They know how much people liked it, but getting rid of those things was an attempt at making the games less punishing for new players. Go on any dark souls subreddit and search "invaders" These are the whiners FS listened to.
I think Miyazaki has all but said that PVP in Souls games started off as his personal experiment to see what people would do with the mechanics (random co-op and invasions). Over time, invasions evolved to be a co-op balancing tool rather than a pure social experiment, and co-op became a way to hang out with your buddies, rather than co-operation with random people on the internet. Unfortunately much of what I've seen has led me to conclude that From doesn't understand their own games very well from a PVP perspective. People sometimes claim that From doesn't care, but that's wrong. They do care, they're just not very good at demonstrating it. DS 3 was lightning in a bottle. ER has a core PVP loop that's really compelling but it is weighed down by a bunch of bullshit - poorly thought out damage curves, projectile spam and poor weapon balancing.
I don’t know about other platforms but a good portion of PvP players on Xbox are refugees from Halo. We mainly played Halo 5 Warzone for PvP during dark souls 3 life time, but due to the disaster that is Halo infinite with every aspect of it, we dumped it and embraced souls multiplayer that is Elden Ring. Elden Ring expanded to be open world and improved on its predecessor Dark Souls 3 and justly got Game of the Year, while Halo infinite which also went open world pissed on storyline, core gameplay that was Halo 5 and never got a mention and is still floundering as a failure. I would say failures of many other games have push people to invest into souls PvP so I would say it was an accident.
Definitely, now the gaming industry is over saturated with bad kid friendly multiplayer games with pay walls or battle passes. They’ve lost their soul and if you want any form of respect it’s either Elden Ring DLC or Tekken 8 and a few others.
Good (speculative) analysis. I would give anything for like a “behind the scenes” documentary thing about the making of Elden Ring so we could have a better understanding of these questions you describe in the video
Side note: Great Kat makes average players feel way better than they actually are. It is a simple weapon with range, large HB, perfect tracking, 180 degree running attack, and roll catch potential off of every move from great distance. Its fantastic but a crutch weapon basically.
@@madserialkiller3394 No. Not like the halberd. Halberd does not have a large hitbox, perfect tracking, 180 degree running attack, react roll catch of its neutral R1, or stupid range.
DeS and Ds1 multiplayer were janky fun but innovative. Ds2 and Ds3 were relatively solid multiplayer experience. I don't think they were accidental, they made more improvements than not. Elden Ring was clearly an afterthought though. Just look at the state it released in, no near/far invasions, no covenants, no solo invasions, no visible signs without using a finger remedy, 100% gaurd boost shields, 1-hit bleed/madness proc, no hyperarmor on great weapons, passive poise monsters, removing taunters tongue mid invasion (still not fixed), reduced max players to 4, overleveleds completely bugged. To be fair they were patching in whole mf NPCs and questlines post release. Not shocking multiplayer was unfinished.
This invasion was perfect for a short bow with lightning bone arrows. Shoot them into the water and you get an AOE. L1 and L2 together for a good free-aimed barrage and it's very difficult for people to avoid. And if anyone doesn't know, you can dodge while you're aiming.
Ggs man, the unique bad thing in this game now is the dlc recovery/dmg in general, and 6 players is necessary for a good invasion style like ds3 (i love it) , my phantom isn't high level (is 125).
I'm still angry they shut down the Demon's Souls servers in 2018. I guess companies just do that, I'm even more angry at Ubisoft for shutting down servers for Far Cry 3 and Crysis 2.
I understand why natural bleed weapons are occult infused, because more damage while also having bleed scale with arc. However natural bleed weapons that are also bleed infused when they proc deal more damage.
They care they are just not very competent. Instead of getting to know their own multiplayer, what works and why; they get random feedback from good and bad sources alike and call it a day. It is what it is.
