wootz

As hard as it was to get, The Tower of Power was solid, standing erect over the competition.

This wrinkly, flaccid dingle-dangle pales in comparison to the pitch-black proud pillar of raw potent power of the original.

I think bloodborne holds a lot of reverence because of the themes it portrays. Besides Sekiro, which also has a cult following, all the other Souls games are based in and around medieval fantasy of some sort.

Bloodborne starts in Victorian England with a Van Helsing story and the descends into Lovecraft really fast. For a lot of people, myself included, that’s inherently a more interesting setting than medieval fantasy. People who are into victorian England are really passionate about it, and people who are into Lovecraft are really into Lovecraft.

It’s an excellent game, was a lot of peoples first From Software game, and unlike the majority of big titles from that time period, hasn’t been ported, updated or remastered.

Additionally, out of all the “Souls” games, Bloodborne is still the only one that can’t be played at over 30fps.

Puts on mask pretending to be Sony

“Bloodwha? Whatborne? Never heard this word before in my life. Doesn’t look anything to me”

The verticality is absolutely the best part. My biggest gripe with Elden Rings world is that it’s an “open world” game in kind of the same way Ubi games are. Traversal is largely trivial, so you stop paying attention to the map after you’ve reached major areas.

In my opinion, Dark Souls I is also an open world game, but instead of a 2D map all the zones are tangled up together in a confusing but interesting web.

Shadow of the Erdtree brought some of that back by having zones stacked on top of each other to a much heavier degree than the base game, while also segmenting off geographically close regions.

I wanted to be a level designer for a lot of years, so this is admittedly a bit of a soft spot for me, but I absolutely loved having the game world come at you as as a challenge, almost a character to be fought and bested, outside the legacy dungeons.

No plot needed.

To me the essence of 2016 is the scene in the beginning where an info screen tries to dump exposition on you and you chuck it into a wall.

There is plot, but you don’t need to pay attention to it. Doomguy is angry and needs to kill demons.

To me a big fumble in Eternal was trying to explain why doomguy is angry and so good at killing. He’s like an inverse Cthulhu, terrifying, unknowable and mysterious. Trying to explain or understand him breaks the basis for the character.

On gameplay, I didn’t mind the changes, but I thought the embellishments were a little on the nose. The technicolor rainbow explosion of ammo when you chainsaw someone, and the increased focus on using abilities to replenish resources scream “This is a video game!” in a over the top way that I felt took away from the immersion and grit that I associate with Doom.

Nah.

2016 was brilliant for its minimalism. No plot needed, no introduction, just tight combat and metal.

You don’t improve on that with more mechanics, more plot and more MTX.

I don’t know what you’re up to, but I ain’t shitting on the Bethesda games, that’s on you.

Put it down to age. I’m sure not a lot of people who jumped in at Fallout 4 bothered to go all the way back to the beginning, but I gotta say, nothing says “PC gamer forum” like lumping every age group together and calling something dead just because you didn’t dig it.

By the looks of this thread, we’re a lot of nobodys.