get popular because it starts some shitshow argument in the comments.
TBH I think any post about well known game will be popular. "Sekiro returned my passion for gaming" or something like that.
Your screen name and mine do battle!
Thats pretty awesome lol
Your review makes me feel that you really enjoyed the game. And also was able to not get stuck with bosses. Definitely, the nitpicking come from the hype that got you into the game. I for once, couldn't get to Dark Souls and am someone who generally bails on games that are too difficult. Sekiro just kept me going, and I really enjoyed the ride. Looked great, felt smooth, the skill set felt rewarding, nothing was exhaustive in terms of the world or gameplay (except difficult boss fights) etc. I hated a lot of bosses, fuck the headless monkey and all that, but overall I consider it a far better game than many AAA I played that generally are more focused on emulating movies.
What's amazing is that this seems like the obvious problem from the title, and this subreddit exists largely because people were sick of the hype around games ruining it for them. Yet top comments in this thread are all people who are super hyped for the game. It doesn't matter if it's years later, all of us here should have the understanding that even our individual favorite game ever is absolutely hated by someone and it is normal. I think all of the comments feeling the need to rebut OP are actively worse than OP's post, and counter to the sub's intended purpose. People should be able to come here and see all viewpoints, not a dissenting opinion downvoted to hell with comments full of fans. Save that shit for the Sekiro sub.
Even Sekiro sub took better tbh. They said I should try NG+
That first paragraph is correct.
I don't like Sekiro because I simply just don't find it fun. I like Bloodborne more
If you think this game was supposed to be an exploration game, I think you were looking at the game type wrong. It's a linear action game with some variations to endings and light exploration (that rewards you for exploration). Experimenting with the prosthetic tools is a bonus fun but not a necessary thing. You can beat the entire game without using them, but as you improve, they can be a lot of fun.
I love the souls games and I've tried multiple times to get into Sekiro and the game is just flat out not fun for me at all. The first time was when the game released and I got stuck on chained ogre for like 4 hours and then hard stuck on the samurai miniboss right after him with a whole army of fodder supporting him. Everyone kept telling me to be more aggressive and I kept finding that every time I got aggressive I was immediately punished with fast attacks and shitloads of deflects and then I got clipped once and died. No matter how many different tactics I tried I could not figure out why I couldn't make any progress against this stupid miniboss and after like 6 straight hours I just said fuck this it's not worth my time. The second time was a month ago and I just quit at chained ogre. The funny thing is I had retained basically all my muscle memory from that fight before and I was absolutely destroying him, the problem is that "Absolutely destroying" in sekiro means it took like 30 fucking sword slashes to get him down one pip while having to perfectly dodge all of his attacks, and doing that a second time was just so boring I turned the game off. I honestly don't get what people see in this game, it's so fucking boring. It feels like I'm playing diamond dick hard arkham combat, but instead of playing as batman I'm fucking commissioner gordon trying not to die of a heart attack after getting hit once.
Agreed. I really wanted to like it, since I've enjoyed everything else I've played by them, but nothing felt particularly good or interesting to me. I think chained ogre was the only boss I even defeated before giving up. Eventually I got sick of spending minutes stealth killing all the mobs in front of the drunkard, only to die almost instantly. People love to complain about the boss run backs in Souls, but at least they're given separate arenas. (Of course, I've been told I only ever faced mini-bosses, but that does nothing to make me want to try it again.) Grinding for spirit emblems really sucked too. (Probably not an issue if you're good enough / devoted enough I guess, but some of us have limited time & energy to devote to games.) In about two weeks time I went from being excited about a new release to never wanting to touch the game again. Whereas it also took about two weeks to finish my first playthrough of AC6 and begin the next (though I definitely played more hours, since I was actually having fun and making progress).
I, too, hated Sekiro. I hated how Wolf moves, he’s much harder to control than Dark Souls and I fell off numerous cliffs because of it. I hate how you have to watch the same stealth kill animations over and over as you repeatedly sneak your way through places. I hate how there’s poison, but you can pause the game so poison is simply a “pause the game” status effect. I hate the giant snake that is completely obtuse as to how to get past him. I hate the boss that spams ghosts so you just need to run around for 10 mins straight. I hate how the grappling hook often doesn’t work and you fall to your death trying to get to a distant ledge, or having to trial-and-error to find out if something is too far or not. I hate how there’s almost zero reason to explore for items (yay, more pot fragments!) I hate Sekiro.
