Smug Souls: Scholar of Questionable Opinions (A Response to hbomberguy)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 17 апр 2017
- hbomberguy's video: • In Defense of Dark Sou...
Discord: / discord
Facebook: / mitch-l-462561553915283
Twitter: / angered_courier
Patreon: / mitchl 
Игры
![Eminem - The Death of Slim Shady [Album Trailer]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/X0HIrS6kUYI/mqdefault.jpg)
First
ok buddy its time to put down the big mac. you're gettin' salty.
Mitch L very good
Palpatine: Do it! Let the darkness consume you...... Do it!!!
you are skipping on a few key details from the video
Mitch L Harris' Bloodborne video is pretty similar to this one, in that it praises missteps, and preaches that same "play conditioning" bollocks, meanwhile ragging on Zero Punctuation because his opinion on Souls changed. And Bloodborne is my favourite game of all time.
-Criticizes omission of details from argument you're responding to as disingenuous
-Omits details from argument he's responding to
Yeah, lmao.
Yes
Watch Mauler's tgen
like what?
I'm sure that all these guys think that they are one upping each other, that they alone will save their preferred entry from unjust criticism lol, but they all come across as insufferable pompous assholes. Who gives a shit which DS they prefer? Hours upon hours upon hours upon hours of footage of them arguing over this lol. Get over yourselves ffs.
"got a little carried away"
Not when Maulers series exists you didn't.
Maulers response is RUclips Hall of fame material.
Blake Walden Yeah, for how petite and shit it is.
@@batmanarkhamcentral3149 ???
@@batmanarkhamcentral3149 You're thinking of the word petty, I think? Definitely not 'petite', the videos are anything but.
@@batmanarkhamcentral3149 yeah a fucking in depth analysis, well researched and well written, how petty, better go suck harris the smug tard, whos been caught lying, mocking and taking people out of context.
soulsborne youtuber drama? I'll take a fucking pass, thank you
Wise choice.
Yeah, the Souls autism is becoming too much.
I'm gonna pass as well
This whole community doesn’t like admitting that their opinions on ds2 are obnoxiously opinionated or dishonest at best which leads to smug and arrogant arguing where the arguer begins their argument with the perception that are infallibly correct and their opponent, by virtue of disagreeing with their perceived infallible dogma, is automatically wrong therefore. Basically a synopsis of all these videos is “I am right. You play the game wrong/right/differently to how I play thereby you are wrong” or some variation of “I did something wrong and now I am going to blame the game for the consequences”
Alright, I will have to say it.
DS is over rated. It is just a hand held device to play Nintendo games. Oh sorry wrong DS.
....Well now we're getting DS on the Switch, which can be played handheld. lol.
Hand Held. More like BLAND Held.
I'll just go...
@@fluffy-hellhound no come back
@@cxx23
Ok. What did I miss?
imskiller99 Hey the DS was great, it had good games, and it's built to last unlike some shitty phones that break if you look at them too hard.
Not gonna lie both of you are pretty smug and left out details from the videos you were talking about
Jordan Ghill I’m here from 2 weeks in the future to tell you that it doesn’t matter how much you think it’s overrated, it defined itself as one of the most influential games in history, even spawning it’s own genre. As for lazy, you’ll have to elaborate.
Jordan Ghill you’re getting there, you’re almost making good arguments but you make a point and then immediately jump to a conclusion. Provide examples. It makes sense that the story wouldn’t be told in the clearest way. They wanted people to be talking about dark souls long after it’s release and it certainly worked. There’s also the fact that Miyazaki loved reading western fantasy books when he was a child but his English was still quite poor and so he couldn’t understand everything and had to use his imagination to fill in gaps which inspired the story telling of dark souls and encourages the player to do what he did. It makes sense why the story would be like this, but I think there are still plenty of arguments to be made that the story is indeed lazy, just provide evidence
Personally I believe the character stories are much better then the overall story an example ds2’s sir alonne was a traveling warrior from the east who trained warriors in the art of QuickDraw but during one feast he saw an aspiring king who had just conquered an iron keep that as the name implies was full of and made of iron mainly because the land around was fit for plants so this new king was mainly forced to trade iron for food so why the long exposition well our little king was at this feast because he had given so much iron that the king of this land decided he was a friend so this is were our iron king and sir alonne made their fateful encounter knowing who sir alonne was the iron king began talking business to him because the iron king was low on men due to the battles but the thing is he can easily get man because of how much he makes with the almost endless supply of iron so money by trade armor and weapons were easy to come by but amazing trainers are a rare sight indeed so sir alonne accepted the offer set by the king only on one condition that those knights are not his but their’s the king was fine with this condition because he really needed men because iron is a valuable thing and other kingdoms would no will attack him for that iron so alonne trained the men that the king had there armor iron but not as bulky as their original armors and more eastern their swords stained black but a design not unlike their teacher allone just smaller so it could draw a bit faster alright this is just the weapons and armor but if you were to strip naked they would put a great fight because they were trained in not just the art of quickdraw but in martial arts as well so the iron king satisfied with his army soon defended his keep because rival kingdoms wanted that iron and the knights of the iron keep held them off the rival kingdoms didn’t expect such a prepared and odd army they also fought differently as well using slashes from the hilt and attacking quickly and hard and when one is found a captain is shooting his bow and three more knights appeared for every one knight goes 10-20 troops of another army. With these victories the iron king grow more arrogant and soon he changed the knights noticed the captains noticed and alonne noticed alonne sadden that his humble friend turned to an arrogant king took his knights and kicked out the king and so the king came back with army but in the history of invader defeats the iron king won but by the time he reached the room with alonne he only had the best warriors so they slew the last the men and fought sir alonne and the iron king killed him and so the king saw there was a room to the right and walked in and what he saw sadden him what was in the middle of the room was a small throne the small throne he started his kingdom with and so the king kept alonne’s armor on display in the throne room reminding the old iron king the days he spent with a man he called friend the knights began to serve him again and soon everything was back to normal but without sir alonne the old iron king then called them alonne knights because that is who they truly served the old iron king summoned a demon who protects the keep and the dead knights then inhabited random armors and protects the keep from invaders to this day and from the old iron king it is said that he cast himself in flames a long before the dead knights inhabited the armors and so the iron keep was empty with nothing but souls of dead knights and demons. soon a child of dark came looking for the old king but only found knights and ash and so she made herself the queen of the keep her name is nadia bride of ash a merchant soon came siting and waiting but what his’s waiting for is unknown and soon a man came to the ash tower a man who’s favorite bird is a black raven
@Jordan Ghill I'm here from current time to say, you're a fucking idiot. Worlds moving and stories ending as they would in a real setting is called good world building.
@@dudelost120 Bro you wrote a really long youtube comment responding to the wrong people.
Just to play Devil's Advocate: One could argue that while you could have 12 Estus and 99 Lifegems in DS2, you could have 20 Estus and 99 Humanity (which fully heals) in DS1.
Also, if healing is a measurement of difficulty, then why do so many people still die in Dark Souls II? Or for that fact, Demon's Souls, where you can stockpile Dark Moon Grass.
With the over-abundance of multi-aggro enemies in DS2 (Something that even Matthewmatosis touched on) coupled with ridiculous areas like the Shrine of Amana, as well as enemies' lock-on radius, DS2 is still a pretty difficult game...
Did they go overboard with the healing? Sure. But I don't think that makes it an easy game... Demon's Souls can still be pretty rough and that is a healer's wet-dream.
Kismet Wolf Oh god, the flashbacks are coming back to me with those dark moon grasses......
*invaders with the ability to full heal within a second and they have 99 times to do it because they did the duplication glitch*
I don't think he really mean't that DS2 is an easy game. I actually think it tries to be difficult for the sake of being difficult, especially with the new enemy placements in the re-release, but with lifegems, as long as you play defensively, you can ensure you'll never run out of healing supplies. Also, while humanity can technically be abused in the same way, it was difficult to harvest for the average player and the only people that really abused it were PvPers
AIEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
to counter that if you do have 99 humanity you do pvp or never use them either way it's hard to get humanity without pvp or farming enemies 1000s of times
It's not that hard to use, though. And with 10 Soft Humanity and drop boosts, they drop like candy. In a normal game, they are a good measure if you are at 1% hp. You'll hardly run out, anyway.
Having watched both videos, your argument here seems to focus more on how an already 'good' player will play, and thus experience, the games, where as hbomberguy's argument is more about how new players to the series will play, and thus experience, the games.
Your experience with the games (and extensive knowledge as a result) means your approach will inherently be very different to that of the average player. The comparison between your two views is therefore a comparison of two conflicting views on two conflicting approaches to two different games.
Not invalid arguments by any means, but also not comparable arguments either.
Once you get good it's easy to become pretentious. That's what this whole video feels like.
I had basically the same thought and was trying to see if anyone else thought it. Cheers.
Of course there are exceptions, and anyone can make through and of the Souls games if they have a friend/guide, but Bloodborne & DS2 offer a different flavor of the combat system & healing & damage mechanics that have the chance to align with some players that would've bounced off DS1 or Demon Souls. I totally understand people not immediately getting that insight from Hbomb's video because his style of presentation can be a bit grating at times.
Didn't hbomberguy make fun of Matthew for using a shield and lock on though, basically saying git gud himself
@@runalsingh1863 That wasn't the point of what he was saying. He wasn't "making fun" of Matthew, he was essentially pointing out that Matthew had learned mechanics incorrectly and then made that the game's fault. Matthew was accusing a system as being bad in a scenario that it wasn't really meant to be used, but also Harris was pointing out that this was likely also because of his experience in playstyle in Dark Souls and Demon Souls.
