Random Gaming Thoughts II ~News Items Beware~

It still blows my mind that people think From soft are some masochistic game designers, yes it can be annoying if you lose a tonne of echoes/souls (XP) but you can always get more & eventually you learn a process of knowing when to cash in that XP at the correct time so those annoying moments don't happen as often.

Drunkalilly wrote:

The important moment of a souls game is reaching the understanding with yourself to not think of death and game over the way you do in other games. Death is just something that happens, and part of progress.

Would be fine if it wasn't repeatedly so cheap in doing it. Having enemies standing hidden on the other side of doors, or up in an alcove so that they can shoot you in the back as you run past. It means you either have to get hit/die and just learn the cheap locations through repetition, or slow down your progress considerably just to be safe. Neither are good options. If I get hit I want it to be my fault, not because I have to learn a level off by heart first.

I don't agree with that. You're not meant to be tearing about the place like a nutter. It makes sense for enemies to want to ambush you instead of just standing there, ready to take you 1 on 1. Stay on your toes and you're fine.

It makes sense in universe, yes, but it doesn't make for fun level design. Ambushes are cheap tactics - that's kind of the point of them. Catch the enemy off guard so they can't do anything to protect themselves. It feels great when you do it as a player in a game, but it's annoying when its done against you /because there is nothing you can do/. Sure you can take it slowly and be very careful not to fall into a trap, and that works, but it slows down an already very slow game. Alternatively you just have to take the hit and learn the enemy position for next time. Great for people who like speedrunning the game, but that's not me.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy games that are slow and methodical in their approach, like MGS and Splinter Cell. I just don't enjoy it in the Souls games. When I play an action game, I think the combat should be fast and fair. I never found it fast, and it was often unfair because of the enemy placement.

...I think OR might be the first person I've seen ever who's played the Souls games and isn't enamoured with them.

Did you play Souls 1 or 2, OR? Because if it was the latter, I actually agree with you. That game traded good game design for cheap deaths a lot.

I'd probably also not like the Souls games, they just give me that vibe that I seriously wouldn't enjoy them.

Oh no-one ENJOYs them... *laughs and cries at the same time*

Athrun888 wrote:

I'd probably also not like the Souls games, they just give me that vibe that I seriously wouldn't enjoy them.  

I thought the same myself at one point and look how that turned out.

---

As for the enemies that ambush you in the souls games this usually happens early on in the game preparing you to constantly be aware of your surroundings at all times.

Jimbob wrote:

Oh no-one ENJOYs them... *laughs and cries at the same time*

I actually really enjoyed parts of my time with both games; for the first game, almost everything after Anor Londo was a fun, light and breezy romp! The weird thing is, those are the parts for which I have the least nostalgia. The sections that challenged me, demanded my respect and that I learn them like the back of my hand, that presented me with horrors and tragedies and mysteries, those are the memories I cherish.

Drunkalilly wrote:

Jimbob wrote:

Oh no-one ENJOYs them... *laughs and cries at the same time*

I actually really enjoyed parts of my time with both games; for the first game, almost everything after Anor Londo was a fun, light and breezy romp! The weird thing is, those are the parts for which I have the least nostalgia. The sections that challenged me, demanded my respect and that I learn them like the back of my hand, that presented me with horrors and tragedies and mysteries, those are the memories I cherish.

Yeah, totally agree with this. I barely remember anything post Anor Londo. I absolutely remember the Undead Burg, Sen's and Blighttown.

In regards to Souls being "cheap" with its ambushes, I disagree that it's cheap. Most of the ambushes in the game are signposted or can be spotted before you reach them if you take your team and observe your surroundings. I understand that's not everyone's cup of tea, but I personally loved it - it heightened the tension of the game for me and I felt rewarded every time I slipped past a trap or actually ambushed my would-be ambushers.

Drunkalilly wrote:

Jimbob wrote:

Oh no-one ENJOYs them... *laughs and cries at the same time*

I actually really enjoyed parts of my time with both games; for the first game, almost everything after Anor Londo was a fun, light and breezy romp! The weird thing is, those are the parts for which I have the least nostalgia. The sections that challenged me, demanded my respect and that I learn them like the back of my hand, that presented me with horrors and tragedies and mysteries, those are the memories I cherish.

The depths and the catacombs are big highlights for me, I especially loved that I got through the depths without being cursed.

Drunkalilly wrote:

Did you play Souls 1 or 2, OR? Because if it was the latter, I actually agree with you. That game traded good game design for cheap deaths a lot.