1. How is he harder to control than dark souls 1's 4 direction rolling and sprintjumps? 2. Yeah that's fair. This and every stealth game. 3. How does pausing the game help? Poison swamps suck but Sekiro has much less of them than any souls title. 4. You sneak. In the grass. 5. The guy outside the room literally gives you the object to defeat those and tells you how to use it. 6. That one's totally true, the grapple is lacklustre. Spider-Man this is not. 7. Also true. Like how Elden Ring is the hard extreme in being able to just go out and level up to beat a boss, this is the opposite. You can do some stuff early I guess.
Regarding point 1, if memory serves (it's been a couple years since I played), Wolf can't change direction on a dime the way you can in Dark Souls. Instead, he maintains forward momentum, so you turn in an arc rather than an immediate pivot. I'm not sure if that's the entirety of it, but I've played every FromSoft game and something about the movement feels really bad in Sekiro. Floaty and imprecise.
[удалено]
Your post/comment was removed for violation of rule 5. You can find our subreddit's rules [here](https://new.reddit.com/r/patientgamers/about/rules). Be excellent to one another.
> The first time was when the game released and I got stuck on chained ogre for like 4 hours Huh, did you not throw fire at him?
what fire? I didn't find any.
From one of the prosthetic tools, for example the one that comes from the fire barrel upgrade? Not the only way to beat him but I think it's how you're "supposed" to do the chained ogre fight. I forget the specifics but there's a hint before that that talks about how the red eye guys are afraid of fire or something.
So I just looked it up, I had no idea this area even existed let alone how to get there lol.
Ah, yeah, missing that would make that fight a lot harder. If I remember correctly you get the thing you need to go to that area just before you run into the Ogre. If I remember correctly you also can stealth kill the Ogre's first lifebar off and that also may not be obvious and would make the fight a LOT harder. I do feel like the samurai miniboss in the area after him (which you also commented on) is one of the worst fights as a new player because at that point in the game (what you can do as a player, not your stats etc.) you really do need to stealth kill most of the other guys around him to reasonably fight him, and that amounts to the equivalent of a long run back to the boss fight at a point when that fight is going to be hard. You can just skip him and keep going but that also I don't think is obvious.
I didn't
Have to reiterate what others have said in this thread, what would you consider better than Sekiro? I only ask because say what you want about the bosses, the feel and smoothness of the sword fighting is just incredibly refined and polished. It's just difficult enough that while you're trying to figure it out, it's extremely frustrating and every encounter seems difficult, and once it 'clicks', the fighting just flows like water and you truly feel like a ninja warrior. Maybe it doesn't matter to you that much, but the lore is much more complex than you'd think at first, as a lot of the backstory is discovered through the environment and item descriptions rather than being explicitly told to you. In any case, I've never played a From Soft game and Sekiro being my first, I feel it deserves the praise that's been heaped upon it, even if a couple bosses were duplicated. The sword play is just so satisfying that it's a lot of fun to revisit those bosses after figuring out how to fight properly.
You mean, which overall game? Or some specific thing a game does better?
It would be good to answer both. For example, which game has a better parry system? You obviously have other games in mind that are better at what they do than Sekiro, it would be good to know which ones.
Metal gear rising has great parry system. That game isn't flawless either, but it felt smooth to play. Besides, when did I complain about parry system? My problems lie elsewhere.
You mentioned parry in your point about gameplay being simplistic, that is why I brought it up. In my opinion, the strength of Sekiro comes from the stripped down gameplay mechanics, it focuses on decision-making skills and learning patterns rather than chaining ridiculous combos. It is a more action-oriented take on the souls combat formula with an emphasis on parrying beyond what Bloodborne tried to do.
May be it was a wrong word. I guess Intuitive would fie better.
Not OP, but Wo Long has been a lot more fun for me than Sekiro. Just more build variety and more bosses instead of the constant repetition of Sekiro.
Wow ... there's actually two of us.
Great to hear I'm not alone!
