What Are You Playing 6: DLCs of Kevin Bacon

[Razade]

You can compare to contemporary games all you like and say "Well, objectively, these games had better gameplay/mechanics/story/whatever..." but at the end of the day none of that matters for judging whether a game was inherently good.

For you. That's not how I look at it. How a game controls effects my enjoyment and I'm cool revising my feelings on something with the scales of time. Doesn't matter if I liked something in the past, I'm not talking about it in the past. I'm talking about it's merits as a game to go back to or a game that's been remade. There's nothing wrong with re-evaluating a game especially if studios are just going to remaster every game they can.

Raised the bar on what, exactly? "Great controls" is not what comes to mind for what Souls games are known for me. And while I haven't played the more recent ones (DS3, Demon's Souls Remake, Elden Ring), the ones I have played were at best just fine in that regard. To an extent their deliberately slow-paced gameplay where you can never cancel any animations can make the controls feel worse than really are, even.

Dark Souls, and really all the From games in that genre, play like crap. Dark Souls 3 and Bloodborne are a little better but a little better isn't much.

[Anonymouswizard]

Honestly? No matter how they control many modern games are just grind fests who's purpose is to duck money out of you. But I don't think that control's really improved that much since the PS2 era.

Plus sometimes poorer control can make for a better game. The controls in classic Tomb Raider games are more awkward and restrictive, but the platforming gameplay is better than the crap in the last three games because those limitations add to the gameplay. In Tomb Raider 2012 I ran slightly to the side and missed a platform because I wasn't paying attention, but I could just snap the stick to the side and magically move towards it. That wouldn't have worked in Angel of Darkness, and that made me put more thought into jumps.

I should get back to AoD, but I'm at that annoying Louvre puzzle.

That's not even getting into games from the era that worked just fine. The Jak series is still fun to play, and Devil May Cry 3 is the second best spectacle fighter ever made.

KH1 has a few issues, but it's not quite that bad. From what I remember it was mainly flight/swimming and camera control that kinda sucked, although combat was nothing special.

[Zevox]

Dark Souls, and really all the From games in that genre, play like crap. Dark Souls 3 and Bloodborne are a little better but a little better isn't much.

Now that I don't agree with at all. I'm not a huge fan of most of them (Sekiro being a bit of an exception), but the Souls games I've played have all been good, and controlled perfectly well. They're just deliberately designed to make everything you do a commitment you can't back out of, which is part of how they create the impression of being difficult - make the wrong move, and odds are strong you could get punished for it, since you can't back out until the animation plays out in full. That's a legitimate way to design a game, even if I personally think others are more fun.

Honestly? No matter how they control many modern games are just grind fests who's purpose is to duck money out of you.

Only the free-to-play/live service games, which are easy enough to avoid.

[Razade]

Now that I don't agree with at all. I'm not a huge fan of most of them (Sekiro being a bit of an exception), but the Souls games I've played have all been good, and controlled perfectly well. They're just deliberately designed to make everything you do a commitment you can't back out of, which is part of how they create the impression of being difficult - make the wrong move, and odds are strong you could get punished for it, since you can't back out until the animation plays out in full. That's a legitimate way to design a game, even if I personally think others are more fun.

Dark Souls has jumping puzzles and jumping is, even in 3, like trying to motivate a sloth to go fast. Two's riddled with really bad attack animations. I've played every Soulsborn game, some control ok, most are like moving a tank in a one lane street. Part of it is design, sure, but part of it is poor controller mapping and animation frames.

[Zevox]

Dark Souls has jumping puzzles and jumping is, even in 3, like trying to motivate a sloth to go fast. Two's riddled with really bad attack animations. I've played every Soulsborn game, some control ok, most are like moving a tank in a one lane street. Part of it is design, sure, but part of it is poor controller mapping and animation frames.

It's been a while since I played DS1 or 2, but I don't recall anything I'd call "jumping puzzles" in them. Heck, the only reason I recall jumping being in them is that part where you descend scaffolding to reach a poison swamp in the first game, and while I recall that being a bit frustrating, it was because of the the enemies in the area to my recollection, not the jumping itself. Granted I do recall the jumping itself not being great, but it was used little enough that it hardly mattered to my recollection.

Also, "poor controller mapping?" I honestly don't know what that could be referring to. The item slots being on the d-pad, maybe? That was a bit weird, but didn't take much getting used to. Beyond that, I don't recall having any issues with what actions they put on what buttons.

