LTTP: Bloodborne - bad game design is "hardcore" now?

The "soulsborne" games remind me of those NES games that were more frustrating than they were challenging. You know, the ones that most people look back at now as being "unplayable".

If Konami let From Software make a Castlevania in the style of Bloodborne that was more at the difficulty level of those games and had the lore/story of those games, it'd be the fuckin mega-GOAT.

I think for newcomers the first few hours can be frustrating, because like the rest of the Souls series, it holds a proud middle finger to established conventions. Once you vibe with that, I think it's a real special experience and a very, very memorable one. That said, not everyone will love everything and that's probably a very good thing.

Here's where I agree: Boss runs. Forcing you to run the same route over and over with a slim margin for failure (but large enough that it becomes annoying) isn't respectful of your time

Where I disagree: Learning the mechanics of a boss fight and executing on it successfully is a brilliant feeling. The games are not about skill but knowledge (or should it be 'insight'?) and this is why they're so successful I think. There's not that skill barrier that a game like Ninja Gaiden has, anyone can 'git gud' if they're prepared to feel out an enemy for a few rounds (really first rounds against a boss should be as slow and risk averse as a first run through a dungeon like Sen's Fortress, you will almost never first try a boss).

The games work when they straddle the line between challenging and fair. Sometimes they do fall off into wasting your time with bullshit though, like Bed of Chaos or the stupid runs you do to fight Blue Smelter Demon and Sir Alonne in DSII

But when you show up to Ludwig and learn his horsey demon phase and put that guy down and suddenly boom he has a whole new phase with completely different mechanics to learn getting to the stage that you know his behaviours and the windows for attacking, healing and countering is very satisfying.


So again it's just that people like learning how to deal with a problem and implementing their solution. Sometimes you got to accept that you will need to die a few times for an encounter to begin to make sense. Or just roll around a lot and don't do any attacking, just watch every attack and try to remember tells

Dr. Mario said:

Yes it's a call back to times when we the medium was new and cheap deaths resulting in having to redo large parts of a level were everywhere to elongate play time, and you were just kind of thrown into a game and you had to call a hotline to understand what you were supposed to be doing. Some people like this. There's nothing wrong with that. In fact it's a bit of a counter protest to a game design culture of railroading the player to such an extent that there is no chance of a mistake anymore. Someone more knowledgeable on the subject than me once said on GAF that FROM Software has been stubbornly making the same game for thirty years and all of a sudden became famous with it. I'll give you that it's baffling that it is so uniformly praised for it however, by all intents and purposes a relatively niche counter culture game should be divisive, but some very vocal fans made sure that it wasn't.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

You act like Roguelikes are hugely poopular all over the place or any other game that makes you repeat content after dying. If a game is fun to play and engaging then for most people it doesn't matter if you have to go back and doing the same things. Games like MMO's rely on this for raids. That's the entire point of the game.

The greatest con From Software ever pulled was convincing gamers that the death-loop in Souls games doesn't disrespect their time.

Though it is harsh to call the level design bad. On that front FS games are typically fantastic.

The only two things in Souls games that are good are boss fights and level design. Everything else from fighting other enemies to grinding for items and the amazing lore is mediocre.

ekim said:

Bland in terms of level design. Beautiful in terms of the visual design.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I don't get this at all.

Of all the games in all the world, I struggle to think of many that rival Bloodborne in terms of imparting a sense of discovery and wonder through merely progressing through the environment.

Trying, failing, adjusting and coming back for more.
Clearly you haven't grasped the concept yet so I'd say : persevere.

A game doesn't get "90+ metascore" by accident.

Richter1887 said:

They are there for you to level up. You can run past them if you don't care about leveling up.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Then why not have a checkpoint by a boss? What do the boss fights gain from every thirty second attempt costing four minutes of actual game time re-traversing previous terrain? A fight that I might get through in fifteen minutes takes two hours instead

theofficefan99 said:

Bloodborne is a very meticulously crafted game by very talented developers.

BUT, having said that, I do think it has pretty shitty design. It's a bunch of trial-and-error and the game loves to waste your time. And sorry but I hate how there's no map and I also don't like the button layout.

If there was an easy mode for these games I would love them but as-is they're just shit that frustrate me and I'd rather spend that time playing games where I can feel actual progress

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I don't know man, the feeling of progress comes when you figure out how to do a thing or can defeat an enemy that used to give you trouble with ease.

The games are just not for you if you sondo like the above.