Essentially, he wasn't saying Matthew NEEDED to change his playstyle, or "get gud", but more that his arguments as to why Dark Souls 2 was a worse game had to do with his unwillingness to play the game the "correct" way for these encounters - blaming the game for his misunderstanding of the mechanics that would best suit the encounter.
While I would argue that not using lock on is better in the encounters Matthew was bitching about, Harris never said that he was "wrong" for playing that way. All he said was that it was wrong to blame the game for his CHOICE to play that way - essentially akin to blaming the game because you decided to do a no estus run and you are dying a lot.
@@thestorygiver6217 you have restored some faith in my hope that people are able to be competent in media analysis.
I thought the video was a satire with those recommended videos, but it's just not self-aware
No matter what you have to agree that Slashy Souls is by far the best game in the SoulsBorne franchise.
this is the ultimate truth
DragonGodMillionare No Lords of the Fallen is the best Souls game bitch. :D
YOU GO TOO FAR
Lords of the Fallen was immensely boring. At least DkS2 was fun.
Nioh is quite good though, looking forward to Team Ninja's stuff.
If you're more of a casual gamer, then Nioh should be right up your alley.
I love how the video says that if Harris could just dodge or block all of the damage and then he wouldn't need life gems then goes on to complain about hit box issues and getting hit when your not supposed too
"if you don't include points that contradict with what you're saying, you win!"
*proceeds to do exactly this*
🤦♂️
But ... i-frames were tied to a stat in DS2?
And the hit boxes are well known to be the worst of the series??
@@numberjuan5837 yea so level your stats.
Yea that has a lot to do with the fact that the Dark Souls 2 hitboxes are the worst in the series, which is because the hitboxes are not accurately tailored to the models of the game. Regardless of how good your are at any of the games in the series, unreliable hitboxes are objectively flawed and make it harder to play the game, even if you're good with timing in general. In order to dodge reliably in DaS2, you have to keep in mind that the models are unreliable thus forcing you to develop reflexes tailored specifically for this game because you have to factor in the flaws. There are also plenty of examples of this all over the internet and RUclips in general, so if you're not finding them then you're not looking.
@@numberjuan5837 Firstly unless fromsoft releases the source code you can't objectively measure how bad hitboxes are, you can only base them on your anecdotal experiences, Ive personally experienced more hitbox bullshittery in ds1 than ds2. And as for your first point youre really going to need to explain how that counters OP's claim on the video's hypocrisy of saying Hbomb just needs to not get hit while complaining about getting hit.
literally hbomb never said that the dragon I heides tower in sotfs was an improvement, he just said how it was ironic that originally the dragon rider had no dragons to ride and in sotfs its ironic the dragon was directly outside the old dragonslayer's bossroom
While explaining improvements to the base game
@@cheetoh3149 I just know you have the smelliest aroma
stefan molineux, styxhexandhammer and mister metokur on the subscribe box.... oh boy here we go
True I’m glad this guy doesn’t upload videos anymore 🌚
This guy likes Stefan Molineux? No wonder I found his arguments so unconvincing and smug.
A beautiful trifecta of subscriptions
Makes sense why his review is so reactionqry
was looking for this comment, hope this guy has moved on from those type of people
I like dark souls 2 because of fashion souls
"Try tongue but hole"
And gesture souls
@@jackwelchel3210 "Amazing chest ahead"
You are the culture of the entire world condnsed in a single comment
I think you've fundamentally misunderstood a lot of the arguments that you're retorting against.
"It isn't fun getting killed while healing."
Dark Souls 2 health bar having the slowest regeneration than it's two counter parts until you level ADP: "👀"
when you were talking about blighttown, he was referring to how the design of enemies has to be accomodated from both directions.
Which is still a bs argument
Which is dumb, because to ascend therough blight town you're supposed to use the water wheel
@@jackwelchel3210 Pretty much, nearly every argument Hbomber made was just so far reaching where points like this have no links.
@@jackwelchel3210 i personally like ds2 more then the rest of the series
@@skycrafter2042 which is valid! DS2 is not a bad game, but it is not perfect. A defense on dark souls 2 could be made, but hbomb should not be the one to do it. Hbomb did such a bad job imo.
ngl man, you sound a bit salty in this one.
you have some valid points here and there, but this video definitely suffers from an unnecessary amount of salt.
@Midas What's hyper gay is judging someone's arguments by what their pfp is and referring to them in meme-form. That, and getting mad.
@Midas "You're a commie because you don't agwee with me". Fuck off, larper.
@@SSD_Penumbra yikes
He could be a bit nicer but honestly if you watched hbomb’s video its pretty hard to not get annoyed by the guys smugness
@@BotBoy-un3pz That's the thing. HBomber doesn't come across as smug to me. This vid comes across as more smug, if anything
>Subscriptions: Stefan Molyneux
Yeah, no thanks, have fun measuring skull sizes though dude.
I wonder if he still watches channels like that 💀
The series has come to an end and within the month instead of admiring the great things the series as a whole has done, all the fans are at each other's throats... kind of petty.
part for the course for the dark souls community from what I can tell
Seems that way really sad, we should be celebrating what they achieved not picking bits that we hate, they made one of the most inattentive series of this generation kind sad to see it getting ripped apart.
All we can hope is someone to create a bs theory on how all the from software games are linked, somehow with King's field being within the age of fire, Bloodborne is the new painting, and Demon souls is the dream world of the Moon Presence who lives in the Hunter's dream.
furyberserk You know I can actually see BloodBorne being the painting though, that's a pretty good idea! (Seriously)
Madnlooney JR Or theyre addressing points with gopd arguments against the bad ones. Why do you feel that we cant talk about this shit? If anything, fucking Hbomber is the guy that threw the first shots for literally no reason other than the fact people didnt like ds2 as much as any other souls game. This guy attacks him too but makes good arguments regardless against hbombers. Stop being so babyish mate :/
Yeah I dunno man. One thing I didn't like about Hbomb's vid (which raised some interesting points and I find it easy to take what he said as just his opinion so not really provable objectively or not) was the way he fixated on Matthewmatosis, which made the video close to weirdly personal at times and obscured his arguments (I also think he laid into DS1 too much for a DS2 vid, but anyway). It spoiled the whole thing for me. And unfortunately I feel you're doing basically the same thing and any arguments you're making here are too layered with snark and salt to be taken in good faith. Sorry man.
Also, for what it's worth, that bit about bosses you can face as your first boss... The Last Giant, The Pursuer, Dragonrider, Old Dragonslayer, Royal Rat Vanguard, The Rotten, and Najka (if you grab the fragrant branch from the Gutter). And you acknowledged the Shrine of Winter but yeah theoretically Twin Dragonriders or Darklurker can be your first boss too (though that would be kind of insane and I don't know if anyone would really do it).
Bear in mind the Gutter is barred because of the drop, so you either need a lot of Vigor, a cat ring, or both. The Pursuer is a 1 time fight, Royal Rat Vanguard/Rotten/Najka are all barred from the same limitations as the Gutter. Realistically, Dragonrider, Old Dragonslayer, and the Last Giant are the first bosses you can fight unless you want to farm an obnoxious amount of souls. In Dark Souls 1, bosses you can fight off the bat are Gargoyles, Taurus Demon, Stray Demon, Quelaag, Moonlight Butterfly, Pinwheel. And if you farm for 20,000 souls, akin to farming for the silvercat ring, Sif. And if you count a jump to lower undead Burg, Capra Demon. And if you count exploits, you can glitch in to Sen's without ringing either bell.
The point is, if you try to compare the open world viability of DS1 to DS2, DS1 will always come out on top, because it is designed to be that way. You can go to the catacombs, you can go to darkroot, you can go to New Londo, you can go to burg, and you can go to Blighttown. You can go to all these areas immediately as you start your journey because the world is beautifully connected to itself without limitation, which is big, because DS2 can be argued to be open, but it's always with limitations such as the silvercat ring or the stupid 1m soul memory gimmick to get around a pile of god damn rubble which the fated king is too weak to climb over.
Sure, but I mean, I think the "quote unquote 'first boss'" example was inherently bad when talking about world design, which was kinda why I went for it specifically. Certainly it's pretty unrealistic to go to the Gutter for your "first boss", but you can very quickly kite Dragonrider off a cliff and go down the Gutter in like 3 minutes (and get the fragrant branch if you wan to go that way - or in Scholar, use the souls instead to buy a fragrant branch from Melentia... I haven't tested if that's quicker). The point I was trying to make is that reducing it to a numbers game isn't a very good point, because there's more to world design freedom than "which boss you can face first", especially when the bosses he's talking about aren't even the literal first boss. I think both Hbomb and Mitch got stuck on trying to compare the two games in silly ways rather than focusing on how the world design may or may not complement each game's pacing/progression/build variety/etc. As an example, the openness of Dark Souls 2 may exist but it almost certainly wants you to venture to the forest first (to learn a major part of Vendrick and Drangleic's story) and that's the most obvious, level appropriate path to go. There's room to critique the game based on things like this rather than cheap shots about how it does or doesn't better its predecessor, and I don't like both videos since they do that a lot. Surely with a number of Soulsborne games under our belt we can talk about them as their own beasts now.