[Lord Raziere]

Dark souls doesn't have jumping puzzles, that implies that jumping is a thing you can do in those games beyond a running jump. Dark souls have falling puzzles, where you figure out what a safe distance is to fall to without dying. more accurately, your coming upon an area where you must contend with a particularly vicious chain of attacks from Dark souls true eternal boss battle: gravity. the one foe dark souls players haven't yet figured out how to beat, but I'm sure with enough time, energy and patience we will figure out a way sooner or later.

[Rynjin]

Also, "poor controller mapping?" I honestly don't know what that could be referring to. The item slots being on the d-pad, maybe? That was a bit weird, but didn't take much getting used to. Beyond that, I don't recall having any issues with what actions they put on what buttons.

B to sprint (and jump!) is duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuumb.

[Zombimode]

It probably shows that I'm a PC gamer through and through, but the "poor controller mappings" issue always really sound weird to me.

If you don't like the default why not just change the key binding?

[Cespenar]

So, this will probably be buried under the Souls argument, but:

Tried something called the Voice of Cards: The Isle Dragon Roars by "legendary game designer" Yoko Taro and published by freakin' Square Enix.

So, I'll try to brief. It may look from some of the trailers that it's almost like a japanese version of Hand of Fate, or even something that utilizes the "cards" they built the game on.

Nah. That's apparently just the aesthetics. The game itself seems to be mechanically similar to Final Fantasy 1. Or maybe even to something simpler than that.

So, unless you're magically reverted to a 6-year-old with matching memory and mental faculties, I wouldn't suggest the game.

[Anonymouswizard]

It probably shows that I'm a PC gamer through and through, but the "poor controller mappings" issue always really sound weird to me.

If you don't like the default why not just change the key binding?

Not every game let's you, even on PC.

Yes, it's frustrating.

[warty goblin]

Not every game let's you, even on PC.

Yes, it's frustrating.

It is amazing how many games don't allow remapping, or forget to let some particular function be remapped.

I gamed for years on a PC that, due to a power surge during a system update, had an error somewhere deep, deep in the bowels of DirectX that caused the alpha-numeric keys to cyclically remap themselves while in game. The first time you hit A, it would be A, but the next time it was B, then C, and so on. Meant I had to map everything to the arrow keys, delete, page up/down, and so on, because they were unaffected.

Basically I played everything with a left handed setup, and a lot of games had awful support for the full remapping this requires. Often some functions couldn't be remapped, or only partly remapped, or keys with multiple default functions couldn't have all those functions rebound to a new key. I got fairly good at editing configuration files because often the function was possible for the hame, but nobody had bothered to expose the functionality in the game itself. It was extra fun when they encrypted the configuration files for some dumb reason.

(Before anyone asks, yes I tried AutoHotKey. No it didn't work)

[Cygnia]

Gonna try my hand at Wytchwood as I'm just not in the mood to play FF8 right now.

Got 4 of the Abe's Oddysee games on Steam a couple days ago as they were on sale.

[Form]

I gamed for years on a PC that, due to a power surge during a system update, had an error somewhere deep, deep in the bowels of DirectX that caused the alpha-numeric keys to cyclically remap themselves while in game. The first time you hit A, it would be A, but the next time it was B, then C, and so on. Meant I had to map everything to the arrow keys, delete, page up/down, and so on, because they were unaffected.

That's some bad luck. That's a really weird and frustrating bug.

[warty goblin]

That's some bad luck. That's a really weird and frustrating bug.

It was a very weird bug, so far as I could tell unique in the world. I finally fixed it by upgrading from Windows 7 to 10, but nothing else did the trick, not even factory resetting Windows 7.

The thing was though, as long as a game allowed really, genuinely complete key remapping it didn't matter all that much. I just scooted the keyboard over so I could reach the arrow keys left handed, got a mouse with a ton of shoulder buttons to get some more convenient options, and after messing around with rebinding for a couple minutes was good to go.

[Razade]

B to sprint (and jump!) is duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuumb.

This is exactly what I'm talking about, yeah. There are lots of other really weird choices that Dark Souls makes. Attacking and blocking on the shoulder buttons? You grow used to it but it's so against standard mapping.

[Anonymouswizard]

This is exactly what I'm talking about, yeah. There are lots of other really weird choices that Dark Souls makes. Attacking and blocking on the shoulder buttons? You grow used to it but it's so against standard mapping.