I had Demon's Souls, skipped over Dark Souls, then thought I'd give the series another shot with Dark Souls 2 - and that's what I'm basing my opinion on. I'm aware that most people would say I missed out on the far superior game, so I'll take that point! I don't recall it being the same in Demon's Souls actually (and I played more of that game, probably because of it).

JayMoyles wrote:

In regards to Souls being "cheap" with its ambushes, I disagree that it's cheap. Most of the ambushes in the game are signposted or can be spotted before you reach them if you take your team and observe your surroundings.

Translation: Most are signposted because there are glowing messages on the floor right before them reading "Watch out ahead" :b

Three examples I remember from DS2 are: First, going up some stairs with a turn in them and an enemy just behind it, so that if you just run up the stairs you'll likely get cheapshotted once. Second, walking through a doorway where there are two enemies either side of the door on the other side, so if you go through /slowly/ you can get hit before even knowing they are there. Third, walking up a set of stairs where an enemy is positioned back up and behind you waiting to shoot you in the back with an arrow. I'm pretty sure they all happened multiple times in just the small portion of the game I played.

OrangeRakoon wrote:

JayMoyles wrote:

In regards to Souls being "cheap" with its ambushes, I disagree that it's cheap. Most of the ambushes in the game are signposted or can be spotted before you reach them if you take your team and observe your surroundings.

Translation: Most are signposted because there are glowing messages on the floor right before them reading "Watch out ahead" :b

Three examples I remember from DS2 are: First, going up some stairs with a turn in them and an enemy just behind it, so that if you just run up the stairs you'll likely get cheapshotted once. Second, walking through a doorway where there are two enemies either side of the door on the other side, so if you go through /slowly/ you can get hit before even knowing they are there. Third, walking up a set of stairs where an enemy is positioned back up and behind you waiting to shoot you in the back with an arrow. I'm pretty sure they all happened multiple times in just the small portion of the game I played.

Ah, I was talking about DS1. DS2 is a bit unfair at points, I'll grant you that.

The signposting in DS1 doesn't rely on the message system either. You can play the game offline and still avoid the ambushes as the devs leave environmental clues or straight-up show you the ambush ahead before you reach it. If you're blasting through the game, you'll get ganked, but if you're patient and observant, you'll be fine.

OrangeRakoon wrote:

Dark Souls 2 - and that's what I'm basing my opinion on.

Called it!

Hmmm... I think it's true what you all said there: in both games, I don't really remember the linear end bits.
(Oh wow, this should totally be on the Sooooooooouls! topic)

I'm posting here as not everyone visits Nontendo for instance where this may suit that better but as it's a random thought along with needing a name it's gettign posted here.

I've always called myself a GAMER and if I was to call myself a fanboy of any sort it be SEGA (You just need to look at the debate in meet the admin team thread) but primarily all my gaming is on the PS4 along with PSVR maybe soon along with most of my gaming viewing (I don't know what the best word is to use) & patronage is focused on PlayStation and so is the games I want to play are exclusive to the PlayStation family.

Now I'm not saying I'm a Sony fanboy that if you gave me a choice of The Legend of Zelda U or The Last Guardian, that I'd take TLG as it's a almighty PlayStation exclusive, No I'd take Zelda all day long and I still love Nintendo.

But me and EofGizmo have been talking at work and seeing as were in similar situation with our gaming along with actually working the same ROTA, were thinking of doing a PlayStation Podcast in the same format style of Podcast Beyond & PS I Love You XOXO.

I posted this on Twitter as well about a PlayStation Podcast and that it will be part of Gintendo with the current podcast being about everything in the gaming world where whatever we call the Gintendo PlayStation Podcast sitting alongside it.

Now we need a name, hence why I posted here as someone that doesn't pop to Nontnedo or check social media may have a great name. So far I've got PlayStation for the Podcast and one I quite like is Pod of War which did have Crash Bantercoot attached to it but I think that could be drop.

Also thoughts on the idea?

TBH I see no point in having a separate podcast that just focus' on one format.

Thoughts on the idea.  

My first thought is that anyone who'd be interested in this would visit Nontendo anyway, so it should be there.  Possibly Community if it ever becomes a reality.

My second thought is, how well is the current podcast doing?  The multiformat one that, in theory, has something for owners of every console?  Because you're cutting out a chunk of the potential audience by going single-format: not just me and Zero, but people like DL who only have an XBox, as well as everyone during any periods when Sony's box is on downtime.  If you're not getting healthy hits to the multiplat podcast, I'd focus on that instead.