Skatin' Tango I disagree. No fucking person, on their first run, would run into any boss other than heide tower of flame, last giant, or pursuer. The game LITERALLY leads you to these three bosses and if you went anywhere else on the first run.... What the actual fuck lol
Benjamin Ordaz I disagree. What they did was make it easier and more accessible through healing items. No new player would buy the cat ring other than to go in the pit. Not only that, but the game designs you to play other areas first before doing the cat ring. Also note, you still have to kill the guy in heide's flame as the first or 2nd boss before proceeding to the pirate boss. Seriously, if youre a new player, you are not going to the gutter as your first boss. The same argument can be made with Dark Souls 1 as the catacombs is barred by deadly skelly wellies so you arent encouraged to go that way, but you can. The only real boss that has the same "locked" at the beginning is Sif and even then, it's only one boss that is "locked" away, for good reason, as this shouldnt be your first boss either. In DS2 you technically could kill bosses like the royal rat vanguard but like sif, he's also locked away by the cat ring.
Idk what argument youre trying to make here, but ds1 DOES offer more bosses as a first boss. DS2 has less "first" bosses because it was designed linearly while ds1 connectivity allowed or rather encouraged players to abandon one path to go to another, a tactic I used for ds2 if I ever got stuck. Ds2, while linear, lets you do the same, but the number of ways you can go is limited if you are a more new player.
what did you expect from a "response"? that he goes and does not mention the guy he is responding to once?
You implied that his video was smug and proceeded to be twice as smug as he was.
And, even if you don’t like his sense of humour, most of Hbomberguy’s smugness or rudeness is a jokey act to make it entertaining, whereas this video just seems full of genuine salt.
You made some great points and arguments in this video and I feel the same for a lot of them but I really think that you shouldn't be this insulting or else you'd come across as really salty and you points less respektable.
One nitpick: Haris didn't say it was hard to know when a parry was successfully executed, but that it was difficult to tell if you were positioned correctly. He was mainly talking about backstabbing and extended it to all repostes.
thats becuz it takes actual skill to parry and backstab in elden souls, not so much in bb, and thats why bomber doesnt like elden souls as much and resorts to making shit up about the other games to feel better about bb.
@@AhmadAlmilli exactly
10:35 That wasn't (from what I understood) what he was trying to say boyo. He was trying to say that similar to the time bending that allows for phantom summoning, this world and location bending provides a surreal experience. Granted, this is not for everybody but I do prefer it.
Aside from spending the whole video making obvious jabs at hbomberguy, you went against your sarcastic rule that you state at the start. I just watched the source video recently and you miss out on a bunch of argument points that were brought up to help your point. I dont like ds2 and I didnt agree with a lot of Harris' points, but in your words; 'he wins,' because of your hyporcisy and tone.
Actually Mauler wins, he made a 10 hour video series responding to hbomberguys video. And its great.
@@coredeadman5980 respectful disagree. He says hbomberguy was only opinion and then proceeds for 10 hours of opinions.
@@NymphieJP well no, hbomberguy made statements that were sometimes opinions, sometimes opinions that were stated as facts. Most of them had little to no valid arguments/proof.
Mauler took these statements and critiqued them / gave contra-statements. But he used actual arguments and proof. Thats the scientific method. You know that everything is basically just an opinion. Facts are just Opinions that have so much proof that it has to be the truth. So maulers arguments and statements have better proof and reasoning ---> Mauler is right ----> until somebody comes who has even more evidence for another thesis. Thats how the scientific method works and is the reason we know so much about our World and its Physics etc..
@@coredeadman5980 wow that's an idiotic interpretation of the scientific method. What you are describing is rhetoric and who is more rhetorically proficient on an opinion or disagreement. The scientific method is about testing hypotheses in a way that is repeatable. There is no way a 10 hour critique of an hour long video essay about opinions between the superiority of different games in a series even approaches anything close to science.
@@lb52person69 no each Statement and counter statement can be tested and evaluated. As an example the statement: "the earth is flat" is idiotic and has no evidence that can be taken serious. The statement "The Earth is an sphere" has plenty of proof and is therefore better. You can apply the same principle to any argument that isnt just based on opinions which includes most of maulers/hbomberguys arguments.
Being rhetorically proficient has nothing to do with the actual substance of an argument
the more I listen to you quoting Harris, the more I think that you watched a 1 hour shitpost ...
trust me, its bad
It's not THAT bad
Not great though
Oh, he did. He very much did. I skipped through the video and all points he makes are plain bullshit.
I mean he says that you can't kill 3 of the 4 lords without the lordvessel is bullshit design in ds1..... And goes praising the king doors which you can only pass if you have the ring on..... It's the same thing?
It was. Much of the video was inconsistent. For example his point about "play conditioning" would be good. If he didn't shoot it in the foot with other statements. For example in the video when criticizing Matthew Matosis' criticism he says that people are playing the game wrong and blaming the game, but his point with play conditioning is that if someone is playing the game wrong it is the game's fault. He refutes his own point. This is why we write a script people, or at least bullet points. You would see that if you had a list saying.
-People blame game for their playing it wrong.
-game is better 'cause it's easier.
-game is better because it's encouraging,
-game is better because it's more linear.
-it is the game's fault if people play it wrong.
That is besides that fact that he does some deceptive things. Like when he's talking about parrying. He says that Dark Souls 1 has a bad parrying sound, but doesn't play the sound, not even in the background. He then plays the sound from Dark Souls 2. He makes a comparison, without giving the viewer a chance to make the comparison themselves. For many things in games that would be fair, but not a single sound, especially that short.
five minutes in and I can tell the rest of the video is gonna be just "get gud scrub"
I never trust a twenty minute response video to a hour long video. Turns out that was a good call.
I cant understand why someone would ever do 18 videos of 1hour each Just to crying about how bad is him At Rolling :')
Then you probably loved the 8+ hour response
It's been 5 years. Hopefully that bomberman guy got better at making thumbnails
this is such an emotional response is v hard to take it seriously
Lmfao finding this video 4 years later and reading all the comments making it sound like hbomb personally attacked them.
Beautiful
Right? I want to hop into some of these comments and ask where the scary bomberguy touched them.
@@SuspiciousLiquid I’ve been here since this all started and I can answer that question: he said the game wasn’t that bad.
If you don’t understand why this perfectly explains why they got so angry at him; I’ve been in this community since this all started and played ds2 sotfs for the first time as my last souls game bc of this drama. I played it expecting it to be horrible and frankly all I learnt was that the souls community was most likely lying about the game bc it wasn’t identical to ds1. They react violently to any positive reviews of ds2 and I personally have had like 3 or 4 accounts banned from the ds subreddits bc I defended the game (the reasoning for the ban is “maybe you could’ve dodged this if you levelled adp lol” and then I’m muted afterwards). So in a sense; yeah hbomb did personally attack them bc they’re just that shallow
Anyone else hear the quiver of rage in his voice every time he said ‘my dude’?
No
yes
WOW, you complain about him doing double wielding and focusing on parrying and treating different fights with different strategies, but say he's taking the easier way out?
I get your point that you CAN circle strafe, but to say that's the then comparatively harder (well your context says that) WOW.
WOW, you might be surprised to find that adding caps lock WOW multiple times make you look like a guy who sniffs his own farts. But the point he was making that you clearly missed during one of your whiffs was that Hbomberguy was simultaneously acting like Matthew was some scrub lord for using shields while also himself complaining about limited estus making the game to hard to play, so he needs infinite healing items on the way to the boss because of his holier-than-though way of playing the game being the only option in his mind. His lack of skill while limiting his own playstyle somehow mean that dark souls 1 is worse and Matthewmatosis is a worse player than he is
@@Spirelord122 lol what are you doing responding to a 3 year old comment. Weird replies aside Dark Souls in considerably easier if you just run in circles and hold up the shield. Idk why you had to go on a whole sentence and a half tangent about fart sniffing to prove your point but Hbomberguy was just arguing the point that the game is more fun without the shield. I don't understand how arguing on reasons why you like or dislike a game and what experiences formed that opinion can come off as pretentious. If anything you acting exactly how you think Hbomberguy is acting especially with bashing his playstyle and making comments like "His lack of skill". It's an internet video about a guy saying he actually liked a game most didn't like, grow up dude.
@@Blazeburn17 while a game being easier is definitely arguable, saying that Hbomberguy was proving the game is "more fun" playing without a shield isn't really defensible, especially since he talked down to him about the way matthew found the game to be "more fun". saying things like "aww, bless" and insinuating he hasn't learned the 'correct' way to play the game isn't defending fun. its riding a high horse. he then turns around and argues that his own chosen play style makes the game too hard, and therefore the healing system in DS1 is insufficient and infinite farmable healing between bonfires is required and makes the game objectively better and somehow "more fun". These are poor arguments and anytime he doesn't make a declarative statement of his point being solely his personal opinion, he tries to tout his biases and personal preferences as some proven truth. the problem most people have with Hbomberguy's video (and by extension the problem I had with your comment) is that there are multiple viable ways to play the game, and it comes down to what a player themselves finds fun. but you cant make arguments against a certain play style being correct because its the harder option while simultaneously complaining about difficulties that arise simply because of your chosen play style. and the fartsniffing comments were still warranted. WOW
Wow, 1:31 I can't believe HBomberguy's real, actual, birth certificate name is not "HBomberguy" and that he instead has the human name "Harris." Thank you for this exposé it was eye opening
Beyond Iron Keep's controversial placement, what other levels are "nonsensical" in dark souls 2 as far as connecting to each other? In your opinion that is. Every other area is land-locked with only two places that are complete dead ends (Black Gultch and The Lost Bastille)
And in your first point you forget to say ""In my opinion" this is one of the dumbest things...." It is Harris's OPINION that the lack of lifegems meant it was less fun. Your explanation is YOUR OPINION to why you had fun regardless of no lifegems. I know Souls fans hate this but not everybody wants their videogames to be a slog. And lifegems is a pretty good compromise. But then when have Souls fans been a fan of compromise. The rebuttal to his example is while also smug kind of pointless. It's a roundabout way of saying you should have got gud and doesn't really disprove the actual point of his example. So putting it another way how does a restricted health pool make the game *more fun*. The whole breaking down of damage points is just numbers, sorry unless you can correlate the inversion of damage points to fun had what's your point?