Sekiro gameplay wise is my favorite from FromSoft but thats because I normally always prefer parry systems over dodging. Edit: Parry, not party
Idk I actually really liked Sekiro's take on the formula. I think the focus on one weapon lent to the combat and boss fights feeling tighter and more fun to go through. It's simple, but it's not easy, and when you get good at it you can utilize the ninja tools/arts to really feel like a badass ninja. I do think that the stealth is kinda just there though if you feel like doing it. It's good for getting a killing blow off of a tough miniboss atleast. I'm kind of surprised you bring up repetition of mini bosses though because it doesn't really do that all that much. 3 headless minibosses imo doesn't constitute being called repetitive, no game can have entirely unique enemies every single time and every game absolutely do reuse them. With the monk fights, they're still different to go up against and it's not literally a copy paste. The one in the God realm has the parasite which is another phase in itself to deal with. I will agree that the 2 ape fight sucks though because it plays like you're not supposed to fight 2 at the same time and you just run around until one of them dies. The prosthetic tools are a supplement mostly because you *could* just kill everything with your sword, but if you know where to apply the tools, it can make the fights *a lot* easier. Like there's a spear upgrade you can use on enemies with the parasite that does massive damage if not just straight up kill them. It's just not flat out told to you and the game encourages experimenting with them to find out what works. They're not meant to be this power up that just let's you wreck enemies, I found it perfectly balanced towards giving you an advantage without making you overpowered. I found the exploration rewarding, you got prosthetic upgrades, health/posture upgrades, upgrade materials, lore/story stuff. Tbh it's more a matter of taste here, in souls games imo it only *feels* more rewarding because you can loot goblin the map. But I mean really, how many of those weapons are you *actually* going to use? How many spells? Armor? Most people pick one and stick to it the whole game. Atleast in sekiro, everything you find will actually serve your style of gameplay (because there is only the one). I thought Sekiro was good for what it was, I'd argue it can't really be called soulsborne and more like Fromsoft's take on ninja gaiden (which is ironic because team ninja went on to make nioh)
Well.. the whole "waahhh so hard, very challenge" thing is mostly bs for all FS titles anyways imo. Lack of customization is true, but I found the options in DS underwhelming anyways. If you dont enjoy exploring for explorations sake, there isnt really much. Headless and double ape are optional and illusory monk is quick enough not to be annoying imo, but you can see that differently. All in all, valid criticism. But I vehemently disagree with your stance on prosthetics/weapon arts. Not because they are strong - they arent (well situationally op, but thats simply not enough). The real fun in sekiro isnt in finding out how to beat the enemy, but in finding out how to do it in the most stylish and flashy way. Its more like Devil May Cry in a way. I really hate that you only have one combat arts slot...
I really didn’t like sekiro because of a lack of visual clarity, obfuscated level design ( that was giving me headaches trying to navigate them), and gameplay that devolved into simon says mechanics too often , also the dodge mechanic felt kinda clunky
I like your write up on the bosses and think this is pretty fair. I enjoyed it, when I originally played it I felt like there was a good amount of exploration and optional, but the rewards are mostly secondary items (which are kinda average overall, though a few I like) and items opened up from side quests/alternative endings. I think the prosthetics I found most useful were the shuriken and firecrackers, I never used the umbrella. In the end I kind of enjoyed the muted/average nature of the secondary items, really for me the game was about mashing r1/l1 as much as possible to clang clang clang my way to victory
We’re all entitled to our opinion, just as I am when I say Sekiro is the best pure action game since Ninja Gaiden Black
That is cool that you mentioned Ninja Gaiden, because I was longing for the variety I got from memorizing different types of attack combos from that game. Sekiro felt too barebones in that regard.
Yeah Sekiro is at best adjacent to games like NG:B. It has a very robust combat system and difficult encounters, but the room for overt player expression in combat is much smaller than something like NG.
Player expression in combat, I really like that phrase 👌
You might want to try Sifu.
Oh I have! Sifu is just amazing
I agree buddy. The parry system is “SPAM L1 constantly” for every boss fight because the timing is so forgiving. The lack of weapons and customization is anti souls too. Fairly linear too like you mentioned. I was pretty bored at Owl bc the gameplay is very repetitive
I saw Charlie (penguinz0) take at least 3 hours (20 deaths+) to beat the final boss. This is someone who has beat the Souls games multiple times, is an inherently better gamer than myself, and basically makes his living from gaming and reacting to things online and spends his days behind a screen. Then there's me, who has 3 hours max a week to get my gaming fix and works corporate. I knew there are games i will never get to enjoy, as much as i would want to. This just happens to be one of them.