My third and final thought is that if this is hosted on Gintendo (has Drunka agreed to this?), that site's really going to have to change its name.  I mean, the "intendo" is tenuous enough as is, but I do think a Sony-exclusive podcast would be the final straw!



A random thought, now: anyone remember when the PS1 was called "the Fony Greystation" by fanboys and, er, me?  Does anyone wonder whether this had anything to do with Sony's move to black?  Also, why did they choose grey in the first place?  Not the most appealing colour.

You know, I've never actually wondered why the original PS1 was grey. I remember my grandparents had a fat grey tv, were lots of electronics at the time grey? Then black seemed to become the new black by the millennium.

As for podcasts, if I was going to add another podcast to the rotation I would rather do something like Matt Lee's Daft Souls podcast. Just take a couple of games, or perhaps some news, and just have a good chat about that. However, I doubt I have enough interesting things to say about games to make that work. I'm not sold on a Sony podcast being on Gintendo.

Balladeer wrote:

Thoughts on the idea.  

My first thought is that anyone who'd be interested in this would visit Nontendo anyway, so it should be there.  Possibly Community if it ever becomes a reality.

My second thought is, how well is the current podcast doing?  The multiformat one that, in theory, has something for owners of every console?  Because you're cutting out a chunk of the potential audience by going single-format: not just me and Zero, but people like DL who only have an XBox, as well as everyone during any periods when Sony's box is on downtime.  If you're not getting healthy hits to the multiplat podcast, I'd focus on that instead.

My third and final thought is that if this is hosted on Gintendo (has Drunka agreed to this?), that site's really going to have to change its name.  I mean, the "intendo" is tenuous enough as is, but I do think a Sony-exclusive podcast would be the final straw!



A random thought, now: anyone remember when the PS1 was called "the Fony Greystation" by fanboys and, er, me?  Does anyone wonder whether this had anything to do with Sony's move to black?  Also, why did they choose grey in the first place?  Not the most appealing colour.

First thing I post here to get thoughts and possible name ideas, if we do it the podcast would be put in the Podcast Thread.  

Second thing, I get your point but is there a downtime the answer is no and will we do every week unlikely that there could be stuff to talk about and it will also have gaming stuff not all PlayStation if there was news like EA bought CD Project Red we would talk about it, also some maybe interested in what's going on with PlayStation. Like if we did it back when Bloodborne came out, I reckon Drunka would find that interesting.

Drunka seemed fine on twitter about it also the idea of the site was to talk & do stuff were passionate about which this would be, I hope there's no name change as I only just renewed the Domain for 2 years.

@Muss basically it would be like you said it would be a intro then news but PlayStation based along with anything big in the gaming world etc it would be Gintendo Presents Pod of War (Drunkas name) and we would promte Gintendo through it any reviews of games on PlayStation platforms, articles and I reckon with the PlayStation stuff I checkout taht it could get a good few watches as well with some maybe staying around also who doesn't want to watch me.

I don't need to approve it. That's the point of Gintendo Namer, I've made my opinions on authority clear. Personally I don't think a PSCast is necessary, but if Mas would enjoy doing one and thinks people would listen to it, fair play to him. He might not necessarily be pitching it at us.

The greystation thing is interesting. To be fair, the NES and SNES were grey too. I guess, like Muss said, that was just the colour of technology and Sony had the misfortune to use that colour as the paradigm shifted and everything had to be black. Nowadays, I'd argue that thanks to Apple white is the colour of high technology. Hence the Wii and (some) Wii U, and mocking "Big Black Boxes".

Yeah, personally I wouldn't see the appeal in a Sony-only cast, as I like hearing about a bit of everything. To that note, I don't think I'd have enough to say about Sony for a podcast as my console of choice at the moment is the 3DS, and I've been flitting between that and the PS4. It's a bit exclusionary having a Sony-only cast. Just my two cents, though.

I've never seen anyone talk about BBoPs outside this site - I think the market still thinks black is a cool power colour. And I think it's a cool power colour too! Maybe you had to have been alive in the 80s (I mean properly) to understand the appeal of grey tech., just like you had to be alive in the 60s to appreciate hideous cuboid concrete architecture.

Drunkalilly wrote:

He might not necessarily be pitching it at us.

masofdas wrote:

Also thoughts on the idea?

Eh, sounds like it to me. And I think it's a weird thing to pitch to us. Fair enough on the authority thing mind.