Fromsoftware is in a very strange spot, as far as game quality goes in general. The Souls games are both the pinnacle of RPG Fantasy Adventure games and also deserving of practically endless valid criticism, from buggy/clunky foundational mechanics to overall game design. I believe the issues with Souls and Elden Ring pvp come from where the bar is set. Or rather where *we* set the bar. I used to be really into Apex, and every problem I had with it would be something like "the servers suck, why don't they look at what Fortnite is doing" or "the rank system sucks, look at what Overwatch is doing". An annoying argument from people when talking about Souls pvp is "just go play a different game". But we know that there's no game out there that meshes pve and pvp quite like Dark Souls. It scratches a very particular itch. That argument is bad, but I do think the core issue is in that conversation. Fromsoft has no guiding light to point them in the right direction. What they have is their team, the profits, and the players' feedback. What they've done with Elden Ring, is they've favored two out of those three inputs. The first two. Theoretically, going with majority will make the most people happy, and if they can do that while continuing to skyrocket success & sales, why would they go in any other direction, right? But it's at the cost of pvp balance, which upsets a loud minority of people in a very niche community. My guess is that they just don't care about that all that much, for the reasons stated above, and would like to move away from pvp entirely if it weren't already embedded in their franchise. And honestly, at this point, I almost wish they had left it out. Rather than throwing us a bone once a year and acting like it's not already burnt to the ground. I barely even play anymore. I don't want to keep running the same four builds because my chances depend entirely on my equipment (AOWs). But that's how it'll be, I guess. The games have just gotten too big for them to have their cake and eat it too. At this point all we can hope for is for modders to continue to fix pvp for them. I think it's too much of a mess to clean up entirely, though.
They care about the pvp obviously or there wouldn’t be patches focused on the pvp like they’ve done throughout the years. The issue is trying to balance asymmetrical pvp like this when you have 100’s of weapons & spells, incantations, ash of wars. It’s to much honestly.
I might be a little presumptuous, but it sounds like you might be a little burnes out. It might be good to take a step back for a week if you can. Its definitely happened to me before. I personally am nowadays way more attracted to lvl 150 duels, as hybrids make for more varied builds. Might go 200 with some.
DS2 has instant backstabs (IBS) which is quick attacking (QAing) the bs grab, bleed glitch which lets you chain bs, and even bs cancels. there's still some tech. (theres wakeup punishes too like bs into outcry firestorm/scraps of life) but that's not exactly tech.
if you and your opponent bs each other at the same time, it's cancelled. you can then punish the other off it. i havent labbed the punish because ive only got a bs cancel maybe 3 times in 10 years and 2 of those times were against the same person. you can also one shot bs someone with (IBS) if you tumblebuff giant warriors club. thought that was funny
It feels as if Elden Ring was the only souls game to go backwards in terms of PVP mechanics. In Demons Souls there was very little hyper armor and no passive poise, so fast weapons could chain stun players very easily, even with shield pokes via an estoc. There were also many zero to death combos like double uchigatanas. This was all later "fixed" through toggle escaping, but before escapes were figured out they released Dark Souls 1 with a passive poise system and slowed the game down like running and attack speeds quite a bit to fix "infinites". This lead to poise tanking and backstab metas of course long before all of the neat rolling tech for DaS1 came out. Then DaS2 comes out and they really push for weapons having good attacks in this game in PVP, and DaS2 has the most viable weapons out of any Souls PVP I think. I think they put a lot of effort into making DaS2 have the best PVP they could possibly make in their timeframe because it has the neatest covenants and PVP interactions by far. DaS3 is the game I put the most time in and I still think they made quite a few improvements from DaS2 with the overall faster speed, removing passive poise and upping hyper armor, and making backstabs a lot more difficult to land. Also they purposefully put in the 2 hit combo system in DaS3, so I think the team did their best with souls 3 as well. When it comes to Elden Ring, god damn did they drop the ball. Passive poise (STILL an issue), backstabs nearly useless on release, hyper armor fuckery, ash of wars being very OP, terrible weapon balance, and so on. Also fundamentally it sucks, as Elden Ring is their biggest game in scope yet by far, but the multiplayer is the smallest. I mean, who the fuck thought it would be fun to have open world PVP with 4 players max running around a giant area chasing each-other with infinite stamina? I hope Elden Ring continues to get any support for the PVP, especially upping the player limits, but it's fading. I mean I thought the DLC would up the limits at-least.
I simply think Elden Ring was an unfinished game. I enjoy it, but the PVE endgame and PvP features felt barebones. They were literally patching in NPC quests months after release. Heck, they patched torrent into the final boss 2 years after release.
@@Yobolight "Heck, they patched torrent into the final boss 2 years after release." I KNEW IT! I WAS RIGHT! (I literally just found out about this patch due to this post)
@@YobolightMost fromsoft games are "unfinished", I really think deadlines are the studio's greatest enemy. Sekiro is the only one where I cant think of anything specific.
