I also agree the game wasn't intended to be a 100% complete playthrough.....but that's like putting cocaine in front of an addict and saying "you're only intended to do a couple bumps." But then at least 1/3rd of that cocaine turns out to be baking powder. I don't know if quantity is a good defense for a lack of balance and meaningfulness but different gamers are going to see that differently.
just wanted to highlight this quote, which can be applied to many more games that just ER. in fact, while the old maxim "you can't make everyone happy" exists, it is even more relevant when your consumer base is split between curious casuals and no-lifers who have been playing souls for decades now . what the hell kind of game would actually satisfy both groups? Part of me thinks many modern designs center around this balance of perception, and so work harder on including a bunch of shallow-but-potentially-interesting for-one-particular-subgroup kind of things to their games, so that there is still some reason to click click your way towards the end, despite feeling the OG formula is not what you expected. . .
catering to idealized notions of gameplay, and creating things that look fun with little meaningful reward. Looking at you , korok seeds
Designing games in order to standardize the reaction of the widest variety of players, rather than any old foolish notion of directorial pursuit of creative ideals. I am not claiming this is what ER did, for I do not really belong in this thread but I like reading various opinions on modern game releases. But the quote above really explains to me how some people might view this theory of a polarized playerbase - as is often the case, the consumer ends up bearing the blame for failing to
properly enjoy the consumption of the media.
I would argue games as an entertainment medium fail to follow through on the invisible and fantastical 'ideal gameplay' that many game-consumers have come to expect, and the largest companies are very aware of this unspoken notion and abuse it to sell products completely different from what might be expected. Looking at you, BF2042 and Halo: Infinite. Could have been amazing, either / or, but both fall prey to really shit design choices that will still likely make a whole lot of money because IP .
once the hype-dragon dies down, it will be interesting to see how ER stacks up against previous titles, in terms of density vs reward. how much sword-swing arc dodge timing memorization are you willing to put in, to see those glorious, glorious landscapes and fantastical creatures? to feel that power creep upward, the burgeoning sorcerer, even if it occurs in fits and spurts and results in an altogether too easy experience? Perhaps DS will really shed light on this kind of design misstep, whereby a game is stretched and warped to fit too broad an audience, and thus water down whatever savory taste might have existed before.
Again, not claiming the above is true, merely positing ideas
Author
Topic: Oooohhhhhhh, Elden Ring. Bay12 Group Password: MAGMA. It's DLC time! (Read 46133 times)