inherit
2765
0
Aug 5, 2018 23:29:13 GMT -6
2
veskmechanic
4
Jul 1, 2018 1:57:44 GMT -6
July 2018
veskmechanic
|
Post by veskmechanic on Aug 2, 2018 13:12:07 GMT -6
IMO he feels about right for the second boss of the full game. I think we're just biased because of him serving as the final boss of the demo.
|
|
inherit
1650
0
Oct 10, 2018 17:39:30 GMT -6
38
yoshi9048
58
Jul 3, 2016 14:07:34 GMT -6
July 2016
yoshi9048
|
Post by yoshi9048 on Aug 3, 2018 1:12:29 GMT -6
yeah I don't agree with giving his sprite a hitbox, human bosses don't have one. In addition to the ones DSLevantine listed, I can confirm Richter in PoR as well. Here's the thing to me. These games do/will have AI loops and strategies to beat them to make them easier, which they've always had. I think we're being given an opportunity to put Zangetsu specifically under a magnifying glass here when most of the game's bosses will have something like this and that's completely normal. Tuning the difficulty of the boss too much could worsen the overall game experience for people trying to beat him for the first time, which I think should be a focus over tuning our experience felt when fighting him repeatedly in his beta form. Yeah, I'm personally not opposed to having built-in strategies to reduce the difficulty of a boss; but this feels less like a built-in strategy and more like an oversight. There is still plenty of cheese, excluding this. Attacking from behind is a strategy (when he goes into his counter stance) and working as intended, but practically back-locking him until death without him even being able to process an attack doesn't feel like an intended design.
|
|
inherit
1711
0
Aug 1, 2019 16:08:29 GMT -6
32
yulia11
155
Sept 5, 2016 21:46:04 GMT -6
September 2016
yulia11
|
Post by yulia11 on Aug 3, 2018 20:56:12 GMT -6
You know you can stay out of the range with dagger/ thrusting swords, right?
|
|
Yän
Herald of the Moon
Loyal Familiar
Posts: 476
inherit
Herald of the Moon
1316
0
Jan 2, 2022 8:01:36 GMT -6
415
Yän
476
Jun 12, 2016 6:59:44 GMT -6
June 2016
yaen
|
Post by Yän on Aug 4, 2018 7:11:30 GMT -6
yulia11Yes but he has several attacks such as his throwing knives that counter this strategy.
|
|
inherit
1711
0
Aug 1, 2019 16:08:29 GMT -6
32
yulia11
155
Sept 5, 2016 21:46:04 GMT -6
September 2016
yulia11
|
Post by yulia11 on Aug 4, 2018 15:09:17 GMT -6
yulia11 Yes but he has several attacks such as his throwing knives that counter this strategy. Just dodge. It's really the best thing you can do against a Katana in real life with a thrusting sword cause many weapons are too light to properly parry a strike and the two handed motion of the katana means there are at least split second opening which they have to retract their blade. Besides our own ranged weapons like bats or arrows far out class his(shards, not the stupid gun which at that point is still quite worthless)
|
|
purifyweirdshard
Administrator
Administrator
Calling from Heaven
Posts: 3,789
Staff Mini-Profile Theme: Example 2
inherit
Administrator
210
0
1
Oct 25, 2024 0:03:05 GMT -6
3,660
purifyweirdshard
Calling from Heaven
3,789
Jun 29, 2015 7:24:38 GMT -6
June 2015
purifyweirdsoul
Staff Mini-Profile Theme: Example 2
|
Post by purifyweirdshard on Aug 4, 2018 17:52:36 GMT -6
yeah I don't agree with giving his sprite a hitbox, human bosses don't have one. In addition to the ones DSLevantine listed, I can confirm Richter in PoR as well. Here's the thing to me. These games do/will have AI loops and strategies to beat them to make them easier, which they've always had. I think we're being given an opportunity to put Zangetsu specifically under a magnifying glass here when most of the game's bosses will have something like this and that's completely normal. Tuning the difficulty of the boss too much could worsen the overall game experience for people trying to beat him for the first time, which I think should be a focus over tuning our experience felt when fighting him repeatedly in his beta form. Yeah, I'm personally not opposed to having built-in strategies to reduce the difficulty of a boss; but this feels less like a built-in strategy and more like an oversight. There is still plenty of cheese, excluding this. Attacking from behind is a strategy (when he goes into his counter stance) and working as intended, but practically back-locking him until death without him even being able to process an attack doesn't feel like an intended design. I definitely know what you mean, but it doesn't mean that it per se shouldn't be there or isn't intended. Zangetsu feels comparatively like Doppleganger in SotN, being around the same part of the game, second boss and first human type opponent. It teaches you normally to think differently about fighting a boss, but the stopwatch item completely trivializes everything if you know about it. I've never heard direct comment from developers about that, but it seems like something they left in there on purpose. This strategy we're talking about at least includes executing a gameplan. It's just kind of how these games are imo.