Yeah, although it was a standard for years before Dark Souls, just in shooters. It kind of made more sense there where you had thumbs on both sticks, in Dark Souls my thumb's already near the B button, attack on X or Y would make much more sense.

Also the about three different ways to jump pre-Elden Ring, none of them great. It's rarely required, but there are times where it would be really useful to have easier access to jumps.

[Theoboldi]

Nah. That's apparently just the aesthetics. The game itself seems to be mechanically similar to Final Fantasy 1. Or maybe even to something simpler than that.

So, unless you're magically reverted to a 6-year-old with matching memory and mental faculties, I wouldn't suggest the game.

That actually sounds quite fun, I may check this one out. How's the story?


Speaking of incredibly simplistic RPGs, I just finished a re-run of Ys Origin, one of my old action rpg favorites. Love how well this game still holds up, both in terms of gameplay and in terms of the simple but competently told storylines. It's a top-down dungeon crawler, with a zelda-esque progression system and some jrpg elements like levelling and special boons that you can spend earned currency on, but describing it like that sells it a bit short.

There's just something so fundamentally satisfying about smashing apart demons in this, and it makes the dungeon-crawl structure of the game work in the story by focusing on a small number of likeable, well-defined characters and how they go about their mission. I also love how despite using the same levels and enemies (for the most part), each of the playable character feels distinct and has a very different focus to their storyline, making it never feel like you're just playing through the same game multiple times.

Plus, that music drop that takes place just before the final level still has to be the best musical cue I've seen in any piece of media. It never fails to hype me up, no matter which route I am playing. The soundtrack in general is fantastic, as is the norm for Ys games, but that part on its own is such a standout that it deserves an honorable mention.


Next up, I'll be going through Crosscode. Some years back, I played the original demo for that game, but never ended up buying it. Always did mean to get back to it though, and now I did.

It's a quite interesting little top down action RPG, with some pretty clear zelda influences as far as puzzles and dungeons go and a long-range combat focus. Story-wise, it takes place in some kind of far future transhuman setting, where some kind of alien planet has been turned into a real life MMO that players explore in bodies made of nanobots.

I've only just played to the first proper area of the game, past the opening that the original demo consisted of, and it is opening up to be surprisingly more MMO-like than I expected. There's actual quests and factions, as well as a very marketplace-based crafting(?) system. It does hit you with a ton of possibilities at once, which is a very authentic single-player replication of that feeling of starting a new MMO, but the game so far seems like it'll guide me through all of that bit by bit. I'll reserve my judgement on it for now, and wait to see how complicated this will get later.

[Razade]

Three has, imo, the best jump of the trilogy. Two buttons that aren't the same, and not totally intuitive.

[Zevox]

Not every game let's you, even on PC.

Yes, it's frustrating.

Yeah, even with it becoming more common even on consoles, it's still far from universal. See my previous complaint about not being able to set Skyward Sword HD's controls quite the way I'd like, for instance - although admittedly that's an odd one since it has to do with enabling motion controls for certain things but not others, not simply moving buttons around (though I don't think the game lets me do that, either).

B to sprint (and jump!) is duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuumb.

This is exactly what I'm talking about, yeah. There are lots of other really weird choices that Dark Souls makes. Attacking and blocking on the shoulder buttons? You grow used to it but it's so against standard mapping.

I'm assuming this is on an X-Box controller? *checks where the B button is compared to Playstation controller* ...okay? As opposed to what, moving it one button down to A(XB)/X(PS)? Or having it on L3? I far prefer having it on an actual button as opposed to L3, personally.

And the shoulder buttons for attacking is slightly unusual, but not unheard of. For blocking it's not even that unusual.

[warty goblin]

Yeah, although it was a standard for years before Dark Souls, just in shooters. It kind of made more sense there where you had thumbs on both sticks, in Dark Souls my thumb's already near the B button, attack on X or Y would make much more sense.

Also the about three different ways to jump pre-Elden Ring, none of them great. It's rarely required, but there are times where it would be really useful to have easier access to jumps.

In shooters the standard is aim down sights on LT and fire on RT, with shoulder buttons generally being actions like grenade or reload or melee or whatever special ability gimmick the game uses. The difference is that you aren't generally expected to make precisely timed pulls of either trigger, since you usually ADS for a period of time, and it doesn't make a critical difference if the game registers you as having shot in this frame or the next frame. Plus a lot of guns in shooters are full auto, so you just hold down and spray away.