@@prins-henrik1530 if basics of the game are bad no matter how much time and money you put to make it looks good they are still bad. Armored Core 6 is a perfect example. Hard lock on removes any skill expression from the game. And you dont need to be genious game designer to put couple objects on arenas to hide from attacks. You dont need to be a mastermind to understand that big arenas are cancerous for pve or pvp. And Fromsoftware does it over and over again. And you can find this in every of their games. Like they are newbie indie-studio and they dont have 20 years of experience in game development.
There isn't much I can contribute that hasn't already been stated by others, but as someone that put hundreds of hours into DS1 PVP and co-op before DS2 came out, the PVP of that game felt like such a natural, yet fun extension of the PVE experience. There was a strong community around the PVP for both duelling and invasions, each with their respective areas in the Township and the Darkroot Garden forest, one area for people wanting 1v1s and another where you knew you'd have to pull out all of the stops to win against difficult odds. Each experience felt like a different way to use all of the janky mechanics and gimmicks the game had to really diversify the gameplay. Even though it felt sort of barebones and experimental, the overall PVP experience was so different and enjoyable for me and others. DS2, for all of its quirks, felt like a refinement of PVP with a clearer vision for how it was meant to be balanced and played, especially with the more unique covenant rewards for being a successful blue, arena duelist, bell defender, etc. It felt like it had a tangible skill ceiling that wasn't as reliant on jank as DS1 was, while simultaneously encouraging commitment to improvement and experimentation with the covenant rewards. As many others have said, this is the game where I feel the PVP being good was certainly not an accident, but rather a reflection on DS1's PVP with an attempt to flesh it out. DS3 was the one that took me longest to warm up to, but ultimately it made an effort to do a lot of similar things to DS2 and I think it lies somewhere in the middle between accident and intended. In retrospect however, it looks like a cohesive masterpiece in contrast to Elden Ring's multiplayer. The player limit reduction continues to be boggling after DS3 had such vibrant success with its implementation, particularly since there are no covenant PVP areas any more and that the maps are vastly larger. TLDR I just miss the more freeform multiplayer that DS1-DS3 had, even just the move away from co-op being a paradigm of spontaneous co-operation with random people towards more of a deliberate group co-op experience. I still log on to DS1 when there's a sale to help new players with bosses, but after trying once in ER and never getting a single summon I gave up. Elden Ring feels comparatively neutered despite having so much potential, and I feel the multiplayer is the biggest scar to show for Elden Ring's rushed release.
You don't need to look any further than the qol features missing from invasions to tell its not a priority for them. Something as simple as pentalities for disconnecting or a interactable timer at a doorway needed to fogwall and invader and enabling taunters at grace would improves things greatly and are hopelessly simple to implement. But they won't even fix spawning bugs or better spawn hopping. But perhaps the biggest insight they don't take it seriously is the lack of difference in gameplay as an invader. Playing an invader plays almost exactly like a host except the enemies are friendly that's really about it. if they cared about the pulling people to invade they would put anti-gank passive on the invader that got stronger the longer the invasion lasted or give them some kind of wall traversal to make reaching the host unproblematic.
The wall traversal sounds like what phantom fingers were meant to do, but they forgot to include vertical distance. I dont think the other one is a good idea, as it would encourage afk invaders. I dont want to have to wait for an hour in some corner to be able to handle a gank, Id rather get a buff just from having three players. (I think invaders should have been able to use spirit ashes in 3v1s if not a co invader and 5 player limit)
@@prins-henrik1530 Afk invaders? You mean instead of a timer that makes the fogwall take a little longer, you'd rather just get fogwalled by hosts at the boss entrance and sit though another set of loading screens because you think invaders are going invade and sit there to make the host have to wait an extra 10 seconds ? The reason for timer against the gank and not a static buff is because you don't always need a buff to beat a team of co-opers or gankers. But gankers who survive a long time do so because they successfully kill off invaders, usually because they are cancer. A static buff punishes players for simply having a full party. A progressive buff outside of a timer only makes sense if its for resummons
@@joshuaherrera358 Wait are you saying a buff for invaders dependant on how long the host is alive or the invader is alive? Host alive could be better, but it being dependent on how long an invader lives would just make the optimal play is to hide for however long it takes before engaging, and the worst ganks can kill the typical player way sooner than a buff would occur. Edit: I realize I didnt make it clear, I am not talking about the fogwall timer I am talking about the anti gank passive
@@prins-henrik1530 I got you. The buff would be to invader in response to how long the host is taking to complete the dungeon(measured by how long they have been alive). Its by definition almost impossible for anyone but gankers and afk farmers to need to worry about this. Right now and running hiding is already the best way to survive in ganks and doing so against a single host or co-opers wouldn't be necessary though would still be possible for dealing with overleveled. This qol would simply reward the invader for surviving against a gank or give an immediate buff upon spawning depending on how long the host has been there sitting around, forcing them to disconnect from time to time and make them to kill all the enemies again.