Harris explains why he thinks Shrine of Amana is good level design. What's your argument against this, "no it's not, it's a slog". Not much else to say about that. And after your detailed reasoning to explain why it's not and further more the level design makes it a slog you say you question whether Harris is saying all this in good faith. Good faith or not he made a relatively detailed argument. You don't. And really does it matter if it's in good faith?
And can I presume from here on out when you mention something in the lore or some reference between Dark Souls and a film/comic/book etc "You just thought you were so smart to have noticed this reference." Frankly this whole bit made you sound a bit petty. Ultimately if I see something in a Dark Souls game, some reference or easter egg or inside joke I feel momentarily happy with myself and smart. I'd go as far as to bet most people feel that way too. But god forbid you dare have that come across in a video. It's almost like slowly explaining how estuses work to somebody who probably already knows.
Anyway I usually like your stuff but the title Smug Souls I'm still not sure if that's a reference to you or Harris. If you then cool, I like that you own it. If Harris, oh dear. If both then you nailed it.
I think the word you are missing here is "accessibility" I understand the gripes about design choices such as disjointed realms and soul gems, but what needs to be understood is the underlying reason behind all of these new features. Accessibility.
Warping for something like an agonizing walk from Anor Londo to Queelag never needs to happen ever again; or making a risk on an attack doesn't need to feel like a do or die experience, you are allowed to experiment with soul gems by your side. Everyone's experience in this game is different, the developers saw this and implemented designs to enhance the adventure. Did it make it easier? For some sure, but it opened tons of new strategies and content for people that may have missed it. Parrying is a great example hbomberguy makes in his video. It widened the door towards parrying for all players.
This probably was not your intent Mitch, but I think this video misses the mark on what hbomberguy tried to achieve and instead comes across a bit condescending. Even malicious at times towards him. Instead of creating an insightful criticism it instead says to me: Get Gud.
So, Mitch, Imma be real honest here. I didn't think Hbomberguy's criticisms were particularly valid, and I believe your responses are all fine and make much more sense. Now, what I do have a problem with is your tone, man. If you keep "insulting" the person whom you disagree with, that'll only lend weight to their argument. It's not a dealbreaker, but it doesn't earn you any points either. A calmer aproach to this video could have honestly helped your arguement a lot.
hes making a point. If you saw Hbomberguys video, you know he used the same condescending tone all throughout to make his argument. Mitch is simply trying to prove here how obnoxious that can be, and since hbomberguy was the first one to start it, there is nothing he can do about this, he just has to suck it up and be willing to take it as much as he dishes it out
Welp, I saw this video fist (as a matter of fact I didn't even watch the other one), and I was pretty certain that Mitch didn't just try to be an asshole. Apart from that, this is not a proper debate being held here, but first and foremost these videos are entertainment. If you can chip in that one little wee bit to entertain your viewership more, why not just go for it? I personally enjoyed to hear Mitch talk with actual emotion behind his points, as opposed to just flat and blunt arguments. Again, this is not a proper debate, but entertainment.
You think insulting people diminishes an argument? Not really. Depends on how it is done.
I somewhat agree with this. I don't think insulting makes lends weight to the insulted. It rather just diminishes Mitch L as a character. I generally like Mitch, and I agree with his points in this video. I just find it a bit ridiculous to make a video in this tone, as much of this is actually a matter of opinion - as the title of the video even says. Questionable opinion or not. Still an opinion though.
TheMadsWitt It's to make a point, it really doesn't diminish Mitchell L's points, sorry.
I must have been super stoned when I subbed.. dunno what other video of yours I watched. I've watched Maulers entire series. It's nice to see a strong short form video.. good stuff!
“The spitters are gone after one kill! It sucks!”
But also
“The Gutter has five billion spitting statues. It’s so great and they even respawn!”
Yeeeeeeeeaaaaaaahhhhhh
Also
“The world design sucks. You can approach it forward and backwards!”
But also
“You can see the top of the windmill. There’s nothing above it, but you can climb a ladder inside the windmill into a giant lava level. That’s called interesting design!”
[Written as I go along...]
Something you forgot to mention about HBG's argument that lifegems complement estus by insuring you're not running out of them is that there was a perfect solution to that very problem in the game he decries in favor of DS2 : SHORTCUTS.
It doesn't matter if you ran out of healing on your way to the boss as long as you unlocked a quicker safer path from the bonfire to the boss that allows you to skip the area which drained you of your estuses.
I'm not going to pretend that all boss runs are fun in these games (that includes DS2) or mitigated enough by these shortcuts but it's still by far the most satisfying solution to that problem whereas lifegems is just an easy lazy brute-force fix to it.
Incidentally, you could also kindle bonfires in DS1, another brute-force way to mitigate the drain on your healing.
Absolutely agree about the nonsensical world design of DS2. Since it's a roll of the dice when it comes to what you're going to find behind magical elevators and silly long corridors, whatever surprise you get from the silly transitions has no build-up to it. And without build up, I don't find satisfaction in the journey I take. Nor do I find it mysterious, especially given how bland most DS2 levels are. Going from one gamey and bland place through a senseless transition to another gamey bland place isn't nearly as exciting as seeing something in the distance, wondering what it is then making your way there.
That "play-conditionning" bit was puzzling indeed. Especially since he decried DS1 for pushing you to play defensively which fucked some people over as the game went on, which is something I agree with ! .... except my first game was DS2 and I did end up playing too defensively. So I guess DS2 didn't condition me well enough to play the way I should have.
Another element of praising DS2's story over DS1's is forgetting how much more stories there are in DS1. Beyond the overarching state of the world, you have Solaire, Lautrec, Siegmeyer, Rhea, etc, etc. Most of DS2's characters simply don't go anywhere or do anything. They have no stories. Even in terms of background character, there are fewer that seem truly interesting. The Ivody King, perhaps, Raime and Velstadt.
To top it off, the visual design of DS2 doesn't intrigue nearly as much and ends up goofy so often, with gamey barren levels connected thoughtlessly. The Iron King is a character that I can't take seriously, because all I see related to him is completely ridiculous. It doesn't urge the player to wonder as to what you're seeing, as to what is going on. Even when suddenly, something interesting appears, like the Shrine of Amana, that interest is then thwarted by how the challenge has clearly overtaken immersion as a priority from the developpers.
I hoenstly went in HBG's video expecting better from him, because I do like DS2 quite a lot, I do think it has a lot of legitimate qualities that surpass all the other Souls game. I'm all for praising DS2's achievements and every steps in the right direction it took for the serie, but HBG spend so much time praising the missteps that his video ended up rather pointless to me.
So if you were to make a video listing the pros/cons of DS2, I'd watch it for sure.
Humanity takes like 2 seconds and heals you to literally full hp in one single thing, are you just going to ignore that? And then say that everyone has 99 lifegems that's an unfair analysis.
And let's not forget Twin humanities (which split up into normal humanities) and fire keeper souls!
HBomber guy doesn’t consider humanity a source of HP hue hue hue.
Orthane yeah, but humanities are not nearly as cheap as gems, wether you farm it or wether you buy it, and especially early game, they are far more useful to obtain more estus or to get a summon than they are to heal yourself.
Hence they don’t break the balance nearly as much, and although I disagree with Hbomberguy that they shouldn’t be considered as a source of healing in general terms, I do think that in terms of analysing how the different sources of healing represent your mistake allowance, and how greatly they expand it, it’s indubitable that humanities are entirely different from either estus or gems, hence why they are generally not included in this particular way.
99 lifegems is actually something many players can end up with if they spend their leftover souls on gems after leveling up in Majula. This point only means the healing system "can be" broken, not that it will be for everyone. It matters, though, because as a game designer, you don't want players circumventing the challenges by gaining access to too many healing resources without having to earn that advantage. I would argue that from best to worst:
1) DS3 balances healing the best since it doesn't give you access to infinite healing in any way. You heal relatively quickly but are still rendered immobile for a second, forcing you to find a tactical moment. Embers can only be used to heal once per life, and you can only carry 1 divine blessing at a time, which are both great decisions in terms of balancing the game. Estus shards are an actual good addition that carried over from DS2 since they reward exploration while not making you overpowered.
2) DS1 has less well-balanced healing, but the other healing items are rarer, take longer to pop, can't be bought for cheap, aren't sold in an infinite amount, and at least make you work to farm them until you get to the chasm of the abyss that is. Rite of Kindling is a lot of work with the reward of 20 estus, and it balances that potentially overpowered 20 heals by making you sacrifice humanity at each new bonfire to be able to maintain that advantage. You need a decent amount of time to get a heal off in any case, which does a lot to negate the ability to heal many times. Early in the game, your healing options will be very limited, as farming is very inefficient until you reach the Depths. The surplus of humanity becomes a problem for balance later on.