Wolfgunblood said:

I didn't like it either, but for different reasons. I thought the world and atmosphere were mindblowing. I don't know if 'lazy' is the right word, but it's laughably consistent with their previous souls games to where it's nearly a skin (again, similar conclusion but for different reasons). I think it's a bad game but certainly not in a way that disqualifies it from being worth playing. The dodge roll mechanic is a joke, one of the reasons I couldn't get into the previous games. I wouldn't even bother with criticism of it, as it's a good AA type of game that we need more of and I'm glad this exists, but the overwhelming popularity for what this is is fascinating.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Consistent in quality. Nothing laughable about that. The differences in gameplay (dashing - you hardly need the roll, gun parrying, instant healing, regain, trick weapons) and the more focused approach to more aggresive gameplay, as well as the differences in setting and lore are enough to make some people love BB that didn't get on with DS, I know a few. Just like there are people who miss the slower pace and build variety of DS in BB.

Nah, it's one of the best games ever made. The world design and combat are incredible.

ekim said:

Bland in terms of level design. Beautiful in terms of the visual design.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

LOL

What the fuck am I reading

Bloodborne is literally the game with one of the best level design ever. Central Yharnam and Forbidden Woods is gaming perfection.

ResetEra: a place where you can see all kinds of hot takes.

⁣

I don't know what you expected when you went into the game but what your saying is just not accurate at all. It feels like you have this idea built up in your head about how a game should be designed and thats coloring your impressions of the game because it doesn't strictly adhere to your limited view of game design.

The game is meant to be unfair, this gameplay aspect actually reinforces the story elements within these games. Of course the gameplay is unfair and brutal, the world itself in these games is unfair and brutal.

You are meant to die and fail because everyone dies and fails, its part of presenting the bleak nature of the world your in.

I won't say the game is perfect like some will, having so much of the story in things like item descriptions is just not a great way to present the story to the player but Bloodborne is a damn fine game and either you don't get it, you need to get better at it, or its just not for you.

ekim said:

A challenging game gives you the chance to progress without any trial&error but with you being able to adapt to the situation by giving some context.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

What.......?????????

A challenge = difficult.... a challenging game should make it difficult to progress... push you into errors for you try again and get better....hence it being a challenge...

You're actually arguing a challenging game should allow you coast through, which is the exact opposite of a challenge.

I've not even talking about Bloodborne here, the literal / logical reasoning in your sentence is a oxymoron.

Mezentine said:

The OP is kind of all over the place but I still don't get how people can justify the checkpoint placements in Soulsborne games as good game design and then turn around and say "just run past the encounters between you and the boss" when stuck on a hard boss. Is the combat and the enemy placement meant to be engaged with or not?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Yeah, I don't agree with much in the OP but Souls conversations are usually full of frustrating nonsense like this. Often, people justify mechanics simply because they're in the games, not because they're good. Boss runs are just wasted time after you're experienced with the content in between.

Astounded to see this many replies without a dozen "tough but fair!" thrown at the OP.

Mezentine said:

Then why not have a checkpoint by a boss? What do the boss fights gain from every thirty second attempt costing four minutes of actual game time re-traversing previous terrain? A fight that I might get through in fifteen minutes takes two hours instead

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Yeah I don't like this. They should let you buy DMC-stye Yellow Orbs or something. Or make the unlockable shortcuts really really close to the fog doors more often

Git Gud xInfinity

theofficefan99 said:

Bloodborne is a very meticulously crafted game by very talented developers.

BUT, having said that, I do think it has pretty shitty design. It's a bunch of trial-and-error and the game loves to waste your time. And sorry but I hate how there's no map and I also don't like the button layout.

If there was an easy mode for these games I would love them but as-is they're just shit that frustrate me and I'd rather spend that time playing games where I can feel actual progress

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

what does that even mean? it's trial and error. sure it's gonna take time. lol.

a map and easy mode would ruin the whole idea behind these games. you're just not invested enough to understand.

before i'm called a fanboy or a troll i'd just like to say that i felt the same way as you and HATED bloodborne. i bought it because everyone was going crazy over it and i felt like i was missing out. i bought it and played it and didn't like it. the only reason i kept playing was because i bought it digitally and paid full price so i had no way to trade it in and felt like i wasted my money. i stuck with it and eventually it clicked. now it's one of my favourite games of all time.

the only thing i'm getting from your post is that you didn't give it enough time or you just don't like it which is OK. not everyone needs to like it. but just don't start hating on something because you don't understand it.

"TRUE hard games are HONORABLE" continues to be one of the most frustrating stances to me.

Not sure if hot take or just incredibly dumb post.

jipewithin said:

Not sure if hot take or just incredibly dumb post.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

why not both?

It should be a ResetERA rule that if you don't appreciate Bloodborne you must delete your account.

People asking for maps, easy modes, and any other manner of "make this game different for me" need to get over their FOMO.