@@joshuaherrera358 I see that makes more sense. I still think there are better ways to implement anti ganks like resummonable pve (spirit ashes? Or even just area enemies scaled to invader level) so that you dont have the situation where all the pve is useless because the host is in an early game area intentionally or all the pve is just prekilled. Even a con invader after a certain time would be good, as 2v3 is way different than a 1v3. At the end of the day, I dont feel like fromsoft even understands the concept of ganking, as it seems like its all balanced for normal co op so all this is just a pipe dream.
Call me crazy but it's up to the players to make a decent PvP system even better by being creative. We were given tools and we built castles with it in DS3. Elden Ring gave us only 1/3 or maybe half of the toolbox.
I have a feeling that this guy, who initially knew what they were doing, surely they're a director. I remember that there are multiple at Fromsoftware. It's possible that they're culminating a mechanical successor.
The weapon swap glitch in DS1 they found recently will have to be patched for pvp now. Nah, the pvp was not a happy accident, just spaghetti code they were trying to untangle back in the day, still are... G9 elden ring still runs and bottle necks the whole game through cpu core 1 it can't even take advantage of a multi core processing due to old game engine code....
Dark Souls 2 they actually made an effort for engaging pvp. Since then the rest of the series have been a trash fire in some form or fashion. Dks3 was okay but plagued the invader with disadvantages but Elden Ring is worse because it’s that plus broken systems in favor of the host. In short they were all flukes except DKS2
Ever since Dark Souls 1, I remember having this argument, They all want to say the games aren't PVP intended. It's super small but one thing I always found interesting was, the DS1 hornet ring, And how it had unique animations when interacting with human NPC and players. I look at something like that and I say they had to have had PVP in mind because with so few fightable NPC's why give this unique animations only when interacting with other players if not intended for PvP specifically. There's elements like that in every Souls game so I feel like there's PVP'rs somewhere in fromsoft, How powerful or influential their voices are has yet to be seen
It just needs to be fun which is what you had in every souls game. ER on the other hand has tipped the favor so far to the host that it’s pushed away many would be invaders.
@@Shendapy overlevel? he was lvl 139 and the host isnt using great rune, yes it has more heals but this scenario is the best you can get cause colosseum sucks
Not really, ganking in early game areas like limgrave and liurnia is inherently lame because none of the pve is capable even in ng+. Additionally this host ran away excessively i understand running in a 2v1 situation but after the second invader died he continued to run and resummon. Just because he didnt use toxic items and clearly has pvp experience doesnt mean they arent still shitters
@@Atarka-bo5jp he could’ve killed g9 in a 1v1 in a couple of times, and he ran, everyone has to run the game is about surviving and playing with the best you got, in my opinion they weren’t shitters and they created a fun pvp scenario, who cares about the pve if they dont have blues and tt on, and cause you’re getting constant invaders is fair for them to resummon
yes it is, isnt perfect but indeed works, it just needs small fixes that fromsoft refuses to do for some reason, it would take literally a week to fix everything pvp related
They proved they have no idea what made their PVP good when they got rid of covenants and lowered player limits.
They know how much people liked it, but getting rid of those things was an attempt at making the games less punishing for new players. Go on any dark souls subreddit and search "invaders" These are the whiners FS listened to.
I think Miyazaki has all but said that PVP in Souls games started off as his personal experiment to see what people would do with the mechanics (random co-op and invasions). Over time, invasions evolved to be a co-op balancing tool rather than a pure social experiment, and co-op became a way to hang out with your buddies, rather than co-operation with random people on the internet.
Unfortunately much of what I've seen has led me to conclude that From doesn't understand their own games very well from a PVP perspective. People sometimes claim that From doesn't care, but that's wrong. They do care, they're just not very good at demonstrating it. DS 3 was lightning in a bottle.
ER has a core PVP loop that's really compelling but it is weighed down by a bunch of bullshit - poorly thought out damage curves, projectile spam and poor weapon balancing.