3) Demon's Souls has a big issue with all the types of grass being available up to 99. You can find them in the levels and purchase them, but they aren't cheap. Farming for them is pretty boring and slow, but unfortunately, you can get way more grass than you should probably have early on if you dedicate a bit of time to it. They do take a heavy toll on the difficulty level from a game design standpoint. If you can farm them up, you will be able to steamroll most levels in the game. The only positive of this system is that it takes long to heal, requiring at least tactical skill to get it off.
4) DS2 is by far the most unbalanced because its healing items are really plentiful and cheap to buy. Lifegems are not only common drops from several enemies, but they sell for so cheap that you can pretty easily max them out before you even come close to finishing the game. They take less time to pop than estus in any other game, while enemies and bosses are not any faster to balance this out, which reduces the element of skillful timing involved. The stacking effect and healing over time lets you tank a lot of damage without really needing to be careful or strategic. Combine that with the fact that you can use them while still moving, and you get an abusable and unbalanced healing system. If you want a challenge, try limiting yourself to only 10 lifegems, which is what the developers should have done in the first place. (I will say that I like the heal-over-time mechanic in theory, which Bloodborne has with special blood vials, but it balances that by limiting you to ONE of those. Having 99 is just ridiculous.)
And just for the hell of it- Bloodborne isn't well balanced per se, as you will often be able to heal through entire levels without running out of vials. It limits your on hand healing to 32 max blood vials if you're willing to sacrifice your rune slots and a maximum of two other special blood vials, but has a generally plentiful amount of vials to be picked up while traversing the levels to restock. They're easy to farm for, and generally, you won't run out unless you're throwing yourself at a boss again and again. But the high aggression of enemies and lack of heavy armor pose a consistent challenge regardless of the healing available to you. Healing is almost instant, but it pretty much needs to be in this game. You can so easily and quickly be killed by the enemies and bosses. I do like that you can be parried while healing. I don't really know how to fit it in with the ranking, it's just a different style of game design.
There's also three or four types of life gem, with different healing potential and speeds. This means the health calculated in this video is far less than the "True" value. Just something to be considered.
There are some cool ideas in dark souls 2, pursuer, water rising in sentry fight etc, but nothing beats the first half of dark souls 1, the feeling of terror the first time i went further and further down past the undead burg, the depths, and a blighttown and the feeling I got when i finally came back up to fire link was just the best
In addition to the five you listed (Taurus Demon, Quelaag, Pinwheel, Moonlight Butterfly and Sif), you can also face Gargoyles or Stray Demon as your first boss out of Asylum.
Dark souls 2 just had counter intuitive design throughout most of the game and it’s very frustrating in a BS way. I love all the souls games but DS2 is definitely my least favorite.
Bro, the Heide Drake isn't lazy design.
It's designed to show you the link between Lindelt and the Dragons.
A story-beat that is repeatedly reused - priest in the aerie, monk behind the painting, the Gargoyles are attempts at Iron Dragons and the Alonne Knights drop Monastery charms.
We can all agree on one thing: scholar of the first sin had more effort put into it then dark souls REMASTERED
They moved a bunch of enemies around and made the graphics closer to what was originally advertised. DS: Remastered may not have been vastly different from the original release, but given how little effort went into DS2 in general, I'd take the remaster ten times over.
Ulrich Weiss nah mate, Scholar of the first sin at least had quality of life changes that made it a mechanically better game than the original release, not just upscaling the graphics and fps like Remastered. And community wise, Scholar of the first sin has a bigger player base than the dying Remastered. Sorry not sorry 😐
@@casbinwat Weird. For quality of life changes, the hitboxes are still inconsistent at best and shit at worst, the netcode is a mess (like all of them), the movement is still awful, enemy placement and aggro range is still ridiculously cheap, the challenge can still be easily trivialized, and it's still just an utter slog to play through. Even if you whine about the Remaster, DS2 still has to at least meet the expectations set by the first game and it fails to do that. I've played through and completed multiple runs in every Soulsborne game and Sekiro, but DS2 is just awful back to front. If you can find enjoyment in it, more power to you, but it's the black sheep of the family for quite a few damn good reasons.
"Sorry not sorry".
@@1sleep2 You have failed to understand the point. The remaster may have been half-assed, but it's still better than SotFS (which only gave fans some of what was initially advertised). A half-assed remaster of a good game is still better than a low tier rerelease of something that was garbage in the first place. If you personally disagree, that's fine. I never said the remaster was a good remaster. I said SotFS is still shit in comparison. I reiterate: DS2 is the black sheep for a reason.
Now, if I have to recycle what I said previously in order to respond to you, then I'll consider this conversation effectively over.
I felt the original enemy placement in Dark Souls II pre SotFS made way more sense lore wise.
ALRIGHT LETS DO THIS!
3:44 - Your response to Harris' pointing out that a cheap attack from an enemy off-screen will impact the entirety of his run to the next bonfire is "don't take damage in the first place"? Your first counter argument boils down to "git gud".
4:18-4:45 - In Harris' video, at around the 4 minute mark, he discusses the calculated and challenging nature of finding a good time and place to heal mid-fight. He also specifically mentions that the punishing nature of whiffing a heal is less fun for NEW players and goes on to say that (in Demon's Souls at least) veteran players can become so learned in the timings of the game that they can become nearly unkillable by abusing down-time in fights to heal. You again boil all of this down in to, "you say dying while healing isn't fun". Yes, he does, but he says a whole lot more to clarify that statement mate. Hell you repeat half of the stuff he says about total life pool and healing being a calculated risk.
6:18 - you are for sure definitely fucked at some points in DS. Judging by exactly how many DS related videos you create, I take it you play a LOT of DS. I don't. I've played DS 1-3 and enjoyed them, but I'm not slavishly devoted to them. I didn't know what the red tearstone ring was. I haven't memorised every cheap enemy waiting around a corner. I don't know every enemy's attack pattern before even initiating the fight. Sometimes I get frustrated or bored while playing and run through to the next area, rather than cautiously approach, checking my corners. So being on a tiny sliver of health with no estus halfway between two bonfires means a death for me. And I get that's part of the challenge, but its still exactly as Harris says - defeating and not entirely fun. Writing off a fairly valid criticism with 'equip an item and deal with it' is again effectively you just saying "git gud".
As a side note, I distinctly remember DS II being more difficult than DS. Even with life gems, encounters were more frequently stacked in numbers against you, regular enemies seemed to do more damage, shields, magic and leveling up weren't as broken. A challenging game is one thing, an unfairly difficult and punishing game is another. Upping the difficulty in DS II without supplementing player survivability in some way would run the risk of making it un-fun and potentially unplayable.
And as a side-side note, depending on the size of life gem you use, it takes either 9, 19 or 29 seconds to gain the full effects of the gem. So if you're on a tiny sliver of health against an enemy that can two-shot you and you use an Old Radiant Lifegem, you've still got a solid 15-20 seconds of being in one-hit range. Its not like the the enemy stops for tea and allows you to heal.
And you also move on from section 1 of Harris' video to section 2 at this point, not even bothering to address the tactical uses of Lifegems that Harris brings up or the fact that he acknowledges the shifting of balance caused by Lifegems, but that he feels its a positive shift and not a game-breaking one.
7:10 - Harris makes valid arguments but that doesn't make his argument valid. Classic.
7:20 - Anecdotal evidence with no footage to back it up. Responding with, "I did it a certain way therefore your experience is invalid" ranks among the dumbest things you've said in this video, including the "valid arguments dont make arguments valid" point from 10 seconds ago. Hey Mitch L, my dude, I couldn't beat any enemies in DS II by circle strafing, because their lock-on and tracking mechanics had been improved by such a large degree since DS. That's your point countered there, by conjecture and baseless anecdote. Right? That's how formal argument works?
7:44 - needless personal attack (don't worry, I do those all the time so STRAP IN!)
8:14 - Will admit that Harris effectively uses the "git gud" solution at this point in his video, which I disapprove of. However you write off the very valid point that learning enemy timings and how to dodge is an ENORMOUS part of the souls series' core mechanics, and that learning to do this will enhance your gameplay more than exploiting poor tracking to get cheap backstabs, with "yeah but sometimes there are bugs so your entire point is wrong". Also, you point out that Harris use of "git gud" isn't intellectually honest after using "git gud" yourself twice already. Here, have some irony blinkers, I bought them just for you.
8:52 - "prepare to see a man try to prove that the interconnectedness of DS 1 is bad because you only have to kill the toxic spitters once"
WHOOO BOY you're really scraping at the gaping void that was once the bottom of the barrel, eh? For a start, you're disingenuously representing his entire argument as to why structured, linearly focused encounters work better than encounters that have to be balanced no matter what level you're at or what direction you're coming from. Which in my opinion is totally valid. It's a big problem with a lot of open world games, lack of control over they player's progression limits the difficulty curve you can implement, as the player might start at the totally wrong end of the curve.
Secondly, Harris argues that the disconnected nature of DS II is superior to the interconnectedness of DS I. NOT that DS I is bad. Quotes from Harris' video, "Dark Souls' interconnectedness is fun and creates a interesting sense of being in a real place". "Blight Town is made more interesting for the fact that it connects [insert lots of names here]". So again, you're being deliberately mis-representative. For shame.
9:20 - Comparing apples and oranges, Harris is criticising the base game as it comes, fresh out of box. You immediately defend a modded version of the game. That's pretty damn close to a strawman if I've ever seen one. What, couldn't come up with a defence for the unmodded game? What if you're on console, and cant install mods? Dumb intro statement is dumb.
