So it’s no longer enough to wait for reviews before deciding whether to buy or not, now you have to wait a few months longer to see whether the devs add crappy features they held back to deceive the reviewers. That’s just fucking fantastic.

Sean Murray may be riding that high and lost track of the lesson he should’ve learned

Oh hell no. He learned his lesson very well, that being that you can lie through your teeth, sell unfinished garbage, spend a decade implementing a fraction of what you promised, and become one of the most beloved studios in the business as a result. He’s doing the same thing again because it worked like magic the first time.

You’re not wrong, but if you want to use policy to regulate business models that exploit dumb consumer choices, there are way bigger fish to fry than videogames.

Or going further back: Remember Star Wars Galaxies?

The game that was shut down less than a week before Star Wars The Old Republic released? You’re not wrong about the other stuff, but this one definitely wasn’t just a big patch.

I recently replayed Q2 and I found it… decent. Alright but not amazing in basically all respects. Just like I remembered it. I hate the fact that enemies have collision until their dying animation is finished, that was a constant annoyance. Quake 1 got it right, so I haven’t got a clue why they screwed it up in the sequel.

At first I thought, “Oh cool, they’re showing what the game used to look like before they reveal the new graphics.” But that is what the game looks like…? I mean, the before and after comparison footage looks completely identical, doesn’t it? It’s October 1st, not April. I feel like I’m taking crazy pills.

it’s going to be a lot more like a kind of Fable - Black and White - Dungeon Keeper kind of experience

Based on this description and given the only thing two of these games have in common, I can only conclude his latest project is a game focused on using your floating god hand to slap the shit out of your minion(s). I’m just not quite sure about the Fable connection…

Always has been.

I’m honestly at a loss about how it’s “mechanically old” and how it could possibly be updated. It’s been a few years since I last played it, but I thought it was basically perfect and even did some things few if any other games do, such as the whole grappling/climbing system.

More of the same? Awesome, can’t wait!

Some people were annoyed by the pawns, but personally I loved them. Their chatter can get repetitive at times, but there’s also a lot of detail and subtlety that’s easy to miss. Each pawn gains knowledge of different enemies, quests, and areas as they interact with them, and what they say depends on how well they know the subject they’re talking about. If they know nothing, they will react with surprise or curiosity, otherwise they will offer advice of varying helpfulness. One time I encountered a cockatrice, and my pawns started yelling to watch out for the griffin. At first I thought it was a bug, but after the fight I realized they had some knowledge of these bird-like enemy types but not enough, and as a result they confused one for the other. Now that’s what I call attention to detail!

That’s cute. How about Hall effect sticks so they don’t wear out after six months?

Bethesda hasn’t made a great game since Skyrim.

Since Morrowind. Skyrim wasn’t bad, don’t get me wrong, but it can’t hold a candle to its granddaddy in terms of world-building and stat-based character advancement, which was sacrificed for the sake of action combat that is not even close to good enough to carry the game.

But here’s the thing… Bethesda hadn’t made a great game before Morrowind either. That was their big breakout hit, and ever since then they’ve just been remaking that same game with slightly different coats of paint hoping to catch lightning in a bottle for a second time. They used to make more varied and innovative games before that, but none of them was really all that good. Terminator: Future Shock had fully 3D environments and enemies and a mouselook control scheme a year before Quake, but there’s a good reason why the latter game is remembered as one of the foundational pillars of the genre and the Bethesda offering lies forgotten.

So I agree with you that expecting TES6 to be amazing is naive, but I don’t think it’s because Bethesda has gotten worse. It has simply regressed to the mean.

their ambition is getting the best of them

Always has been. I haven’t played Starfield yet, but from what I’ve read about it online, including your description, it sounds a hell of a lot like a sci-fi version of Daggerfall, which was insanely overambitious for its time. It’s a shame they seem to have focused on making the graphics prettier rather than the procedural generation more complex and interesting.

Oblivion, on paper, is an objectively better RPG that is truer to the Elder Scrolls formula than Skyrim

Hard disagree on that one. It’s truer to the Morrowind formula, but Morrowind itself was a radical departure from the previous TES games’ design philosophy. And I despise Oblivion precisely because of that, because it slavishly apes Morrowind’s formula without really understanding what made it tick. I’ll spare you the diatribe. Morrowind was a great triumph but also a turning point for Bethesda. Up until that point, they used to make varied games. Ever since they found success with Morrowind, they’ve stopped trying to innovate and improve and have just been remaking the same game over and over with a slightly different coat of paint each time.