I don’t know about other platforms but a good portion of PvP players on Xbox are refugees from Halo. We mainly played Halo 5 Warzone for PvP during dark souls 3 life time, but due to the disaster that is Halo infinite with every aspect of it, we dumped it and embraced souls multiplayer that is Elden Ring.
Elden Ring expanded to be open world and improved on its predecessor Dark Souls 3 and justly got Game of the Year, while Halo infinite which also went open world pissed on storyline, core gameplay that was Halo 5 and never got a mention and is still floundering as a failure.
I would say failures of many other games have push people to invest into souls PvP so I would say it was an accident.
Definitely, now the gaming industry is over saturated with bad kid friendly multiplayer games with pay walls or battle passes.
They’ve lost their soul and if you want any form of respect it’s either Elden Ring DLC or Tekken 8 and a few others.
Good (speculative) analysis. I would give anything for like a “behind the scenes” documentary thing about the making of Elden Ring so we could have a better understanding of these questions you describe in the video
Side note: Great Kat makes average players feel way better than they actually are. It is a simple weapon with range, large HB, perfect tracking, 180 degree running attack, and roll catch potential off of every move from great distance. Its fantastic but a crutch weapon basically.
So, like the halberd?
@@madserialkiller3394 No. Not like the halberd. Halberd does not have a large hitbox, perfect tracking, 180 degree running attack, react roll catch of its neutral R1, or stupid range.
i came to believe they probably made these low skill req. weapons on purpose to keep casuls engaged in pvp..
not a good choice though
DeS and Ds1 multiplayer were janky fun but innovative. Ds2 and Ds3 were relatively solid multiplayer experience. I don't think they were accidental, they made more improvements than not. Elden Ring was clearly an afterthought though. Just look at the state it released in, no near/far invasions, no covenants, no solo invasions, no visible signs without using a finger remedy, 100% gaurd boost shields, 1-hit bleed/madness proc, no hyperarmor on great weapons, passive poise monsters, removing taunters tongue mid invasion (still not fixed), reduced max players to 4, overleveleds completely bugged.
To be fair they were patching in whole mf NPCs and questlines post release. Not shocking multiplayer was unfinished.
Well hopefully there next souls like is a more focused linear game & not open world because From focused more on the pvp in that setting.
This invasion was perfect for a short bow with lightning bone arrows. Shoot them into the water and you get an AOE. L1 and L2 together for a good free-aimed barrage and it's very difficult for people to avoid. And if anyone doesn't know, you can dodge while you're aiming.
They flipped a switch by accident and forgot about it
Ggs man, the unique bad thing in this game now is the dlc recovery/dmg in general, and 6 players is necessary for a good invasion style like ds3 (i love it) , my phantom isn't high level (is 125).
Caramba legion, aparecendo em video do jeenine ta famoso em pae
@@hazukashii9823 Foda
I'm still angry they shut down the Demon's Souls servers in 2018. I guess companies just do that, I'm even more angry at Ubisoft for shutting down servers for Far Cry 3 and Crysis 2.
I understand why natural bleed weapons are occult infused, because more damage while also having bleed scale with arc. However natural bleed weapons that are also bleed infused when they proc deal more damage.
Jee yapping for 24 minutes 🗣🔥🔥🔥🔥
They care they are just not very competent. Instead of getting to know their own multiplayer, what works and why; they get random feedback from good and bad sources alike and call it a day. It is what it is.
Fromsoftware is in a very strange spot, as far as game quality goes in general.
The Souls games are both the pinnacle of RPG Fantasy Adventure games and also deserving of practically endless valid criticism, from buggy/clunky foundational mechanics to overall game design.
I believe the issues with Souls and Elden Ring pvp come from where the bar is set. Or rather where *we* set the bar.
I used to be really into Apex, and every problem I had with it would be something like "the servers suck, why don't they look at what Fortnite is doing" or "the rank system sucks, look at what Overwatch is doing".
An annoying argument from people when talking about Souls pvp is "just go play a different game". But we know that there's no game out there that meshes pve and pvp quite like Dark Souls. It scratches a very particular itch.
That argument is bad, but I do think the core issue is in that conversation.
Fromsoft has no guiding light to point them in the right direction. What they have is their team, the profits, and the players' feedback.
What they've done with Elden Ring, is they've favored two out of those three inputs. The first two.
Theoretically, going with majority will make the most people happy, and if they can do that while continuing to skyrocket success & sales, why would they go in any other direction, right?