If I had to guess why Dark Souls moved melee to the trigger and shoulder buttons, it's because they're slower than the face buttons, and the game wants to discourage button mashing on account of its slow attack animations and hatred of animation cancelling. If you like this sort of thing I'm told it makes combat feel weighty and impactful. It makes me feel like I'm playing an uncoordinated and out of control spastic idiot.

[Razade]

I'm assuming this is on an X-Box controller? *checks where the B button is compared to Playstation controller* ...okay? As opposed to what, moving it one button down to A(XB)/X(PS)? Or having it on L3? I far prefer having it on an actual button as opposed to L3, personally.

And the shoulder buttons for attacking is slightly unusual, but not unheard of. For blocking it's not even that unusual.

The Playstation doesn't have a B button so I'd assume yes. DS3 uses the L3 for jump. Anything is better than making the same button you use to run also be the same button you have to use to jump. This isn't a controversial take, that Dark Souls (one especially) has crap button economy and worse controls. It's been a complaint of all of From's games that don't start with the word Armored since King's Field 1. Making the run and jump button the same thing is just bad design. You don't have to jump often in Dark Souls 1 unless you want to get some items or short cuts, but that doesn't mean making it bad is justified.

[Anonymouswizard]

Dark Souls gives you the weapon swinging ability of me. That's not good, I could never hit anybody the few times I tried fencing (although I want to give it another go trying left handed). Okay at unarmed stuff, but I can't control a weapon.

Which is kind of fine with the feel the game's going for, but also clashes with the fact that they want you to take a Jungle King of the Monkeys approach to combat (i.e. dodge roll for your life). It kind of feels weird, and the game could potentially do with lightening up on the 'no cancels' bit slightly, but in DS1 it did actually kind of work out.

I was less annoyed by the limited moveset than the boss healthbars. These bosses take as many hits as a Devil May Cry boss, but while those are a chaotic frenzy of attacks to last second dodges to attacks to parries in Dark Souls I spend at least 70% of the time dodge rolling before moving in for one, maybe two hits. Unless, I suppose, you're one of the people actually allowed to reliably parry.

[Razade]

You don't have to dodgeroll in Dark Souls, you can do a total shield build. Get a 100% physical shield and the wolf ring and jack Str/End up and you can just tank the hits.

[Anonymouswizard]

Clarification: the strategies for these bosses are boring and IME mostly involve 'survive attacks, get one hit in, repeat 500 times'. It gets even worse when bosses have second forms, because their attacks take up even more time. Takes a long time and soon fails to be interesting.

Wish I could have the mood with better gameplay.

[Zevox]

The Playstation doesn't have a B button so I'd assume yes. DS3 uses the L3 for jump. Anything is better than making the same button you use to run also be the same button you have to use to jump. This isn't a controversial take, that Dark Souls (one especially) has crap button economy and worse controls. It's been a complaint of all of From's games that don't start with the word Armored since King's Field 1. Making the run and jump button the same thing is just bad design. You don't have to jump often in Dark Souls 1 unless you want to get some items or short cuts, but that doesn't mean making it bad is justified.

Ah, the complaint is just having both functions on the same button, not which button it's on? That makes more sense. Though again, personally, never bothered me, since you do so little with jump anyway. And still seems like a minor complaint to use to call all of those games' controls crap.

Also, quick googling tells me this isn't the case in most of Fromsoft's games. DS3, Sekiro, and Elden Ring separate jump and run, and Bloodborne doesn't really seem to have jumping at all/makes jumping small gaps automatic from a roll from what I'm reading. So it's only DS1 and DS2 that even do that.

Dark Souls gives you the weapon swinging ability of me. That's not good, I could never hit anybody the few times I tried fencing (although I want to give it another go trying left handed). Okay at unarmed stuff, but I can't control a weapon.

Which is kind of fine with the feel the game's going for, but also clashes with the fact that they want you to take a Jungle King of the Monkeys approach to combat (i.e. dodge roll for your life). It kind of feels weird, and the game could potentially do with lightening up on the 'no cancels' bit slightly, but in DS1 it did actually kind of work out.