I think the combat speed is probably the most noticeable difference between DS and Nioh, and I’d probably prefer some middle ground between the two, but IMO it’s far from the most interesting or impactful one. For example, I love the sheer variety of attacks in Nioh and the emphasis on special moves. In Dark Souls, you mostly just spam the same basic attack over and over. Nioh gives you three stances to switch between (a system copied from the old Jedi Knight games, btw.) and a bevy of special attacks that you can learn. And I love that those special moves aren’t tied to specific weapons but rather to your character and those three stances, so your moveset is not only much larger than in DS but also customizable. And I do think this is straight-up better than DS, because it’s not just a difference, it’s an addition. All that complexity and depth is there for you to explore if you want to, but you don’t have to. If you wanted to, you could play Nioh like Souls and just use the basic medium attack. The reverse is not true, you can’t play Souls like Nioh.

Another interesting difference is that Nioh lets you put pressure on enemies in ways that DS disallows. In DS, when an enemy’s stamina is depleted and their guard broken, you’re given the opportunity to do a finisher. But regardless of whether or not you take it, they regain their stamina and the fight basically resets, forcing you to dodge the enemy’s attacks and chip away at them again. That can also happen in Nioh, but you can also choose to forego the finisher and keep the pressure up instead with a zero-ki combo. Attacking an exhausted enemy again will knock them on the ground, opening them up to a different type of finisher, but you can also still attack them normally (probably requiring a stance switch) in order to force them to stand back up without giving them the opportunity to regain their ki/stamina. At the same time, you can use well-timed ki pulses to replenish your own stamina, so if you have the timing down, you can keep an enemy stunlocked pretty much indefinitely. And you can even do this to bosses. Dark Souls doesn’t allow you to keep the upper hand in a fight, it goes so far as to give the enemy several seconds of invincibility after a finisher in order to reset the fight. Nioh isn’t like that, it does let you keep the upper hand and really exploit it if you know what you’re doing. And once again it’s not a difference, it’s an addition. That basic DS cycle of “dodge enemy attack, break their guard, do a finisher, rinse and repeat” is present in Nioh too, but whereas in DS it’s the end point and the pinnacle of player skill (because they game doesn’t allow you to do anything else), in Nioh it’s the start. It’s what newbies do. Over time you learn to dominate enemies in far more effective ways, and it feels oh so much more satisfying than anything Souls can offer.

In short, I think Nioh is just a straight upgrade to Souls in terms of gameplay. Souls starts you off as a weak little hollow, and you fight like one. That’s all well and good, but you never move beyond that, you’re always the one under pressure even after you’ve absorbed the souls of lords and acquired legendary weapons. That slow, methodical combat is also present in Nioh, but it’s an early-game element, it’s something for you to grow out of as you upgrade your character and improve your own skills as a player. That late-game fast-paced brawling action is no less skill-based, mind you, I’d even argue it requires way more skill than Souls. But it also rewards you for your skill way more than Souls ever does.

I could list Wo Long right alongside Elden Ring as a game I found disappointing. It doesn’t seem to have been very well received in general, and I stopped playing at the first boss. I could write a whole other diatribe about how the tutorial bosses in From Soft games become more and more unfair bullshit over time, and to my dismay the first boss of Wo Long is basically Iudex Gundyr, whom I absolutely despise. In other words, he’s a fairly easy humanoid boss with clearly telegraphed attacks in his first phase, but in his second phase he turns into a mutated shapeless blob that spazzes the fuck out all over the place in ways specifically designed to kill you because you can’t tell WTF he’s even doing. You know the saying “when people show you who they are, believe them”? When Team Ninja showed me they were doing a Dark Souls 3, I believed them and lost all interest in playing further.

Sekiro and Bloodborne are interesting, since they’re variations on the formula that show that From Soft is actually capable of trying new things. It’s just a shame that, as with DS2, basically none of the improvements they pioneered were carried forward to Elden Ring (such as showing you the enemy stamina bar, which is also something Nioh does). Pretty much their only legacy is the replacement of poise with hyperarmor, which I consider a detriment. In Nioh, stunlocking an enemy is possible but requires a lot of game knowledge and practice to get the timing right. In From Soft games since Bloodborne, stunlocking an enemy requires nothing more than hitting them before they hit you, at which point you’re free to keep swinging for as long as your stamina lasts. That’s just dumb and boring.