But it's at the cost of pvp balance, which upsets a loud minority of people in a very niche community.
My guess is that they just don't care about that all that much, for the reasons stated above, and would like to move away from pvp entirely if it weren't already embedded in their franchise.
And honestly, at this point, I almost wish they had left it out. Rather than throwing us a bone once a year and acting like it's not already burnt to the ground.
I barely even play anymore. I don't want to keep running the same four builds because my chances depend entirely on my equipment (AOWs). But that's how it'll be, I guess.
The games have just gotten too big for them to have their cake and eat it too.
At this point all we can hope for is for modders to continue to fix pvp for them. I think it's too much of a mess to clean up entirely, though.
They care about the pvp obviously or there wouldn’t be patches focused on the pvp like they’ve done throughout the years. The issue is trying to balance asymmetrical pvp like this when you have 100’s of weapons & spells, incantations, ash of wars. It’s to much honestly.
I might be a little presumptuous, but it sounds like you might be a little burnes out. It might be good to take a step back for a week if you can. Its definitely happened to me before. I personally am nowadays way more attracted to lvl 150 duels, as hybrids make for more varied builds. Might go 200 with some.
DS2 has instant backstabs (IBS) which is quick attacking (QAing) the bs grab, bleed glitch which lets you chain bs, and even bs cancels. there's still some tech. (theres wakeup punishes too like bs into outcry firestorm/scraps of life) but that's not exactly tech.
if you and your opponent bs each other at the same time, it's cancelled. you can then punish the other off it. i havent labbed the punish because ive only got a bs cancel maybe 3 times in 10 years and 2 of those times were against the same person. you can also one shot bs someone with (IBS) if you tumblebuff giant warriors club. thought that was funny
lol IBS
It feels as if Elden Ring was the only souls game to go backwards in terms of PVP mechanics. In Demons Souls there was very little hyper armor and no passive poise, so fast weapons could chain stun players very easily, even with shield pokes via an estoc. There were also many zero to death combos like double uchigatanas. This was all later "fixed" through toggle escaping, but before escapes were figured out they released Dark Souls 1 with a passive poise system and slowed the game down like running and attack speeds quite a bit to fix "infinites". This lead to poise tanking and backstab metas of course long before all of the neat rolling tech for DaS1 came out. Then DaS2 comes out and they really push for weapons having good attacks in this game in PVP, and DaS2 has the most viable weapons out of any Souls PVP I think. I think they put a lot of effort into making DaS2 have the best PVP they could possibly make in their timeframe because it has the neatest covenants and PVP interactions by far. DaS3 is the game I put the most time in and I still think they made quite a few improvements from DaS2 with the overall faster speed, removing passive poise and upping hyper armor, and making backstabs a lot more difficult to land. Also they purposefully put in the 2 hit combo system in DaS3, so I think the team did their best with souls 3 as well. When it comes to Elden Ring, god damn did they drop the ball. Passive poise (STILL an issue), backstabs nearly useless on release, hyper armor fuckery, ash of wars being very OP, terrible weapon balance, and so on. Also fundamentally it sucks, as Elden Ring is their biggest game in scope yet by far, but the multiplayer is the smallest. I mean, who the fuck thought it would be fun to have open world PVP with 4 players max running around a giant area chasing each-other with infinite stamina?
I hope Elden Ring continues to get any support for the PVP, especially upping the player limits, but it's fading. I mean I thought the DLC would up the limits at-least.
I think everything good what they did was an accident. Why do they cut off so many good ideas from previous games?
Make a list of good ideas that they cut :)
I simply think Elden Ring was an unfinished game. I enjoy it, but the PVE endgame and PvP features felt barebones. They were literally patching in NPC quests months after release. Heck, they patched torrent into the final boss 2 years after release.
@@Yobolight "Heck, they patched torrent into the final boss 2 years after release."
I KNEW IT! I WAS RIGHT! (I literally just found out about this patch due to this post)
@@YobolightMost fromsoft games are "unfinished", I really think deadlines are the studio's greatest enemy. Sekiro is the only one where I cant think of anything specific.
@@prins-henrik1530 if basics of the game are bad no matter how much time and money you put to make it looks good they are still bad. Armored Core 6 is a perfect example. Hard lock on removes any skill expression from the game. And you dont need to be genious game designer to put couple objects on arenas to hide from attacks. You dont need to be a mastermind to understand that big arenas are cancerous for pve or pvp. And Fromsoftware does it over and over again. And you can find this in every of their games. Like they are newbie indie-studio and they dont have 20 years of experience in game development.