I was less annoyed by the limited moveset than the boss healthbars. These bosses take as many hits as a Devil May Cry boss, but while those are a chaotic frenzy of attacks to last second dodges to attacks to parries in Dark Souls I spend at least 70% of the time dodge rolling before moving in for one, maybe two hits. Unless, I suppose, you're one of the people actually allowed to reliably parry.

Oh, that's absolutely true. The difference is, Devil May Cry is supposed to make you feel powerful and cool - hence faster pace, far more options and abilities for the characters, etc. Dark Souls is going more for everything feeling like a struggle, so it functionally makes you weaker and more limited than action games like DMC do by imposing more restrictions on what you can do (i.e. everything you do is slow and you can't cancel animations), on top of making the enemies do a lot of damage. I'm very much with you in preferring DMC's design (DMC5 and Bayonetta 2 being my favorite action games), but depending on what you're looking for, both are perfectly good and valid ways to make action game combat work.

[Lord Raziere]

Oh, that's absolutely true. The difference is, Devil May Cry is supposed to make you feel powerful and cool - hence faster pace, far more options and abilities for the characters, etc. Dark Souls is going more for everything feeling like a struggle, so it functionally makes you weaker and more limited than action games like DMC do by imposing more restrictions on what you can do (i.e. everything you do is slow and you can't cancel animations), on top of making the enemies do a lot of damage. I'm very much with you in preferring DMC's design (DMC5 and Bayonetta 2 being my favorite action games), but depending on what you're looking for, both are perfectly good and valid ways to make action game combat work.

I mean personally speaking, there are few reasons why I like Dark Souls/Elden Ring kind of game. while I'd love to play more of the DMC kind of game, your kind of locked into whatever character everything is designed around so, not much options for your own playstyle, the customization in most soulsborne games being a big reason I'm into them. this is because I'm a bit of a Bioware refugee who gets tired of trying to make modded skyrim and FNV work only for them to crash again and again, and while they don't provide much story, many rpg aspects are still there. there is also the delayed gratification aspect where not being instantly gratified can be a good thing, because I can feel either a rush of triumph or relief that you don't really get if its easy. also the whole "dodge roll 500 times to get one hit in" is kind of the dark souls tryhard meme strength user who thinks that using anything other than the single weapon they carry is cheating. when really anyone with sense has ranged weapons, farmed thrown items, cures for poison and such, so it rewards preparedness and figuring out weaknesses and doing things in a smart way- dodging becomes easier when your constantly running away from the foe to hit them instead of charging into all the people stronger, bigger and powerful than you.

like I love me some power fantasy slaughter an army style combat, wish I had more, but DMC games seem really short and doubt Bayonetta is much longer. turns fast epic combat seems to lead to a fast game, so not much for lasting enjoyment. and sure short and sweet has its benefits nothing wrong with that, but if I want to play a game for the sake of its combat I want it to last, because the focus is on enjoying the experience of the combat. short games are more for if I want to play it for the story specifically. while soulsborne stuff isn't my ideal game admittedly, it can hold my attention and really make me focus for a while when it feels my attention is scattered a lot of the time. its something I can't just breeze through or flit by, so it makes me have to pay attention more and thus makes me feel as if I can put actual effort into things to achieve something hard rather than being lazy and scattered.

[Zevox]

I mean personally speaking, there are few reasons why I like Dark Souls/Elden Ring kind of game. while I'd love to play more of the DMC kind of game, your kind of locked into whatever character everything is designed around so, not much options for your own playstyle, the customization in most soulsborne games being a big reason I'm into them. this is because I'm a bit of a Bioware refugee who gets tired of trying to make modded skyrim and FNV work only for them to crash again and again, and while they don't provide much story, many rpg aspects are still there. there is also the delayed gratification aspect where not being instantly gratified can be a good thing, because I can feel either a rush of triumph or relief that you don't really get if its easy. also the whole "dodge roll 500 times to get one hit in" is kind of the dark souls tryhard meme strength user who thinks that using anything other than the single weapon they carry is cheating. when really anyone with sense has ranged weapons, farmed thrown items, cures for poison and such, so it rewards preparedness and figuring out weaknesses and doing things in a smart way- dodging becomes easier when your constantly running away from the foe to hit them instead of charging into all the people stronger, bigger and powerful than you.

like I love me some power fantasy slaughter an army style combat, wish I had more, but DMC games seem really short and doubt Bayonetta is much longer. turns fast epic combat seems to lead to a fast game, so not much for lasting enjoyment. and sure short and sweet has its benefits nothing wrong with that, but if I want to play a game for the sake of its combat I want it to last, because the focus is on enjoying the experience of the combat. short games are more for if I want to play it for the story specifically. while soulsborne stuff isn't my ideal game admittedly, it can hold my attention and really make me focus for a while when it feels my attention is scattered a lot of the time. its something I can't just breeze through or flit by, so it makes me have to pay attention more and thus makes me feel as if I can put actual effort into things to achieve something hard rather than being lazy and scattered.