9:40 - you're conflating exploration with, as Harris calls it, needless walking. Harris at no point in his video calls the exercise of initially exploring a new location, or finding necessary pickups such as keys, "needless walking". You explicitly lie here. Bad boy. Harris' idea of needless walking encapsulates scenarios like; once you've cleared an area and gotten all the necessary items, you then have to walk all the way back through an area you're now done with and any enemy encounters are both repetitive and aren't as well structured as you're now approaching them from behind. Or if you want to challenge a certain boss but haven't found the nearest possible Bonfire, or if indeed you just want to go back to a bonfire. Lies make baby Jesus cry. And, for future reference, hamper the integrity of your entire argument. Like a magic trick, if you see someone flash, the illusion is ruined. In creating a formal argument, once you give in to logical fallacies or outright lies, the rest of your argument is moot because you've established that you don't care about the rules of argument nor even arguing correctly, just about APPEARING to be correct.
10:40 - I could take or leave this. Again, not a die hard souls fan, don't really give a shit if the world is connected or not. I think you both have good points and bad points here. DS I is cool because if you can see something, you can go there eventually. I think that's great world design. DS II is cool because it isn't constrained by having everything in one place all the time. It embraces more retro-gaming style world design, where a building can be bigger on the inside because its a separately rendered world. This lends itself to more creative freedom in level design. Which is also a good thing. Why do we have to have one be superior to the other? Oh, right, fandom.
Harris initially doesn't do a great job articulating this, as he does literally say "the sense of mystery this creates", which yeah to me seemed like grasping at straws. He does go on to articulate somewhat better reasons for preferring DS II, which regardless of merit, you have tactically ignored in favour of again just kind of being a dick.
11:37 - "how is DS II or even Bloodborne different from this". They're not. Harris doesn't state that they're not. He simply states that DS I isn't as "open" as people claim it is. Which you seem to be tacitly agreeing to here.
12:44 - "how are these the same thing, Harris?" They're not. He never said they were the same thing. He explicitly states that DS is structured around setting up specific circumstances to test a specific skill set. So in one circumstance combat and in another, platforming. Did you even watch his video? You're either incredibly thick or consistently dishonest. Both are bad.
12:53 - "Somehow forces you to take them outside". Timestamp 37:37 in Harris video, "If you WANT you can lead them out on to the battlements [...] the player is encouraged to know where they want to fight". Harris goes on to discuss how you can either engage three knights in the room they spawn in, giving them a numbers advantage, or lead them out onto the single-file staircase where the 1v1 fight is easier, but the risk of falling off to an insta-death is higher, and also an archer is there to add a peripheral danger. And from this you interpreted, "forced to take them outside"? Re-iterating the point above that you either didn't actually watch Harris' video, are incredibly stupid, or are just making shit up at this point.
13:07 13-17 - you make the point that you weren't susceptible to ranged damage, and then say you fought them in the room you found them in. Harris explains that, in the room they spawn in, you AREN'T susceptible to ranged damage. The ranged damage is a condition of luring them out onto the battlements, to engage in more manageable 1v1 fights. See previous two paragraphs for insults to your intelligence, please and thank you. Gonna further break down how bullshit you are in this 10 second stretch though.
You're misunderstanding Harris' point. He's not commenting on whether luring the three knights out onto the battlements is easier, nor stating that you HAVE to do it one particular way. He's commenting that you CAN do it his way, or you CAN do it your way and that there are pros and cons to each. You've basically proven his point here, accomplishing the same goal in a different manner. And you're too fucking stupid to know it, hilarious.
And then, cherry on the bullshit cake, you state "I even backstabbed a couple [...] I thought DS II discouraged cheese strafing" WHILE SHOWING A VIDEO OF YOU DODGE ROLLING TO GET THE BACKSTAB. You didn't cheese strafe that enemy, you dodged, putting you in a position to backstab. THAT IS HARRIS' POINT! Not that backstabbing is inherently bad, but that you should have to earn it. Which you did. Is this a parody? I'm pretty sure this is a parody of a bad critique at this point.
13:43 - "both of which you can kill before engaging the sword wielding hollows". Again, missing the point. Harris argues that DS II is superior because you have the OPTION to engage the archers, whereas in DS I you are forced to. Stating that you can kill the archers in DS II or engage in an area they cant reach, which has its own supplementary difficulty factors, whereas in DS I its literally just "kill archer first or dodge archer the entire time". You counter this by saying that you can just....kill the archers first? Fan-fucking-tastic mate.
Calling it, parody of a bad critique, I'm done. I'm not watching the remaining six minutes of your video (as watching it simultaneously with Harris' and writing this takes a lot more than six minutes) because you've sufficiently demonstrated an inability to properly engage with the source material you're criticizing and anything further will likely be a rehash of what's come before. If the big twist reveal is that the preceding 14 minutes were all deliberately shit and your real, 100% infallible critique starts at 14:01 well that's too bad, don't lead in with 14 minutes of poorly executed shite. Bad critique is bad. Looking forward to your insightful response.
John Doe You watched this video alongside Bomberguy's? I'm surprised their combined smugness didn't melt your face off, Ark of the Covenant-style.
John Doe finally someone who watched Harris's video
Preach!
Old comment, but I felt compelled to reply to simply say, thank you! I was literally about to respond to Mitch point by point, in this fashion. Good thing I found your comment first. Good shit bro.
This is one of the most emotional and butt hurt videos I've ever seen from a legit content creator.
I agree, hbomberguys video is extremely emotional and butthurt.
@@loubloom1941 this one is too and the creator admitted it
I see the points you're making and you're right most of the time, but is it necessary to be this salty?
It's all a big meme
Mitch L salt everywhere
i want it on my food so yes
Doge HD He's not salty.
XYZsolution dude...he made a 20 min video just because someone shared an opinion he didn't agree with...I'd say there's some salt...
"just play perfectly and it's no problem" sure, by that logic we don't need a healing system at all
Not saying Harris' critique was perfect, but most of these points made here are "He said this was good, Really this?!?! what an idiot amirite?" Solid argument skills.... (that being said, I think there are some good counter points made here and think all three of these videos should be watched to enjoy how different people see this super polarizing game.)
As someone who never really liked Dark Souls 2, however much I wanted to like it, I was extremely interested to see Harris' video shed his own light on the game as I know a lot of people see 2 as their favourite and I wanted to better understand that viewpoint. However when the first point is why "Lifegems are awesome" I can't say I didn't immediately close the video.
Also Emerald Herald better than Gwynievere? Utter Heresy.
Haxalara's Heresy Lifegems are equivalent to Moon grasses from Demon's Souls I'm sorry they didn't fanservice dark souls 1 again for you, fucking deal with it. Bunch of babies.
I like your points on this topic.
You should do a detailed analysis of the three games.
Dark Souls 1, 2 and 3 (and maybe even Bloodborne's influences on Dark Souls 3).
His point about the toxic spitters was to illustrate that the levels weren't designed at a fundamental level to be backtracked through- making the interconnectdeness and backtracking not a particularly compelling part of game-play. He wasn't saying it wasn't a nice feature, his point was that the interconnectdness didn't substantial elevate the game play. And hes right - in every souls game, even though backtracking is often playable- its blatantly obvious the levels a designed meticulously and marvelously to be tackled in specific directions. Ambushes, item placement, light sources and subconscious visual cues are all tailored for the one direction run - its simply a fact. Does this make backtracking broken or completely pointless? No. But it does make it for the most point a pretty uncompelling, unnecessary addition and certainly not something that, when absent, to freak the fuck out over- as so many players did. About the only area i can think of that worked really well from multiple directions was cathedral ward in Bloodborne- mostly because of carefully designed enemy patrol patterns and placement that made them balanced and fun to tackle regardless of bearing.
I'm not exactly a fan of Hbomberguy but you are really reducing and simplifying his arguments here to fit your narrative. He's not arguing DS1 is garbage, hes arguing that the differences in the two aren't that big a deal or are interesting in their own way (e.g. more enemies makes for a DIFFERENT experience, not necessarily as WORSE experience), and for the most part hes pretty right.
Wish I could finish the hbomberguy's video as I think he had few interesting approaches to some of the criticisms but smug tone and flat out false information was too much for my taste.
Channel* not video
Video
"Flat out false information" like what, exactly?
Mephistophea you're fake news.
"The Gutter is fun"
Who needs sleep
Javier Martinez what Is sleep?
Your point at about 13 minutes is related to a misunderstanding about something. He was saying that the game ALLOWED you to decide to pull those knights out of the room they're in, and the design of the levels allowed you to make tactical decisions like that, while he thinks that the level designs in dark souls 1 and demon souls didn't allow for it as much.
One thing you definitely missed is how much he contradicts himself. He talks about how he dislikes that DkS1 makes you do certain things only 1 specific way to proceed, then praises DkS2 for doing the same thing.
0:15 seconds in and you already fucked up the gag by it showing you have already watched it, good job
It's almost as if people could enjoy a game for their own reasons... 🤔
11:41 You can actually fight the gargoyles first aswell by going through the Valley of Drakes with the master key, taking the elevator up to Darkroot Garden and basically backtracking that level to André.
I would like to see your pros and cons of all the souls games including bloodborne
brb I have an 80 minute video to watch first OwO
My favourite part is when speaks down to Matthew as a bad player for using shields, and then later does the same towards players that solo boss fights. "I SUMMON COS I HAVE FRIENDS OK FUCKING SOLO SCRUBS".
*notices bad arguments and contradictive arguments within his own statements on 80 minute defense*
OwO whats dis
My favorite part was when he criticized Matthew for playing the game wrong and blaming the game; only to later make his point about "play conditioning" that means it is the game's fault when someone plays it wrong.