"A slay, yet basick"?

That's cool and all, but it's still one of the best games ever made.

Sorry it didn't click for you.

Also when it comes to teaching 'git gud' I think DSII's Fume Knight is the best of the lot.

It basically forces you to learn about stamina management and timed dodge rolls and recognising opportunities for healing.

There's better bosses in the series but I like that one a whole lot cause of the git gud-ification it involves, teaching you lessons that carry over into every other game in the series

You are clearly angry at the game, and swinging wildly in all directions as a result (in real life - perhaps in the game, too).

I hate, HATE the "it's not for you" meme (because it's a meme, thanks to overuse on this very forum) but in this case its absolutely right - this is objectively a quality title that is not compatible with your playing preferences, OP.

Lol that OP

That being said, BB is the worst souls game I've played to me. Healing system breaks the entire gameplay loop. Wanna continue trying this boss? Fuck you, go farm blood vials and forget parts of what you learned in the mean time.

I gave it the old college try too and thought it was terrible. Extremely clunky and obtuse game design. Poor controls. Terrible performance even on a PS4 Pro. I don't even think that it looked that good visually.

I just couldn't make the leap to get over the poor design choices and nauseating performance to get to what everyone says is fun about it.

Game has terrible map design and runs so bad boss fights look like a blur. I don't understand how people claim this game is so great myself.

Is this more what you wanted OP?

OP getting wrecked in here harder than blood starved beast would've got him.

there are actually a lot of " tells" to all the enemies and bosses. It's a simple formula of off beat attacks. They liked to use pauses after attacks a lot. also BB more than dark souls . A lot of enemies can just be ran around. It's a great concept of mind games with thier off beat attacks that tricks you into thinking you have to be ultra slow and careful.

theofficefan99 said:

there's no map

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

why would it need a map?

Hitting the air gives you HP...

Lmao

You don't even have a fundamental grasp of the game, let alone one competent enough to call parts of it lazy.

callamp said:

The greatest con From Software ever pulled was convincing gamers that the death-loop in Souls games doesn't disrespect their time.

Though it is harsh to call the level design bad. On that front FS games are typically fantastic.

The only two things in Souls games that are good are boss fights and level design. Everything else from fighting other enemies to grinding for items and the amazing lore is mediocre.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Combat and lore are top tier in the RPG space. And you don't have to grind. The games are enormously flexible in the way you play them. Hence people completing them with just using bare fists or nor leveling at all.

tangeu said:

Is this more what you wanted OP?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

What if there was some sort of towers you can climb that can unlock the map, quick travel, and show you where things to do on the map are?

Then, perfection.

/s

Sorry not all games are designed to hold your hand for you, OP.

D65 said:

Game has terrible map design and runs so bad boss fights look like a blur. I don't understand how people claim this game is so great myself.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I just found proof that opinions can be objectivelly wrong guys

ekim said:

Just take the fact that attacking the air gains you HP when you got hit. It makes no sense within any of the game's context and I feel like this for most of the game.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

It's not a fact if it's not true.

Bland world.
Unresponsive controls.
HP for hitting air.
Lazy design.

What did I just read? I'm all for people having different opinions and I know some people don't like Bloodborne and I even respect and understand their points but this was kind of nonsense...

I can respect most of your opinions, but talking shit about the level design just hurts, man. It's the single aspect these games go above and beyond in, and an example for the rest of the industry.

At least the Miyazaki games.

Allow me to say that I think you've been spoonfed by the mainstreamization of games in the past decade and when you play a good game that doesn't give you everything in your plate ready to swallow easily,you just think it's bad design

92 on Metacritic from critics doesn't say that much,since critics can be biased ,but 8.9 in user rating should most likely say something about the game.

D65 said:

Game has terrible map design and runs so bad boss fights look like a blur. I don't understand how people claim this game is so great myself.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

tell me more about that terrible map design? also how is it a blur? before you hit out with "it's a slideshow of 20fps" i'd like to just say that i'm primarily a PC gamer who plays at 60fps. sure Bloodborne has some issues regarding frame pacing/rate but i would hardly call it a blur. the first couple hours of the game are rough but afterwards it's quite reasonable with a few stutters in some later areas. DS3 is far worse a game on PS4. i managed to play through Bloodborne without issue but couldn't stomach DS3 and bought it on PC. 60fps would for sure make a big difference to Bloodborne but it's definitely playable even for people used to PC gaming where 60fps is seen as the bare minimum.

Memento said:

I just found proof that opinions can be objectivelly wrong guys

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Most people I've talked to about how I got stupid lost just said "yeah, it's just part of the first area"

Demon's Souls is far better in this front