Personally, I feel like you can develop your own play style just as much in a Devil May Cry or Bayonetta game as in Dark Souls, by choosing which of your weapons (and styles on Dante, or Devil Arms on Nero) you use, how much you switch between them, etc - and as an added bonus, no need to lock yourself out of other play styles with a stat system that requires you to build towards one thing to be good at it, or find stronger/upgrade your equipment. But this is a matter of taste, of course.

I'd also argue that if you turn up the difficulty, DMC and Bayonetta are far harder than the Souls games I've played, besides maybe Sekiro. Devil May Cry on Dante Must Die or Bayonetta on Infinite Climax will kill you, a lot, and make you earn the wins, despite the fact that you have a higher overall power level and far more options in a fight than in any Souls game. (Caveat: Vergil in DMC5 admittedly could cheese most fights with repeated super moves even on Dante Must Die, if he can keep his concentration up and build Devil Trigger gauge. But keeping concentration up requires not getting hit, and building Devil Trigger takes time, so he does need to earn that to an extent, even if it's so powerful that it can take huge chunks out of even bosses' health.) I'm a lot prouder of beating Vergil (and Dante) on Dante Must Die in DMC5 than I am of beating Dark Souls 1 or 2, or even most of Sekiro. Hell, I'm prouder of beating some non-boss fights in DMC5 on Legendary Dark Knight than I am of beating Dark Souls 1 or 2.

And as far as length goes for an action game, personally, the fact that my enjoyment of the game is mainly for the combat is why the games being short doesn't matter. If I want to continue enjoying the combat after the first time through (and for DMC or Bayonetta I always have), I just play it again, often on a higher difficulty. I don't need the game to be long, I just need it to give me enemies to fight. In contrast, story-based games are the ones where I prefer them to be longer, so that my attachment to the characters can build over time, the plot can unfold gradually, etc. Again, personal preference, but that's how I feel about those things.

[Rynjin]

In shooters the standard is aim down sights on LT and fire on RT, with shoulder buttons generally being actions like grenade or reload or melee or whatever special ability gimmick the game uses. The difference is that you aren't generally expected to make precisely timed pulls of either trigger, since you usually ADS for a period of time, and it doesn't make a critical difference if the game registers you as having shot in this frame or the next frame. Plus a lot of guns in shooters are full auto, so you just hold down and spray away.

If I had to guess why Dark Souls moved melee to the trigger and shoulder buttons, it's because they're slower than the face buttons, and the game wants to discourage button mashing on account of its slow attack animations and hatred of animation cancelling. If you like this sort of thing I'm told it makes combat feel weighty and impactful. It makes me feel like I'm playing an uncoordinated and out of control spastic idiot.

Honestly I think RB/RT are pretty natural buttons for melee combat. It sort of mirrors how the original Assassin's Creed games tried to map everything to actual parts of your body so it feels natural.

The right buttons control your right hand functions., Your left buttons control your left hand functions. It feels good. It feels right.

B to sprint is just bizarre, when the standard had already been L3 to sprint for close to a decade at that point. I understand why it's that way in Elden Ring (since the jump button threw off the control scheme a bit, and it was either L3 to crouch or run, and B to crouch and also roll is kind of awkward), but there's not really any excuse for that in the prior games IMO.

Guess they could have moved lock-on to L3 and crouch to R3, but I think they wanted to throw off as little muscle memory as possible in ER compared to previous games.

Personally, I feel like you can develop your own play style just as much in a Devil May Cry or Bayonetta game as in Dark Souls, by choosing which of your weapons (and styles on Dante, or Devil Arms on Nero) you use, how much you switch between them, etc - and as an added bonus, no need to lock yourself out of other play styles with a stat system that requires you to build towards one thing to be good at it, or find stronger/upgrade your equipment. But this is a matter of taste, of course.