|
|
inherit
2852
0
Sept 26, 2019 14:12:56 GMT -6
7
azdrerios
12
Jul 18, 2018 9:58:21 GMT -6
July 2018
azdrerios
|
Post by azdrerios on Aug 5, 2018 4:23:42 GMT -6
Yeah, I'm personally not opposed to having built-in strategies to reduce the difficulty of a boss; but this feels less like a built-in strategy and more like an oversight. There is still plenty of cheese, excluding this. Attacking from behind is a strategy (when he goes into his counter stance) and working as intended, but practically back-locking him until death without him even being able to process an attack doesn't feel like an intended design. I definitely know what you mean, but it doesn't mean that it per se shouldn't be there or isn't intended. Zangetsu feels comparatively like Doppleganger in SotN, being around the same part of the game, second boss and first human type opponent. It teaches you normally to think differently about fighting a boss, but the stopwatch item completely trivializes everything if you know about it. I've never heard direct comment from developers about that, but it seems like something they left in there on purpose. This strategy we're talking about at least includes executing a gameplan. It's just kind of how these games are imo. I don't think one should be justifying game design by comparing it to SOTN. As amazing as that game was for its time, no one in their right mind could possibly claim that it was balanced properly. The Doppelganger/Stopwatch thing is just one example out of many.
|
|
inherit
1650
0
Oct 10, 2018 17:39:30 GMT -6
38
yoshi9048
58
Jul 3, 2016 14:07:34 GMT -6
July 2016
yoshi9048
|
Post by yoshi9048 on Aug 6, 2018 1:28:06 GMT -6
You know you can stay out of the range with dagger/ thrusting swords, right? Likely, but you can also just equip some boots and skip behind him and get 3 free hits before his eventual turn around where you have to simply walk behind him again. Playing a distance game is much less cheeseable than simply back-locking and your retort actually requires a modicum of strategy, skill, and positional awareness (making visual calculations of distance).
|
|
purifyweirdshard
Administrator
Administrator
Calling from Heaven
Posts: 3,789
Staff Mini-Profile Theme: Example 2
inherit
Administrator
210
0
1
Oct 25, 2024 0:03:05 GMT -6
3,660
purifyweirdshard
Calling from Heaven
3,789
Jun 29, 2015 7:24:38 GMT -6
June 2015
purifyweirdsoul
Staff Mini-Profile Theme: Example 2
|
Post by purifyweirdshard on Aug 6, 2018 7:57:33 GMT -6
I definitely know what you mean, but it doesn't mean that it per se shouldn't be there or isn't intended. Zangetsu feels comparatively like Doppleganger in SotN, being around the same part of the game, second boss and first human type opponent. It teaches you normally to think differently about fighting a boss, but the stopwatch item completely trivializes everything if you know about it. I've never heard direct comment from developers about that, but it seems like something they left in there on purpose. This strategy we're talking about at least includes executing a gameplan. It's just kind of how these games are imo. I don't think one should be justifying game design by comparing it to SOTN. As amazing as that game was for its time, no one in their right mind could possibly claim that it was balanced properly. The Doppelganger/Stopwatch thing is just one example out of many. What I mean in this example is that I think that was intentional for how Iga likes to make these games. They're not per se about forcing you to "get good" to beat something by default with intentional choices to make things easier on players if they so choose to use them. While further Igavania games moved further toward satisfying the core audience who were stronger and more familiar players, clearly Iga values capturing the wider audience who want to enjoy things at their level of ability. SourceSotN's famously "low" difficulty doesn't necessarily come from the ease of navigating its enemies' patterns or dangerous stages (it certainly has those, especially for a first time through), but rather how there is both strong RPG stat/equipment progression and more than that, incredibly strong attack options. I don't think all of that was a mistake, while some of it might have been. Stopwatch vs Doppleganger was kept in for every version of the game as well as many other things, and I think it's for the best like that. As the very core-est of fans, I think we have to carefully evaluate what the meaningful and lasting impression of these games are/were on us and preserve that as an ideal over them being as challenging as they could be, to make them lasting experiences for new audiences. Iga's games niche'd themselves into a corner before and they need a new start before they zero in again, to me. I'd like people to see the how/why these games are "slower" than the current main indie metroidvania game and carve out its own place rather than "get with the times" of the trend. I'd see it rather as an entry point and new beginning for people to get into this very specific design than the very specific design start anew at a level no one outside us understands or wants to play. Changing Zangetsu wouldn't affect that all too much, just speaking broadly here. My thought was merely that a lot of the time, these things might be fine, even by design. It may be the first of multiple Zangetsu encounters as well, with more along the lines of you guys' suggestion the second time, or more aggressively defend his back in Nightmare.
