Installer Steam
connexion
|
langue
简体中文 (chinois simplifié)
繁體中文 (chinois traditionnel)
日本語 (japonais)
한국어 (coréen)
ไทย (thaï)
Български (bulgare)
Čeština (tchèque)
Dansk (danois)
Deutsch (allemand)
English (anglais)
Español - España (espagnol castillan)
Español - Latinoamérica (espagnol d'Amérique latine)
Ελληνικά (grec)
Italiano (italien)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonésien)
Magyar (hongrois)
Nederlands (néerlandais)
Norsk (norvégien)
Polski (polonais)
Português (portugais du Portugal)
Português - Brasil (portugais du Brésil)
Română (roumain)
Русский (russe)
Suomi (finnois)
Svenska (suédois)
Türkçe (turc)
Tiếng Việt (vietnamien)
Українська (ukrainien)
Signaler un problème de traduction
No i am no masochist, I want good PC port not lazy cash grab.
Who want play with clunky controls, glitches.... retard person perhaps
But all of your personal points are just troll bait post quality.
enemy balance is fine
player mobility is fine.. and depends on load - on high u get fat rolls, medium is with normal rolls and mobility, light is faster with longer i-frames
ingame help in souls games? :DDD
magic targeting - ye, its intentional, magic is OP AF and safe
hard melee? yes, its intended and always was in souls games
exploits, glitches and so are kinda part of souls games - check speedrunning and so.
no 360 camera? yes, its not there
you dont like it? ok.. choose another game what you will like more. this is like when you bought vanilla ice cream and you want strawberry one.
i guess vanilla isnt perfect, but you dont wanna buy it when you want strawberry one.
you just cant call it bad only because you dont like it.. its the same like vanilla ice cream isnt bad just because you dont like it.
I like ER too, performance issues aside, but especially the balancing feels off right now. In some late-game areas the enemies are extremely aggressive and have both high damage and health. It feels the balance between "normal" enemies and elites feels off. To add to that fact a lot of bosses are copy-pasted, and some people still try to ignore that fact. DS2 had like 40 something bosses. Many sucked, but most were unique. Base game I can think of like 3 reused bosses or something, Dragon Rider/Dragon Riders, "Last Giant"/Giant King and.. there probably is a third or even fourth. But point being, there aren't many at all. The DLC has a similar thing where once you fight 1 big cat, then you fight 2 big cats. In Shulva you fight a copy of Nashandra, who summons another boss as minion.
Meanwhile in ER? The same fat lizard is copy-pasted like 4 times. There's the pincer horse which you can find in several places and has boss HP bars in each encounter. 8+ Asylum Demons that act as tree guardians, rotten guardians who guard I think 2 trees and another one if found in the capital. Then you have the flying deer which is used twice, the meteor/gravity bugs which are used as I think bosses twice and found several times in the underground, Margit is reused too from what I know, fat guy is reused, Loretta is reused.
To top it off, a lot of bosses are either jokes or they're way overtuned like Malenia. Malenia has no poise and no health, but she hits like a truck and on top of it heals too. Then you have broken status effects like bleed, bleed feels way too powerful right now. You can use the Flamberge or some katana and get very good damage on top of bleeding the boss potentially every 7-8 hits.
Then you have the huge downgrade for online (invading, but covenants as a whole) and I can't see how some "journalists" and e-celebs could give it a 9 even. I mean I do know, A. they need to keep good relations with the publisher and the industry as a whole, but more importantly B. they know if they didn't give it a fantastic score they'd have people riot in the comments and social media. If you give an AAA game an 8/10, a very good score mind you, people will take it as personal attack and pretend like an 8 is the worst possible score you could give it. Some journo has even said in the past that the "average AAA game" is "usually" a 7 anyway. So instead of a 5 being average or mediocre it's suddenly a 7, which a 7/10 is usually a good score. I have no citation for that, it might be wrong. Even if it is wrong and no journo ever said that, it's what everyone thinks anyway.
It's just one huge crapshow, how modern journos work.
ok
but.. why? O_o ..you can criticize this game even without needing dream up some nonsense to support your criticism. you just make your criticism less valid, when you did this.
People like OP are just desperately trying to pinpoint flaws for whatever reason. Not to mention that most of OP's points are moot.
That doesn't matter, because all that changes is that an official member of the journalist circle didn't acknowledge it. It's the reality. Feel free to scour through old articles and look at their reviews and scores and compare them to nowadays. The average has risen to 7+ over the past 15 years.
Here's the video btw: https://youtu.be/Bgg7_0rBUOA?t=277
There, she said it. "Games are really ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ good.", when most games these days, and by these days I mean the past 5-7 years, are not even finished by the time they launch. CoD is a perfect example of still getting "really ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ good" scores when for the past 2 years now each CoD has had massive issues and launched in a poor state. CW and Vanguard still got those 7 scores. Keep in mind, Pearce said that a 7 = "really ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ good". So good in fact that it had issues for months, to this day, hundreds of bugs who weren't fixed, like broken hitreg, broken AA/TA, broken tracer rounds so someone may pay $15+ for a bundle for parts of the bundle not to work correctly and so on. So even though she's admitted to it here, she's still making it seem like it's the correct thing to do, when it really isn't. IGN looking at it is actually one of the more sane sites too, giving games like DL2 "only a 7", which keep in mind Alanah says is still a very good score essentially. Most major websites give these AAA games an extra point or two, just for being AAA. The reality is if a game has major bugs and an uninspired campaign in case of CoD, it shouldn't even get a 7. 2042 got majority mixed reviews from critics, when in reality it should've been mostly negative.
Also thanks for the gaslighting. You're ignoring the rest of my post to latch on to the single thing you could possible latch on to, to "discredit me" by posting things like "you're just trashing the game". That's gaslighting 101, making me and others believe I was only talking nonsense and lies or misinformation when in reality only a single bit of my post, which I even pointed out in it, was potentially wrong and no such event had occurred.
Smiley/etc users and gaslighting go hand in hand and unless you have something decent to say about the points made (copy-pasted bosses galore and modern "journalism"), I am going to ignore you.
i just point at fact that trying trashtalk game based on dream up nonsense just make your criticism less valid.
anyway "argument from authority" is pretty lame and common argumentation foul
Opinions are fun.
Grow the ♥♥♥♥ up. Someone else can call this game a masterpiece if they want to. Get over it.