I'd also argue that if you turn up the difficulty, DMC and Bayonetta are far harder than the Souls games I've played, besides maybe Sekiro. Devil May Cry on Dante Must Die or Bayonetta on Infinite Climax will kill you, a lot, and make you earn the wins, despite the fact that you have a higher overall power level and far more options in a fight than in any Souls game. (Caveat: Vergil in DMC5 admittedly could cheese most fights with repeated super moves even on Dante Must Die, if he can keep his concentration up and build Devil Trigger gauge. But keeping concentration up requires not getting hit, and building Devil Trigger takes time, so he does need to earn that to an extent, even if it's so powerful that it can take huge chunks out of even bosses' health.) I'm a lot prouder of beating Vergil (and Dante) on Dante Must Die in DMC5 than I am of beating Dark Souls 1 or 2, or even most of Sekiro. Hell, I'm prouder of beating some non-boss fights in DMC5 on Legendary Dark Knight than I am of beating Dark Souls 1 or 2.

And as far as length goes for an action game, personally, the fact that my enjoyment of the game is mainly for the combat is why the games being short doesn't matter. If I want to continue enjoying the combat after the first time through (and for DMC or Bayonetta I always have), I just play it again, often on a higher difficulty. I don't need the game to be long, I just need it to give me enemies to fight. In contrast, story-based games are the ones where I prefer them to be longer, so that my attachment to the characters can build over time, the plot can unfold gradually, etc. Again, personal preference, but that's how I feel about those things.

Traditional character action games are easily, EASILY harder than the Soulsborne series for sure, at least on harder difficulties. I will replay any of the Souls games repeatedly, and have done so, with all sorts of builds.

I will never, ever have the patience, tenacity, and sheer free time I had when I beat DMC 3 on Hell or Hell again.

(For those uninitiated, Hell or Hell is a modified version of the Heaven or Hell game mode, where both Dante and all monsters die in one hit. In Hell or Hell, Dante still dies in one hit. The monsters, however, have equivalent HP to the hardest normal difficulty, which IIRC was Nightmare in DMC3? Might've been Dante Must Die already at that point though.)

[Zevox]

B to sprint is just bizarre, when the standard had already been L3 to sprint for close to a decade at that point.

Wait, what? Even now, I don't think I'd call that "standard." Outside of Assassin's Creed, I'm struggling to think of games that use that off the top of my head (though I'm sure there's some I'm forgetting). And the original Dark Souls came out in 2011 - I don't know if I can think of a single game from before that which used L3 as its run button, because I don't think even Assassin's Creed was doing that back then.

Traditional character action games are easily, EASILY harder than the Soulsborne series for sure, at least on harder difficulties. I will replay any of the Souls games repeatedly, and have done so, with all sorts of builds.

I will never, ever have the patience, tenacity, and sheer free time I had when I beat DMC 3 on Hell or Hell again.

(For those uninitiated, Hell or Hell is a modified version of the Heaven or Hell game mode, where both Dante and all monsters die in one hit. In Hell or Hell, Dante still dies in one hit. The monsters, however, have equivalent HP to the hardest normal difficulty, which IIRC was Nightmare in DMC3? Might've been Dante Must Die already at that point though.)

To be fair, Hell and Hell and Heaven or Hell are kind of gimmick difficulties anyway, so I wasn't really thinking of them when I said that. I've never actually played them myself - though congratulations on being able to actually beat DMC3 on Hell and Hell, goddamn. I didn't even know that one was in DMC3.

And the hardest difficulty was called Dante Must Die even back in the first game. It's the only difficulty setting whose name has never changed, in fact.

[Razade]

(For those uninitiated, Hell or Hell is a modified version of the Heaven or Hell game mode, where both Dante and all monsters die in one hit. In Hell or Hell, Dante still dies in one hit. The monsters, however, have equivalent HP to the hardest normal difficulty, which IIRC was Nightmare in DMC3? Might've been Dante Must Die already at that point though.)

See, I don't really see that as the same kind of difficulty as the Souls games. It's just tweaking the parameters for an artificial difficulty curve. Any game is difficult if you pump up enemy damage or lower the damage you deal. Any game can be difficult if you lower how much the player gets in the form of health, healing or abilities. There's a point where "difficult" is just jerking a person along and it's stuff like the above that absolutely hits that level for me. I'm all for difficult games but I don't have the time or patience for games that just increase parameters and go "this is difficult! Get good!"