01-16-2019, 11:33 PM
(01-12-2019, 07:42 AM)Ben Wrote: my response, as someone who loved bloodborne a whole lot but doesn't like the other souls games:
1. i agree, i think there was a period of me having no vials at all but then eventually i got many without having to even think about it. i dont really remember having to farm
2. i have the opposite complaint- i hate the "the knight in my castle has a mean old dragon" aesthetic of what ive played in souls (i know im oversimplifying). i like that there's beasts, and then theres.... something much darker and deeper going on. i felt like there was variety, though yes thats subjective. everyones gonna be satisfied at different levels
3. thats funny, because the fights you mentioned are the ones i beat in 1 or 2 tries and so dont remember so well at all. i loved the look and feel of fighting eeeeveryone, i think. they all had their cool design (visually). as far as fight design, you may be right, but i think your points in general speak to the technical aspects of the game and its gameplay and im a gaylord for the story/aesthetic/visual design. i also didnt really have trouble with getting my health back or visceral attacks
4. i think this is one of the strongest aspects. it may seem like im being an apologist, but the game is a lovecraftian story of things untold. nobody points to a diagram and explains how the story works, that its ending, or otherwise. i think if one reads into it s'more, it makes more sense, and thats what i love about it. it makes sense, but its not in your face. i get if that's annoying for people that aren't invested enough, but for me it was great
5. im conflicted, because i agree but i also think its such a serendipitous thing that this whooole weird dungeoncrawling mode with new content exists even after everything
Lol yeah I think the whole knights and dragons thing that dark souls has to be kinda boring and childish but there are two positive consequences to it.
1. The theme of entropy and time when combined with medieval aesthetics and rituals nets a couple of neat conceptual points that enrich potential interpretations. I instinctively read Gwyn as Zeus protecting the ancient idea of aristocratic reason/gnosticism against Christian populism and mindless faith. The bits of body horror sprinkled through the game are also cool in this context as the consequence of aristotelian forms weakening and bodies losing their relation to the ousia.
Unfortunately this doesn't work when the entire lore is taken into account because from can't get their shit together. Apart from the fire dying out out and ending the world (but actually maybe making it better who knows!) there's ancient dragons who want their revenge and whatever the hell the abyss is. Probably something that has to do with humanity although humanity is supposed to be good and prolong the fire? All of this together is the cause of the undead curse, which results in mindless non-humans, except not really because gods can go hollow to and hollows can organise states. Clusterfuck.
2. For some people (me) fighting against knights, although it often feels childish, works on a fantasy level because of the assumption that your enemy has been trained to battle it out and they know what they're doing, making the experience more rewarding. A good example of this is the lothric knights in ds3 punishing backstab fishes with their shields and trying to guard break you if you play defensively. It also adds to pvp with players not being able to help role playing as the knightly order they're a member of.
Bloodbornes enemy design makes me sad in comparison because the setting is much better then ds but instead of basing the characters on that they just made everything a puppy.