Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
18 
Report this post
Brother I am literally asking your opinion on this. You can say no or yes to all of the above examples. I am not telling you that you don’t think or do think they are gimmicks
A straw man is when you misrepresent an argument and then debate with that misrepresented argument. I’m not presenting any arguments and even if I was I am not debating against them they are literally questions you can answer yes or no to and based on those answers the discussion can move forward. I’m trying to ascertain your position better because you are continuing to generalize when the discussion at hand requires a more nuanced approach if we are to accurately represent our sides.
I'd be okay with calling some of these gimmicks. I think they're (mostly) interesting attacks or behaviors that make the fights more unique. They make both the bosses feel more powerful and Khazan too for walking out unscathed (if you care about feel/vibes at all).
Personally I agree with that take. I think Khazan handles gimmicks well and that most good bosses have gimmicks. I’d argue that gimmicks are mandatory in not just good boss design but also good game design. I also feel like gimmicks can be handled poorly or that gimmicks can rub players the wrong way. I just don’t believe that a gimmick is inherently good or bad.
Yes, I wouldn't put all gimmicks into one basket. I'd say something like Yhorm from Dark Souls 3 is a bad gimmick, because it essentially removes an entire fight from the game and is the entire boss' design.
Compare that to Khazan, where you'll usually find that bosses have one or two things to account for or a combination of things that lead to certain decisions, an example of which is Bellerian, whose multiple set ups make the player consider resources and positioning while fighting her in order to not let her become too powerful.
- yohrm in DS3 is a gimmick boss
- bed of chaos in DS1 is a gimmick boss
- "insert other obvious examples here"
I mean... I see people here mix up classical boss attacks with what is called a "gimmick"
I think that deserves a slightly similar but different distinction. There are bosses that have gimmicks and then there are bosses that are gimmicks. Another example would be the folding screen monkeys in sekiro. The entire fight is predicated around a singular idea or theme. You are less fighting a boss and more solving a puzzle. For what it’s worth I think most Zelda and Mario bosses fall into this category and there are some of those I really enjoy.
I hear you.
The problem with this distinction is that if boss attacks are gimmicks then attacks in general are gimmicks.
So every enemy in every game in existence that throw attacks have gimmicks.
So the discussion is just centered around the fact that someone may like or not "insert any boss fight here" and tries to trash it saying it is "a gimmick"...
It's hard to define, because it's very subjective. In a melee-focused game, are all ranged attacks gimmicks? There's also the threshold: exactly how unique or transformative must a move or behaviour be in order to be considered a gimmick? Perhaps you consider a slightly more advantageous move a gimmick, while I only consider a completely ridiculous move a gimmick. I'd stick to a case by case basis on this, because we'll never reach a full consensus that applies to all games or all people. We can more easily reach a consensus within the lens of someone's personal understanding of a gimmick.
Idk if that kind of leap is what is being said. I think both parties in general agree that there are attacks that are not gimmicks. While I can’t speak for sgrey in this context, I can say that I think attacks that require basic gameplay functions with no special consideration do not fall into that category. most of the bosses move sets consist of strings of attacks or actions that are meant to be dealt with using basic systems. It’s only really a gimmick if it needs special consideration imo. just because an attack is hard to react to, or hard to fully parry/brink guard doesn’t mean it would fall into a gimmick. Most grab attacks wouldn’t fall into that camp either as they are basic functions of the game. I don’t think applying a slippery slope type of argument to it is very apt personally. i also don’t think every enemy in every game has a gimmick based on that logic as well. I feel like very very few of khazan’s non-boss enemies have attack gimmicks. Some do but not most.
that's exactly what I said, hard to avoid/block attack is not a gimmick, otherwise everything is a gimmick.
Your weapon toolkit especially for spear provides a lot of useless skills and combos .
No wonder the fight is gimmicky if the boss has more useful skills than you.
My favorite bosses: Gwydo. Shactuka, Volbaino.
Pass me whatever you’re smoking. Demon souls is super easy. Dark souls 1 is also easy but clunky. Literally demon souls can be beaten with just simple magic spells. Theres nothing that compares to that in lies of p in terms of power.