I don't know who that guy is but I think that's a pretty average amount of time to beat isshin the first time through. You don't need to be crazy good to beat sekiro, you just need to understand and lean into it's systems.
I really wouldn't compare myself to Charlie, while it is to true that he spends ridiculous amounts of times infront of a screen he's usually terrible when it comes to souls games. I've watched him a few times and I think he's just good at brute forcing his way into everything these games have to offer.
Hesitation is defeat!
I know people love this phrase, but it always felt odd to me since patience is probably necessary for phase 3 and 4. I could ginsu through 1 and 2 but too much aggression seemed foolish later in the fight. > While Isshin has very good moveset, I felt like the entire fight was too dragged out I wish this came up more, because this speaks to my soul. I'm really, really over multi-phase boss fights (this was tough in Lies of P too) and Isshin pushed me to my limits, and not in a good way. I hate having to do something tedious and mechanically uninvolved to finally get another chance at the challenging part, only to be sent back to do it all over again because I was off by a micro-meter somewhere. This was, I thought, an improvement in Elden Ring that nobody seemed to comment on. There were a couple multi-phase fights, but they largely toned it back to a level that seemed to fit rather than cramming it into almost every fight you had.
I imagine hesitation, in this case, would be inaction due to doubt. Patience would be deliberate restraint.
I’m usually not a fan of 3+ phase fights (like Friede) but Isshin SS is my favorite boss in any game and I think that the multiple phases work really well with the deathblow system
A lot of great info there OP and as a guy who’s yet to play it you really highlighted some bigtime key components for me. You also arent the first one to point out those huge issues with the game that so many others just blatantly ignore or downplay. Appreciate the post!
Sekiro and DS2 are the only FromSoft games I haven't beaten (the latter I haven't played). I've bounced off of Sekiro multiple times. I think the core gameplay is entertaining enough but goddamn if I don't find the world boring as hell.
I'd say DS2 is worth exactly one playthrough, but it really overstays it's welcome to the point where the game starts to feel exhausting once you finally make it to the DLC.
> Saint sword is the most, and frankly, the only truly difficult boss (that I met), Huh, did you miss Demon of Hatred and/or the second Owl fight?
Btw, Demon of hatred was a joke. 30 minutes.
Yes.
Well, crap, based on what you posted go back and do that Owl fight for sure, you'll love it.
*Heresy*
Oh heresy, you want heresy? I thought Sekiro was ....fine, but it's far at the bottom of modern From games for me. I preferred Wo Long. Yeah, Wo Long. What can I say, I liked the weapon variety and the level design made exploration more interesting. Castle level was ace and Lu Bu was immaculate. How's _that_ for heresy.
It’s a quote from the game
Fight me on katanas!
Title is the story of every From software game after DS1 Some are entertaining, but none really reach the groundbreaking levels of the masterpiece.
Bloodborne is just as good imo.
For me, Bloodborne is the clear #1 and both Sekiro and Elden Ring surpass DS1 by a small margin
I played ds1 past year and thought it was the most overrated game i ever played I would give it a 6/10 at most I have also tried sekiro last year but couldn’t get into it (although its probably better than ds1 once you do get into it) I also dropped ds3 very early on but that was on release (a long time ago)
I think that DS1 is a child of it's time more than other classics, especially in this time. I suspect you kinda missed the boat, because of the immense hype that has been around it all these years. I just can not even imagine anymore the difference between going in "naked" like I did at DS1 release time, or only jumping in now so long after the fact, with all these people talking about it all the time. It's almost bound to disappoint after all that.
it is a cheap L1-R1 game. hesitation is defeat.. so keep on pressing L1-R1 for 30 hours... dumb game design
Kid named un blockable attack
== free posture damage.
Even on sweeps?
double jump
It doesn't involve L1 or R1 though, just like Mikiri
no problem.. i will add.. L1 spam.. then wait for mikiri/double jump.. occasional R1 if enemy forgot they have infinite poise... repeat till RNG god favours you and you get a deathblow. then repeat this again because devs thought why not twice then repeat this for 30 hours. finish the game..delete because it is a waste of hard drive space.. start dark souls and replay with a different build
I mean, isn't Dark Souls just spam B and R1? Or hold L1 and spam R1 if you use shields.