The game conditions you to learn to NOT be dependent on shields, whats more, that shields get in the way most of the time, so he gives shit to Matthew not for being bad, but not learning the rather obvious as he was on the end game and still using a shield.
He gave shit to "solo scrubs" because the game also tells you implicitly you dont have to do that shit alone, by making some stuff UNNECESSARILY hard (even more by Dark Souls standarts) without summons, and those who dont is mostly because they are stubborn bastards. He gives them shit for that, not for being "scrubs", which is a fucking joke.
Harris gives these people shit not for going the easy/hard route, but for being too stupid/stubborn to play the game the way THE GAME ITSELF is telling you to, then blaming the game for being "flawed" because they dont know how to play the game. His arguments are everything but unconsistent.
If you guys had a minimal of logical reasoning and not just gaming knowledge youd notice this video is bullshit and Harris video is accurate 90% of the time.
Harris must not have gotten very far in Dark Souls 3, seeing as you cannot summon for Iudex Gundyr...
We can fight 5 different bosses after the initial boss in DkS1, true. When in souls history are we given similar choice?
In DkS2 you got a choice of 7 different bosses as the FIRST boss. Last Giant, Pursuer (on the roof), the Rotten, Scorpioness Najka, Royal Rat Vanguard, Old Dragonslayer and Dragonrider.
and 5 of them are complete shit! nice job B-team!
"Royal Rat Vanguard, Old Dragonslayer and Dragonrider" All bad, except for Dragonslayer but he was a test port to see if DS1 assets could move to the new engine properly so they kept it (read: it's literally a copy-paste fight with 2-4 modified attacks. Those attacks aren't new animations either. Every single one is a straight port with different effects and particles).
Next: Pursuer (on the roof). Not really /supposed/ to survive the encounter. It might be subjective but I think the intention of him dueling you there is to totally smash your pussy and send you straight back to the bonfire. His name and shit don't come up at all. If he didn't show up to guard the end of the level, he would just be considered a mini-boss. In fact, he shows up twice more (three times, if you count his clone in Drangleic castle) without his name showing up to duel you again. He's not a boss. He's a mini-boss that you can trigger now without music, or at the end of the level with music and his name at the bottom of the screen. You can call that a boss if you want. I call him a pathetic pushover who can't even fight me correctly with a clone AND a massive health/dmg buff.
Rotten requires cat's ring or a spell. Devs lock you straight out of the gutter until you go get that stuff. But feel free to show me a video of yourself just starting a new character and then jumping into the pit without fighting any bosses throughout the entire game yet. I legitamately don't know if that's possible but I have my reservations since the cat ring costs like a million souls. DS2 is my least favourite Souls game but the one I played the most. I'm a
god damned expert. There's no way to rack up enough souls for a Cat's
Ring without bosses or grinding (which is the stupidest way to play any
souls game).
Scorpioness Najka requires you to retrieve a Branch of some kind. Earliest I can think of getting it is just before the Salt Fortress but I think that requires at least 1 boss death.
I've speedran DS2 for about 200+ hours now so if there's a way to make Rotten my first boss without using a spell, then I'm all fucking ears but I think your definition of "First boss" is "there's no boss between me and him despite the item/soul/spell gate that's locking me out of reaching and fighting this boss first in a real world scenario."
+dad Not the point though. The point is the choice is there.
I'm not saying the choice is bad or even irrelevant. It's good. It's just that DS2 has bigger problems than the choice of boss order.
Also in DS1 there are 7 initially- taurus, capra, gargoyles, moonlight butterfly, quelaag, sif, pinwheel
Can you do it without returning to the hub though? INTERCONNECTIVITY FOR THE WIN
I don't hate dark souls 2. I've grown to appreciate it over the years but one thing that drives me absolutely crazy about that game is when an enemy swings at you and mid swing you dodge and yet during that same swing set enemy somehow changes the trajectory of his swing and it's still wacks you in the head. I mean obviously there's other issues, but that shit just drives me nuts lol
CANT WAIT FORE HIS RESPONSE VIDEO
2/3 through and you’ve got some interesting ideas, but you’ve missed most of Hbomb’s main points. At 13:15, for instance, the point HB made was “you can tackle enemies in your own ways.” Your counter point was “what do you mean I tackled this enemy in a different way from you so it tested different skills.” His point about level design was one of theme and aesthetic, which you ignored. His points about health are about how it feels, he flat out acknowledges that he knows you’re supposed to dodge, but not everyone can just be perfect all the time.
Also at the beginning of the whole damn video he clarified that “Dark Souls II is better” is his opinion and maybe not even a right one?
Matthew Rowland the fact that DS2 being better is just « his opinion » doesn’t mean much, though.
First, because he still supports his opinion with attempts at grounding them in facts, and second because... opinions can be wrong.
« Opinions » as in « preferences » can’t be wrong, because as long as you’re being honest, your statement of your preference isn’t erroneous, you indeed have this preference, but « opinions » as in « viewpoints », preferences excluded, can absolutely be wrong.
3:40 into the video and the question is, did you watched the same video as i did
because that was not what hmbomber said
lol, putting words in other peoples mouth just to make your point is something just terrible, you should be ashamed.
I'm not even going to end watching it
Long live the strawman...
Little late, but he wasn’t saying Dark souls 2 was better than 1. He was saying that the differences makes the games have more interesting differences
He definitely said that a fair few times. There are so many bits in his video that pulled ds1 below ds2.
Hardly anyone mentions that in dark souls 2 enemies stop spawning if you kill or farm them enough. This changes the normal game into an even emptier ghost town until you use a bonfire ascetic or join the covenant of champions
I like the part where he calls you a scrub for using a shield and then bashes people who call summoners scrubs. I like the part where he says Shrine of Amana is supposed to be a hard long run to the boss but had previously criticized that kind of thing in Dark Souls 1.
To a late game boss, and he doesn't say you're bad for using a shield but that it's more fun without one
@@IM2OFU alright, let see him measure fun with and without shield
@@vitaliitomas4057 It's subjective, but it's also subjective to say bowling is more fun than administrative filing, we can still say it because even if relative, it's still a general truth, ie true for most people
@@IM2OFU not seeing any proof so far. Come on, bring out that paper on fun amount with and without shield
@@vitaliitomas4057 It's subjective, "fun" is not a quantifiable metric, it can't be proven with objective standards. It's instead a general statement not a scientific one, he's saying he believes that for most people it's generally more fun to play without a shield.
Man all of you guys triggered by Harris into making your own long ass rant videos against his video. Gg dude
I don't think the estus flask / lifegem "potential health pool" thing is all that valid of a point when you take into consideration that the game's combat plays fairly differently. In DS2 estus takes pretty much until next christmas to drink and lifegems, with the exception of the better varieties, take a fairly long time to heal you so you can still die quite easily even if you manage to use one. The increased amount of healing items would make the game easier if it played exactly like Dark Souls 1, but with the more sluggish movement and such I find the gems a welcome addition to the game. Too bad there were shitfests like the mentioned Shrine of Amana though.
Many of the original video's points sound like complaining about the dude's own mistakes and putting them on the game, and especially the world continuity thing sounds really weird to me. Probably my favourite shitty world transition in DS2 is the Iron Keep: you climb to the top of a windmill in the middle of a fairly flat area, take an elevator UP from there and end up inside a fucking volcano. I wonder how they even managed to make that. The transition to Dragon Aria or whatever it was called was also super "immersive" iirc.
I saw my friend STUCK trying to pass Gwyn in many ways. His attacks had an absurd hitbox, hitting without having ways to do. He tried to parry him many times and most of them the parry sound played but the animation didn't, or even worse: The parry wasn't able to be executed without any reason. It's kinda funny that a game said to be so balanced like Dark Souls 1 is also full of exploits and a game like Dark Souls 2, that openly gives a full variety of difficulty choices is said to be broken by many people. Well, more surprisingly, many people make use of DS2's most genius level design as a complain, even with it being totally optional and even being more ways to make things harder. I really don't know, if it is just dumb complains, some kind of hardcore gamer elitism or just ignorance, but people most of time keep saying that Dark Souls 2 lacks challenge, as if they thought the game had to force them a challenge, while it suggests you this instead. Have you never noticed that you can play the game without using anything that can make it easier? The Dragon Rider really can be challenging if you don't pull the levers; you can pass through Shrine of Amana without a bow (or magic); or even try to keep 1 million souls to pass through the door. These are choices that the game gives you to play in more difficult, have more hard times and feel more rewarded with the challenge. But hey, maybe I'm just wrong and the game where you are as fast as a cinder brick and still can kill a god is really more concise, right?
Just on healing. Dark Souls 1 = Estus, Heal Spells, and Humanity Sprites. Dark Souls 2 = Same but with Life Gems. Oh and both have Divine Blessings. Although Humanity Sprites are hard to find, 99 of them can heal up to max health per use in all of Dark Souls, making it easy in any situations. But again, Dark Souls 1 is better on the healing side when compared to the other two. Life Gems(DS2) vs Blessed Weapons (DS3). Dark Souls 1 always had a give and take with its healing in rarity and with spell slot usage excluding Estus. Then again I play as a universalist class that can wield all kinds of weapons and spells, so healing isn't a big deal.
Dark Souls 3 really isn’t much different, don’t get why you tried to brute force a mechanic most people don’t use in the DS3 argument.
@@neurotic3015
It depends on each player. I mainly play as an even stat character, so my path is generally more difficult at the start then much easier beyond sl150.