There isn't much I can contribute that hasn't already been stated by others, but as someone that put hundreds of hours into DS1 PVP and co-op before DS2 came out, the PVP of that game felt like such a natural, yet fun extension of the PVE experience. There was a strong community around the PVP for both duelling and invasions, each with their respective areas in the Township and the Darkroot Garden forest, one area for people wanting 1v1s and another where you knew you'd have to pull out all of the stops to win against difficult odds. Each experience felt like a different way to use all of the janky mechanics and gimmicks the game had to really diversify the gameplay. Even though it felt sort of barebones and experimental, the overall PVP experience was so different and enjoyable for me and others.
DS2, for all of its quirks, felt like a refinement of PVP with a clearer vision for how it was meant to be balanced and played, especially with the more unique covenant rewards for being a successful blue, arena duelist, bell defender, etc. It felt like it had a tangible skill ceiling that wasn't as reliant on jank as DS1 was, while simultaneously encouraging commitment to improvement and experimentation with the covenant rewards. As many others have said, this is the game where I feel the PVP being good was certainly not an accident, but rather a reflection on DS1's PVP with an attempt to flesh it out.
DS3 was the one that took me longest to warm up to, but ultimately it made an effort to do a lot of similar things to DS2 and I think it lies somewhere in the middle between accident and intended. In retrospect however, it looks like a cohesive masterpiece in contrast to Elden Ring's multiplayer. The player limit reduction continues to be boggling after DS3 had such vibrant success with its implementation, particularly since there are no covenant PVP areas any more and that the maps are vastly larger.
TLDR I just miss the more freeform multiplayer that DS1-DS3 had, even just the move away from co-op being a paradigm of spontaneous co-operation with random people towards more of a deliberate group co-op experience. I still log on to DS1 when there's a sale to help new players with bosses, but after trying once in ER and never getting a single summon I gave up. Elden Ring feels comparatively neutered despite having so much potential, and I feel the multiplayer is the biggest scar to show for Elden Ring's rushed release.
You don't need to look any further than the qol features missing from invasions to tell its not a priority for them.
Something as simple as pentalities for disconnecting or a interactable timer at a doorway needed to fogwall and invader and enabling taunters at grace would improves things greatly and are hopelessly simple to implement. But they won't even fix spawning bugs or better spawn hopping.
But perhaps the biggest insight they don't take it seriously is the lack of difference in gameplay as an invader. Playing an invader plays almost exactly like a host except the enemies are friendly that's really about it. if they cared about the pulling people to invade they would put anti-gank passive on the invader that got stronger the longer the invasion lasted or give them some kind of wall traversal to make reaching the host unproblematic.
The wall traversal sounds like what phantom fingers were meant to do, but they forgot to include vertical distance. I dont think the other one is a good idea, as it would encourage afk invaders. I dont want to have to wait for an hour in some corner to be able to handle a gank, Id rather get a buff just from having three players. (I think invaders should have been able to use spirit ashes in 3v1s if not a co invader and 5 player limit)
@@prins-henrik1530 Afk invaders? You mean instead of a timer that makes the fogwall take a little longer, you'd rather just get fogwalled by hosts at the boss entrance and sit though another set of loading screens because you think invaders are going invade and sit there to make the host have to wait an extra 10 seconds ?
The reason for timer against the gank and not a static buff is because you don't always need a buff to beat a team of co-opers or gankers. But gankers who survive a long time do so because they successfully kill off invaders, usually because they are cancer. A static buff punishes players for simply having a full party. A progressive buff outside of a timer only makes sense if its for resummons
@@joshuaherrera358 Wait are you saying a buff for invaders dependant on how long the host is alive or the invader is alive? Host alive could be better, but it being dependent on how long an invader lives would just make the optimal play is to hide for however long it takes before engaging, and the worst ganks can kill the typical player way sooner than a buff would occur.
Edit: I realize I didnt make it clear, I am not talking about the fogwall timer I am talking about the anti gank passive
@@prins-henrik1530 I got you. The buff would be to invader in response to how long the host is taking to complete the dungeon(measured by how long they have been alive). Its by definition almost impossible for anyone but gankers and afk farmers to need to worry about this.
