quash wrote:I was nothing but respectful towards everyone, if not a bit blunt.
Nope. I don't know what your objective is here, really. Looks like you came in to dick wave, and aren't gonna stop any time soon.
quash wrote:
From his first post, Dear Quashyboy establishes his tone with a youtube-tier disrespectful comment. A little dig at anyone who ever found the game challenging, many of whom are forum members.
I thought that argument wasn't applicable to this forum. IS THIS BACKPEDALING?
Looks like you're struggling to understand, or this is some pathetic attempt at a 'gotcha!'
What I said was:
" 'zomg it's SO hard' doesn't really apply on a forum dedicated to shmups.."
Meaning the media hype about the game being 'the hardest ever' isn't relevant on this forum. There's a difference between "zomg SO hard" and 'challenging.' So don't take me out of context.
Try harder, son.
Sure, I died on my first play through of DS. I die in a lot of games, particularly when I don't use the internet as a way to spoil the surprises the game developers put in for me to enjoy. That doesn't mean that a game is necessarily hard or deep. This is a very foolish line of thought for a number of reasons.
Yeah, that is a foolish line of thought. So why bring it up? That point has nothing to do with any of the conversation. If you want to sit and argue against your own points, do it elsewhere.
Also you're implying the only way to succeed at DS on a blind run is to use a guide? Or that the only possible way our great action hero quash could die in a souls game is if it's some sort of unfair trap. I suppose if you've been puffing up your own ego by saying the game's learning curve is done after 3 hours, then you would have to make excuses for any deaths afterwards.
I made a comment that was meant to open the discussion as to why this "mainstream appeal" as you put it is self destructive, but then we got sidetracked on other things.
Yeah, your complaints about 'illiterates.'
We didn't get sidetracked, I informed you that no one cares. They probably still don't.
quash wrote: 'Another chance'? Who the hell do you think you are?
I do not care about reputation, neither of others nor myself.
You do care, it's painfully obvious.
I haven't backpedaled an inch. Every last one of my statements in this thread is compatible with each other. Stop reaching, you're embarrassing yourself here.
Haha, okay mate.
"Souls just ripped off NG combat & added stats."
to
"All I want is for people to accept there may have been some influence from NG
"
Those are separate, but related points. I haven't explained in detail the issue around the internet creating false prophets, but I will at some point.
Don't waste your time.
You act as if having a stamina bar and a few NPCs to talk to is enough to classify a game as an RPG. Unfortunately you are not alone in this, but that doesn't make you right.
There's no hard and fast definition of what an Action-RPG is. I'll say again that it's just a functional, catch-all term.
C'mon on then, Mr. expert. Give us your definition of an RPG, outline some games that are true RPGs. I'd like examples that aren't 80's/early 90's PC games too.
After all, everyone must adhere to quashy's definitions, and not the wider gaming community's lexicon.
You can argue to the hills that Souls is a "spiritual successor" to Kings Field
It is. From said as much in interviews..
Imagine that your first exposure to any Souls games were versions that completely hid all stats from you except for your health. Would you still call it an "action RPG"? I'm pretty sure you would default to action/adventure before RPG ever crossed your mind.
This is ridiculous. You want me to engage in what-if's now? Souls doesn't hide your stats; they're an important part of the game.
Also Action/adventure is often listed as a different genre to the '3D Action' you keep jerking off over, which I've seen described as 'character action games' more often lately.
Perhaps you shouldn't be so concerned about what the rest of the world thinks and start figuring things out for yourself.
You mean change my definitions to the world according to quash.
Everything would work better then eh?
quash wrote:He says regular enemies being deadly is the most important aspect, not the mechanics or feel of combat itself.
The two are innately related. What use is a combat engine if you don't have any decent enemies? To illustrate the point in a more extreme manner, what use is a combat engine if there are no enemies at all?
Sidestepping. Useless questions.
You said deadly enemies are the most important aspect of souls.
Surely you admit that if NG 'may' have been an influence on the souls family tree, then it also may not have been.
There are tough enemies for most of King's field, Lost Kingdoms (slightly less so but I can elaborate), Armored core series. I'm not that familiar with others.
Suggesting that none of From's output could possibly be an influence on Souls, could possibly lead to 3D combat using the
same design principles for enemies & worlds that they'd been working with for 10+ years is reaching.
You haven't shown me real evidence to suggest that NG was a more important influence than the above, or even present at all.
It's not an unreasonable theory, I'm just not convinced personally. I might've been more receptive if you weren't having a tantrum.
quash wrote:Every problem comes from viewing Souls as an action game. If you're looking for NG everywhere; if you're looking for that same combat experience, don't be disappointed when you don't find it.
I don't expect every game to be NG, nor is direct comparison between NG and Souls necessarily the most productive for a number of reasons. I do compare the premise of adding stats to a genre primarily balanced around skill vs keeping stats out of such genres, which is totally reasonable and productive. If you don't see the difference, I'm afraid we can't converse any longer.
Okay, yeah. Kindly stop the comparison then.. You opened that can of worms as soon as you arrived.
Oh! I don't see the difference! uh huh. looks like we have to stop conversing
what a fucking shame.
quash wrote:I cleared NGB on Master Ninja years ago and it changed how I see 3D action games.
^it all boils down to that really.
What's funny is that this literally started as a troll thread. You turned it into your personal blog about From games, and proceeded to berate a guy who rightfully called out your nonsensical labeling of dungeon crawlers and action games as RPGs. It can only go up from there, friendo.
Great Quash, soldier of justice, pointer of fingers, he who challenged Evil Blinge's use of genre terms. They'll be singing about him in the halls of System11 forever to come! He who cast down Blinge's personal blog about From games. How dare anybody want to share their game experiences or discuss which others they'd like to try by the same dev.
Thank god you arrived.