Pure and Hybrid builds generally do better much sooner.
Critisizes nonsensical world design of DS2.
Praises how the Randomizer mod made the game fresh again.
Have fun looking for the Artorias Crest in the Kiln.
4:00 this argument doesn't make sense, the issue is not the player is taking damage and being bad, but that this is punished by them either having to run back to the bonfire which is boring or continue on knowing your probably gonna die cause you haven't gotten good yet
Just remember some enemies/bosses jump at you or like Ornstein shoots towards you very fast making It more difficult to heal without getting hit (but some very nito points in there)
I love the "yolo idgaf if the red bar shows I watched the video already, everyone knows I'm doing a bit anyway" opening to this.
Dark Souls 2 did plenty good and plenty bad. i-frames tied to a stat? Bad. Power Stancing? Good. Split damage worked; almost every weapom was viable. Life Gems are terrible. Dark Souls 2 is an easier game to play and it's just more comfortable. But I think it's the worst in the series. It's still a good game in my opinion, but not a good Souls game.
LoganSoulsBorne4 Easier? Lol no. It was the hardest by far (shieldless that is) but for the wrong reasons.
Yeah, I'd much rather have Resistance. (By the way, that's sarcasm. Just in case you didn't catch that)
Adaptability is still 10 times better than Resistance and Luck. Life gems shouldn't even be making people mad. In Demon's Souls you were pissing moon grass (aka your main source of healing), in Dark Souls you could have 99 humanity and 99 twin humanity (which was an instant full HP refill, on top of 20 estus), Dark Souls 2 has life gems (which are slow and can be easily out damaged), and Dark Souls 3 has nothing to keep you from dying before the boss.
Slender Man/Douglas Mitchell Also life gems are so god damn slow tbh. Too slow to make them op.
Slender Man 186 Dark Souls 3 has nothing to prevent you from dying before the boss ? Apart from embers I suppose.
Also, yeah, for Demon Souls (the *first* game of the series, hence why some mechanics weren’t optimal yet) grass is your main source of healing, hence considering if you run out of it you don’t have anything else anymore, it’s better than life gems, which are fairly common, cheap, and who complement a system of healing that you’ll always have.
Humanities ? Well, humanities aren’t nearly as cheap as gems, neither in terms of souls, nor in terms of farming it, nor in terms of consequences.
Popping a humanity (which you hardly will have 99 of after your first or second boss, which is perfectly doable in DS2) has much more consequences than popping a gem, since doing that means that you may lose the ability to summon, or the ability to kindle your fire more, hence you’re at the very least given a reason to use them more sparingly than life gems.
And the same goes for embers, though their problem, I’d agree with Mattosis on that, is that you can use them only in the last moments before a boss room, hence you don’t risk anything by using anyone except if you die during the boss fight, whereas a humanity used to become human again had you risk losing your humanity even before you encountered the boss.
On the note of life gems did everyone forget you start with a single Estus and without playing in a very exploratory manner you can finish the game with one? Life gems were meant to be a helping hand until you collected every flask shard.
"my duderino"
The mouse in like a bunch of the video was intentional right?
But I actually agreed with hbomber's video almost completely. I played Dark Souls for the first time, beat it, and then immediately played Dark Souls 2. I enjoyed it more. Had more fun playing it. I truly think it is better than the first Dark Souls, once I realized how it has been changed from the first and adjust play-style.From every one of these types of videos I'm hearing about how the rolling is garbage and floaty and like underwater but I find the movement easier and more enjoyable than the first. I also agree that the story, with symbolism and a more visual narrative language and personal focus is better than item description puzzle pieces, of course this is just me. I don't enjoy the puzzle narrative, but I understand how someone into finding lore, and one who literally makes videos about that lore, wouldn't enjoy that form of storytelling if they were expecting the other form of story.
I'm not one of those people that played Dark Souls over and over and over and then played the second when it came out expecting similar things and got disappointed. I played one and then the other and I prefer the second game. I haven't been frustrated like I have in some Dark Souls areas, which there are like four or five that I just hate moving through. I haven't had an issue with that in Dark Souls 2, not even Iron Keep (although it was the closest).
wierdfishes thank you, I have been scrolling through the comments looking for one sane person, and you are the first one I found
Watch Mauler's response videos... and THEN tell me Darks souls 2 is better in any objective sense...
It doesn't mean you can't enjoy it. I still play it sometimes when reliving the trilogy. But let's stop pretending you can't find enjoyment in something poorly made.
I like hbomberguy's videos, and I watched his defense of ds2 video, and I took what he said into consideration, and I came to the conclusion that many of his arguments were true, or plausible. I went into the video highly doubting that DS2 was any better than it was and I just haven't given it a fair shake. I came out actually feeling better about the game. I don't think it deserves as much of the hate as it's gotten, but after watching your video, I gotta say... it's still the worst in the series. Lol! That being said. Hell yeah, it's still a great game. I love going back and playing it. It's just... what's wrong with it is what's wrong with it, and you don't like it if you don't like it. DS is my favorite, and I started on DeS.
Shrine of Amana, thats the exact location I decided to call it quits during return to drangleic.
Get gud
dude, did you LISTEN to the words that came out of Hbomberguys mouth? he DIDN'T say the dragon was a good thing to put there, he said it was FUNNY because in either version SOMEONES credentials are being called in. Either the dragon rider, whose no where near a dragon, is a liar or the dragon slayer, whose got a dragon right outside his office, is a liar.
He also never even talked about maximum healing potential. his point on the estus was that HE DIDNT LIKE having a finite number of mistakes you could make on the run to the next bonfire. He found the attrition of it less fun. He was very clear in that section how that was just his opinion.
Having just finished DS2, im not really onboard with his preference of it over DS1, but christ in HEAVEN where you even listening to his words?
I love most of Hbombs content, but every five minutes into his video, I wanted to punch straight through my screen. That idiocy was absolutly embarassing and your response to that was great.
Hbomb's videos are always like that to me.
dude ignores shit just to make a point, says its good that every boss is the same because its easier...
really makes me want to rethink my life
His arrogancy is what killed his content for me. That moment where he "patented" play conditioning in his bloodborne video is what made me gave up.
Seriously, did he HONESTLY think the idea of directing the player to play in a certain is something new that he just found out? HOLY FUCK. This shit has been around in EVERY tutorial since time immemorial. Heck, the idea of directing audience behavior and expectation has been around since the age of BOOKS. You have to condition the audience in a certain way to enjoy your content. This is why people from EVERY entertainment medium talks about the opening segment CONSTANTLY.
The worst thing is, his "patent" is both a show of complete arrogance AND UTTER IDIOCY AT THE SAME TIME. The guy proclaims himself to be a genius by discovering the most obvious shit. It's like the village idiot proclaiming he's Einstein after discovering why doors have doorknobs.
Hudrow Portnof well wait, didn't he say that he say that there was most likely a term for it and it was just his sort of phrasing of it? I could be wrong but that's how I remember it
@@hudrowportnof4058 Somebody doesn't understand a joke
>sees Stefan Molyneux on your sublist
>clicks off video
I can see that this dude did not see the entire vid. And like hbomber guy said they all run to Mathieu's lap to prove a point. He also forgot to giving him props for his teachings on the appropriate usage of the camera and the lock on system. Also Mathieu had trouble with the two dragon riders in his vid, saying that it is hard to beat them with the lock on system.lol
Scholar was actually my first dark souls game,bought it as a blind buy and love it,since then i've beaten all the other souls games,I enjoy Dark Souls 1 the most but its hard to top Bloodborne
9:50 Translation: "It isn't a bunch of needless walking, as long as you use the Randomizer mod."
By the way, you know the message this guy placed at the start of the video, specifically the part that says: "When responding to someone else's video, you can omit details that cause you to be wrong." Remember that? Mitch follows that rule to the letter.
Dalec Al 9:50 translation : « it isn’t a bunch of needless walking, except if you use the Randomizer mod. »
He said that it made him appreciate the interconnectivity more, but that the mod made him walk needlessly, whereas the actual game didn’t.
I think you didn’t pay enough attention.
This is the most contradictory argument of all time. Gets a dislike from me and I think ds1 is miles better than ds2.
Wow telling a guy you disliked the video 3 years later wow you really got him
@@marvingonzalez8586 lmao
I just couldn't believe that there was no mention that Dark Souls 2 is the only game out of the three that actively punishes you for failure with the decreasing health pool. There are certainly work arounds, but it's still something that felt needlessly punishing in a game series whose tagline is "Prepare to Die".
I happen to be an archeologist that traveled 200 feet down and found a dick that slapped me in the face, and I find this offensive.
I love how whenever someone criticizes hbomberguy his little circlejerk of fans just dislike storm the videos.
Actually, I kinda have to agree with hbomb on that video. Especially on that dudes with armor point. But not the Estus or any healing related things. As I come from monster hunter and healing mid battle is a normal thing.
But the lock on stuff, the big mobs, the OVER RELIANCE ON THE SHIELD. Yeah, 100% agree. And while I dont think ds2 is better than ds 1. I also think ds1 is the second worst game in the souls borne games. Behind demons souls, and of coarse ds3 and bloodborne are the best 2.
Also castlevania and castlevania 2 prove that an interconnected world can't provide as good of an experienced as a stfait forward well placed enemies that you only approach from 1 direction.
Life gems heal so slowly that it still seems quite fair to me.
Radiant ones are a bit more op but I agree basic lifegems I don’t think work well in combat.