Right now and running hiding is already the best way to survive in ganks and doing so against a single host or co-opers wouldn't be necessary though would still be possible for dealing with overleveled. This qol would simply reward the invader for surviving against a gank or give an immediate buff upon spawning depending on how long the host has been there sitting around, forcing them to disconnect from time to time and make them to kill all the enemies again.
@@joshuaherrera358 I see that makes more sense. I still think there are better ways to implement anti ganks like resummonable pve (spirit ashes? Or even just area enemies scaled to invader level) so that you dont have the situation where all the pve is useless because the host is in an early game area intentionally or all the pve is just prekilled. Even a con invader after a certain time would be good, as 2v3 is way different than a 1v3.
At the end of the day, I dont feel like fromsoft even understands the concept of ganking, as it seems like its all balanced for normal co op so all this is just a pipe dream.
toggle escape was intented after all. some npc's are coded to do that when getting stunlocked
Call me crazy but it's up to the players to make a decent PvP system even better by being creative. We were given tools and we built castles with it in DS3. Elden Ring gave us only 1/3 or maybe half of the toolbox.
I have a feeling that this guy, who initially knew what they were doing, surely they're a director. I remember that there are multiple at Fromsoftware. It's possible that they're culminating a mechanical successor.
Isn't it crazy how good hyperarmor makes you
The weapon swap glitch in DS1 they found recently will have to be patched for pvp now.
Nah, the pvp was not a happy accident, just spaghetti code they were trying to untangle back in the day, still are...
G9 elden ring still runs and bottle necks the whole game through cpu core 1 it can't even take advantage of a multi core processing due to old game engine code....
dark souls 3 was fkn amazing man, elden ring can be the best of them all but they dont know what to do
loving this new format, and hopefully others do too. keep up the great work!
It’s why I’m on ds2 cus that was the prime of PvP
I could believe it
Dark Souls 2 they actually made an effort for engaging pvp. Since then the rest of the series have been a trash fire in some form or fashion. Dks3 was okay but plagued the invader with disadvantages but Elden Ring is worse because it’s that plus broken systems in favor of the host.
In short they were all flukes except DKS2
Bloodborne doesn’t have backstabs….
it does, charge r2 into bs, its just hard to land, but it fixes every issue fromsoft had with backstabs, for better or worse
Champ mungus
Im enjoying yapnine
Ever since Dark Souls 1, I remember having this argument, They all want to say the games aren't PVP intended.
It's super small but one thing I always found interesting was, the DS1 hornet ring, And how it had unique animations when interacting with human NPC and players. I look at something like that and I say they had to have had PVP in mind because with so few fightable NPC's why give this unique animations only when interacting with other players if not intended for PvP specifically.
There's elements like that in every Souls game so I feel like there's PVP'rs somewhere in fromsoft, How powerful or influential their voices are has yet to be seen
I don't think it was ever good. It can be fun to watch, or even play sometimes, but its not good.
It just needs to be fun which is what you had in every souls game. ER on the other hand has tipped the favor so far to the host that it’s pushed away many would be invaders.
It was an accident
This was an actually good 20 minute invasion. It's nice to see a host who knows what he's doing and isn't a shameless griefer/shitter.
Crab shack meta slaves with an overleveled phantom? Oh yes very nice
@@Shendapy the host was definitely knowledgeable though, nothing wrong with acknowledging that
@@Shendapy overlevel? he was lvl 139 and the host isnt using great rune, yes it has more heals but this scenario is the best you can get cause colosseum sucks
Not really, ganking in early game areas like limgrave and liurnia is inherently lame because none of the pve is capable even in ng+. Additionally this host ran away excessively i understand running in a 2v1 situation but after the second invader died he continued to run and resummon. Just because he didnt use toxic items and clearly has pvp experience doesnt mean they arent still shitters
@@Atarka-bo5jp he could’ve killed g9 in a 1v1 in a couple of times, and he ran, everyone has to run the game is about surviving and playing with the best you got, in my opinion they weren’t shitters and they created a fun pvp scenario, who cares about the pve if they dont have blues and tt on, and cause you’re getting constant invaders is fair for them to resummon
It was never good lmfao
yes it is, isnt perfect but indeed works, it just needs small fixes that fromsoft refuses to do for some reason, it would take literally a week to fix everything pvp related
Why are you an earlier viewer on a niche pvp channel then?
@@myoldvan119 I enjoy watching Jeenine outplay ppl
@@Lutheinvader exactly, it needs these fixes but they aren't done so it's still shit
Good, no. Fun, yes.