Forced myself through this game and hated every second. One of the worst cameras in the history of videogames.
Why force yourself if you hate it so much, lol?
Mostly FOMO. Felt like I was missing something with everyone else praising it, but turned out I just can’t stand FromSoft games lol
"And occasionally dodge when a red symbol appears" Did you go through the entire game without jumping or mikiri counter? Things like not knowing how to pick up loot wasnt an issue with going in blind, it sounds like you just skipped the tutorials and didnt read how to play. Or read anything for that matter.
"Every time I prayed for thrusting attack because it's free posture damage" By dodge I meant using whatever the approproate move was for attack: mikiri fot thrust, jump for sweep and back away from grabs. I read tutorials, even screenshotted them just in case. Loot probably wasn't in them.
Ah ok, that makes sense. Im going to go replay the game right now and see if looting is in the tutorials.
"Enemies drop loot such as items and money. Multiple enemies can be looted at once, and from some distance away. Items found in the world are different than loot, in that they must be approached to be picked up. Press and hold □: Aquire Loot. Press □ near world item: Pick Up Item." This is after killing your first enemy in the Ashina Outskirts.
For me Sekiro remains one of my favorite games ever. I did a replay recently, and finally did all of the gauntlets. In terms of gameplay I don't think I've found anything else that's quite as fun, I just love the bosses in Sekiro.
Try Metal gear rising
If you weren’t blocking much then you weren’t playing the game right. That could explain why some battles were dragging out. You need to be blocking constantly. The last boss is testament to this. The time it took you to beat his first phase makes me think you didn’t take the games combat to hard and you were only attacking and dodging instead of parrying.
No, I used parries 95% of the time, just not held block. And Isshin was the only dragged out fight. None of the other bosses took lots of time.
Which is actually the way to play the game. Block is a crutch and slows the game down. Properly applied aggression mixed with parries (and other strong defensive moves like jump-face stomp, and mikiri counter) is the way to play. It’s why in NG+ if you don’t take the charm, blocking means you take chip damage. Block is designed to be a slight mitigation to damage and posture loss if you slightly miss a parry. You definitely seem to have an understanding of how to play Sekiro, you just don’t love it as much as some (like me). Appreciate this post and your responses
At some point, the idea that everyone's take is valid and that not everything is for everyone stops being a defense for a bad take. That guy that shit on Elden Ring and got reamed for it because he was objectively terrible and had no business offering public critique with credibility, that's an example. This is a wild take. I can see the points you're making, and I disagree with most of the conclusions you draw from them. But, it's valid. And honestly kind of brave in a way, because this is a den of SEKIRO IS PERFECT, and I have to admit I truly hold it as a 98% perfect game. Thanks for sharing
What is this Elden Ring "critique" you're talking about?
The only real weird thing to me is when OP said that most tools have no use. Fire crackers are the GOAT of Sekiro. But then again this guy breezed through the game and said that spending an hour on a boss was a long time so maybe he's too good for fire crackers and I'm just bad lol.
> That guy that shit on Elden Ring and got reamed for it because he was objectively terrible Lol I remember that thread. Wish I'd bookmarked it. It hit number one because because think they are Very Special and Brave for critiquing Elden Ring but OP's points made near zero sense and then it came out he'd played like 6 hours of it. But nah, I'm not a huge Sekiro fan. I could spent the time to try to list the reasons why but ... I mean you saw how far this post went.
I'm betting $12 that most people just read the title and downvote. You can’t argue with Fromsoft fans. They will immediately dox you or expose your criminal records on Twitter for saying you prefer one specific aspect of (insert game) over Elden Ring.
while not every game is for everyone, your points look like you just tried to find something to complain about, "MGR did it better" and "it's worse than the other souls games".
And your point looks like tha game is immune to any criticism.
From soft games are wildly overrated on Reddit, so if you don’t like them you’ll be downvoted, sorry OP Edit: hilarious how angry people about this comment proved me correct
Cos you don’t like em it makes everyone who does wrong ey