|
|
inherit
2852
0
Sept 26, 2019 14:12:56 GMT -6
7
azdrerios
12
Jul 18, 2018 9:58:21 GMT -6
July 2018
azdrerios
|
Post by azdrerios on Aug 6, 2018 13:48:55 GMT -6
I don't think one should be justifying game design by comparing it to SOTN. As amazing as that game was for its time, no one in their right mind could possibly claim that it was balanced properly. The Doppelganger/Stopwatch thing is just one example out of many. What I mean in this example is that I think that was intentional for how Iga likes to make these games. They're not per se about forcing you to "get good" to beat something by default with intentional choices to make things easier on players if they so choose to use them. While further Igavania games moved further toward satisfying the core audience who were stronger and more familiar players, clearly Iga values capturing the wider audience who want to enjoy things at their level of ability. Not necessarily. Currently, there's no evidence that the cheese in Zangetsu's fight is even intentional: it could very well be a simple oversight from the AI programmers. Best not to make any assumptions one way or another, until we get some sort of verification. Honestly, I wouldn't even mind having a cheese solution to the fight if its cause wasn't such an odd, easily abusable mechanic (the lack of a hitbox). All the other enemies in the game have hitboxes, so why are character fights magically excluded from this rule? It never made sense to me, even in older IGAvania titles.
|
|
inherit
1711
0
Aug 1, 2019 16:08:29 GMT -6
32
yulia11
155
Sept 5, 2016 21:46:04 GMT -6
September 2016
yulia11
|
Post by yulia11 on Aug 6, 2018 16:44:27 GMT -6
You know you can stay out of the range with dagger/ thrusting swords, right? Likely, but you can also just equip some boots and skip behind him and get 3 free hits before his eventual turn around where you have to simply walk behind him again. Playing a distance game is much less cheeseable than simply back-locking and your retort actually requires a modicum of strategy, skill, and positional awareness (making visual calculations of distance). Thrusting sword (the stinger one with poison) with the lion shard should do over 25 damage before level 10, cause poison, attack very quickly and you can stay out of Zengetsu's counter right in front of him while countinously poisoning him and doing damage. That, and the fact that it add poison to your arrow shard as well.
|
|
inherit
447
0
Jun 11, 2024 9:28:29 GMT -6
182
DSLevantine
224
Jul 25, 2015 11:16:27 GMT -6
July 2015
dslevantine
|
Post by DSLevantine on Aug 7, 2018 0:03:12 GMT -6
What I mean in this example is that I think that was intentional for how Iga likes to make these games. They're not per se about forcing you to "get good" to beat something by default with intentional choices to make things easier on players if they so choose to use them. While further Igavania games moved further toward satisfying the core audience who were stronger and more familiar players, clearly Iga values capturing the wider audience who want to enjoy things at their level of ability. Not necessarily. Currently, there's no evidence that the cheese in Zangetsu's fight is even intentional: it could very well be a simple oversight from the AI programmers. Best not to make any assumptions one way or another, until we get some sort of verification. Honestly, I wouldn't even mind having a cheese solution to the fight if its cause wasn't such an odd, easily abusable mechanic (the lack of a hitbox). All the other enemies in the game have hitboxes, so why are character fights magically excluded from this rule? It never made sense to me, even in older IGAvania titles. The burden of proof is on the person who suggests it is an oversight. Since kickstarter page was updated on 1 Aug and there is no comment from the dev, it is very likely that it is intended. I have to compliment Iga for the lack of hitbox on human boss. Iga is consistent, human bosses do not have hitbox in the older titles, why should they have hitbox now? In the contrary, putting hitbox on human boss doesn't make sense to me.
|
|
Leinbo Belmont
New Blood
If the Abyss opens it's eyes...Do you still have what it takes to over come the curse?
Posts: 51
inherit
2557
0
Jan 12, 2021 8:44:08 GMT -6
24
Leinbo Belmont
If the Abyss opens it's eyes...Do you still have what it takes to over come the curse?
51
Jun 7, 2018 15:53:51 GMT -6
June 2018
leinbobelmont
|
Post by Leinbo Belmont on Aug 7, 2018 5:19:04 GMT -6
Are we talking blitz as soon as the fight starts Zangetsu? The AI was relentless to the point actually hitting him from behind became a valid weak point in defeating him.
|
|
inherit
1650
0
Oct 10, 2018 17:39:30 GMT -6
38
yoshi9048
58
Jul 3, 2016 14:07:34 GMT -6
July 2016
yoshi9048
|
Post by yoshi9048 on Aug 8, 2018 4:29:05 GMT -6
Not necessarily. Currently, there's no evidence that the cheese in Zangetsu's fight is even intentional: it could very well be a simple oversight from the AI programmers. Best not to make any assumptions one way or another, until we get some sort of verification. Honestly, I wouldn't even mind having a cheese solution to the fight if its cause wasn't such an odd, easily abusable mechanic (the lack of a hitbox). All the other enemies in the game have hitboxes, so why are character fights magically excluded from this rule? It never made sense to me, even in older IGAvania titles. The burden of proof is on the person who suggests it is an oversight. There is no way of knowing, whether it be someone considering it an oversight or someone considering it intentional. As far as anyone here knows, it is locked in superposition. There is nothing anyone that isn't part of Iga's team can do to prove anything one way or another. So I am not sure how (I'm assuming you're suggesting I have the burden of proof as I am principally suggesting this is an oversight) I can prove it's an oversight or not unless it was stated here by an authority; in which case the authority (not me) would provide the proof and there'd be no point in continuing the discussion as it would have been answered already.
|
|