As for farming a specific spot over and over, that is absolutely something that exists in Souls. It’s usually not a boss, since most of the games don’t let you easily respawn bosses (DS2 being the exception, with the Giant Lord specifically designed to be farmed), but farming for souls and/or upgrade materials has been a staple of the series since its inception.

If you do play Blade of Darkness, temper your expectations. I love it because of massive nostalgia, but it was clunky as hell even by the standards of its day. There are good reasons it wasn’t a commercial success.

Elden Ring is pretty much my favourite game of all time. I feel like it’s the “culmination of Dark Souls design”, and just happens to be exactly what I was personally looking for in DS games

I’d probably feel the same way if I hadn’t played a few other similar games while waiting for ER. Nioh and especially Nioh 2 showed me how much more Dark Souls could do. Their combat system is much richer and deeper, and I find it baffling that From Soft hasn’t tried copying even a few of their ideas. I hadn’t realized anything was missing from the Souls formula until I played them, but now I can’t unsee it. Maybe my expectations are excessive. From Soft seems incapable of copying even its own good ideas. Dark Souls 2 made quite a few good (if relatively minor) changes to the formula, all of which were erased the moment Miyazaki took back control of the series.

I also recently replayed Blade of Darkness, which I consider the forgotten true originator of the souls-like genre. Being more than twenty years old, it’s much simpler than its spiritual successors, but it showed me that Dark Souls also does a bunch of things it really doesn’t need to do, such as bullshit artificial difficulty. I used to think BoD was really hard back when I played it for the first time more than two decades ago, but after several thousand hours in Souls and Nioh, it feels easy. And you know what? That makes it great fun. Enemy attack patterns are quite basic and easily readable and predictable, there are no surprise ganks and no spoiler enemies (which is what I like to call annoying enemies specifically added in order to spoil what would otherwise be a fun combat encounter). Hell, there’s even friendly fire among enemies, so it’s much harder for them to gang up on you, and you get none of that toxic and abusive encounter design based around ranged enemies shooting you through melee ones that From Soft seems so very fond of. Nioh showed me what the Souls series is missing, and BoD reminded me that sometimes less really is more.

Seeing that ER is just more of the same has really sapped my motivation to play, and I haven’t gotten very far in it as a result. I’ll probably finish it someday, but I’m definitely not going into the NG+ cycle and PvP for hundreds of hours like I used to do with previous Souls games.

as for Fromsoft just doing the same thing over and over - Armored Core VI coming out next week, and that’s quite different. :D

Ah yes, the sixth game in a series. More than halfway to double digits. Such innovation. ;D

Elden Ring

It’s just Dark Souls 3.5. Which is not necessarily bad if you really liked DS3 and just want more of the same thing, but I considered DS3 by far the weakest in the series to begin with, and playing the Nioh series after it has opened my eyes to just how much room for improvement there is in the DS series as a whole. From Soft has basically followed the same path as Bethesda - they used to make varied games until one of them randomly became wildly successful, and from that point onward they haven’t had the balls to deviate from the winning formula and have just been remaking that same game over and over with a slightly different coat of paint each time. Which makes sense from a business point of view, I guess, but after this many repetitions, it’s become clear to me From Soft is totally creatively bankrupt. Hell, it’s been more than a decade since Demon’s Souls, and they still can’t even figure out a better counter to the “roll behind them and stab them in the butt” strategy than making enemy tracking ever more effective and their movements ever more spasmodic and unreadable in each subsequent game. The end result of this complete lack of willingness and/or ability to innovate is that despite being expertly crafted, Elden Ring feels very by-the-numbers and utterly soulless (if you’ll pardon the pun).

You could say that about any other story where you save the world. You only ever save it from the present danger, you never make it safe for all time. Otherwise there could be no sequels (of which DS has received a couple). “Happily ever after” is figurative.

That just paints DS as dishonest, since it’s designed to be beaten too. There are entire genres of games far less fair and forgiving than DS, such as roguelikes, where death means starting over from scratch and bad RNG can screw you over in a heartbeat no matter how well you play.

these games make you feel pretty unimportant

You’re literally addressed as the “Chosen Undead” by a goddess in DS1 and tasked with saving the world.

Daggerfall Unity fits this almost perfectly. You can become hilariously OP if you want to, but exercising some self-restraint on the custom class and enchantment screens can lead to a very challenging experience.