Re: What Have You Been Playing... IN MARCH 2024?

On 04/04/2024 17:13, Justisaur wrote:

On 4/4/2024 3:23 AM, JAB wrote:

On 02/04/2024 18:20, candycanearter07 wrote:

I find the games pretty varied, and extremely rewarding, but at times
they can definitely get a bit much.  Breaking controllers throwing them
out of frustration is a common meme of people playing these games.

>
I absolutely can't stand super difficult games. Thanks, though.

>
I used to enjoy games with big manuals and a steep learning curve when I was younger - the type of game where you have to spend at least an hour reading the manual and several hours playing just to get the basics of the game. Nowadays, totally different and I really want to be able to pick the basics in at most an hour and preferable far less than that.

 I personally don't think the souls games are all that hard, that's just the reputation.  Especially if you compare to older games like nethack. If you die in a souls game, you only loose souls (money) and even then only if you don't manage to get back to where you died and pick them up again (happens a lot until you get used to spending them before going after bosses/new areas.) The controls aren't particularly difficult to pick up.
 The real difficulty is figuring out weaknesses, ways around things, and/or learning patterns of behavior of enemies and how to avoid attacks.  That seems to vary a lot between people, I seem to be a slow learner in that regard, and I tend to look up spoilers for ideas when I get to the frustration point, but I get through, some others just zip through the games first time without much issue.  I consider anything below 20 tries against a boss to be easy for me (Most in Bloodborne for me took 2-3 tries, which I consider to be laughably easy.)
 A lot of difficulty of the game is people deliberately (or caving in to internet sentiment) restricting themselves, such as only using melee, no spells or items, no co-op, not going over internet suggested levels for each boss/area (o.k. I do that last one as it makes co-op more likely) etc. because so many spout off nonsense that that's the only way to play the game 'for real' and that gets to 'no true Scottsman' territory.
 I feel DS1 and DS3 both have a bit too high of difficulty initially for someone unfamiliar with the type of game, which is why I suggested Elden Ring or DS2 (only if your specs aren't up to Elden Ring, as it can be a lot harder, more getting through the areas than the bosses) to begin on it.
 That perceived difficulty results in a greater feeling of accomplishment, at least for me.  That might actually be a reason to avoid them though, after you're accomplished at souls, most games don't give that dopamine hit as they're more like a walk in the park.  On the other hand sometimes a walk in the park is a nice change.
 

I can't say I've played any DS type games but I have wondered before whether the whole they are really difficult is overplayed and it's more not that they are overly difficult but instead it's modern games tend to be relatively easier.
As for the genre itself, it's not the reputation for being difficult but more they just aren't my type of games. So as slight comparison to make sense of that. I like CRPG's but something I never do is look at guides of how to make 'good' character builds. I just pick what I fancy and accept that it's quite possible at some point I'll have to change the difficulty setting as the game thinks you're this level so you character is this powerful.
That kinda ties in with my initial comment in that unlike when I was younger I no longer gain much enjoyment from learning the in-and-outs of a game.