Should Invasions Be Optional? | Elden Ring PVP
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 окт 2024
- This week we're answering the question as to whether or not invasions deserve to be locked behind an opt-in system and the effects giving players too many options can have on a game's health.
A big problem is so much of the new wave of players view multiplayer as a free easy mode, rather than an alteration to the base game design with tradeoffs, which is what is meant. Often, we see people on Reddit, Facebook groups etc. asking for help with an area or a boss which certainly implies that they view summoning someone as a concession for their own inability. When invasions confront them with the design being built around the idea that co-op ideally being on par balance wise with single player (which admittedly it fails to do) it disrupts their belief that the game SHOULD make concessions to accommodate them rather than them rising to the challenge established by the game.
I understand why people just want to "get through" a difficult encounter but by asking someone else to solve it for them, they're making sure they can't learn anything. Modern games are sort of defined by how well they can retain player engagement and if you ask them to eat their veggies, they're gonna throw a fit.
I used to hold Dark Souls up as a game against those sensibilities, that had integrity and demanded more from its players, and it was better for it. Elden Ring seems to have abandoned that concept in favor of accessibility. I'm all for games being available and accessible to everyone, just not at the cost of changing what makes them interesting.
I think this is a component of a wider social problem you can find in many MMO's too. People nowadays are viewed more as obstacles to get past in order to get the next shiny thing, when back in the day before the major streamlining of information especially game stuff, they were viewed as assets in order to help you get said shiny thing.
Add in the invasion concept to this idea and you can see why a lot of new players to this franchise are struggling with the idea of invasions. The obstacle concept is taken to the other side of the spectrum. It's built on different principles than they are used to and even though it's more accessible right now, the game still does not waver all that much to these people's demands (modders did but that's another story). So naturally, they get frustrated and think "game bad, bad game design, red man bad etc."
Remember when people were happy to get summoned? Jolly you might say
@@shambleshefwell said
I don't know why using a Rune Arc doesn't open you up to Invasions. It's how it worked in DS3 with Embers, and It was a fine system. You give yourself extra health and open up the possibility of performing co-op in one fell swoop, but if you don't summon anyone you are at the bottom of the priority list for being invaded because the system prioritizes filling lobbies with multiple players first before empty ones. Oh, and a total of 6 players could be connected if the Dried Finger was used, which allowed you to summon an additional cooperator. And there were different factions that could spice things up like the Mound-Makers which could choose to either kill the host or kill phantoms (including Red ones) to win, and there are also area-specific Blue-Red Phantoms that could optionally compete with traditional Red phantoms (Some people say this is stupid and is counter intuitive, but it's actually lore accurate if you read the item description of the Archdeacon White Crown and the Rosaria's Fingers covenant item, Aldritch and Klimt don't like each other very much.) And you also had Red/Gold phantoms too, which just added even more variety in the colors of phantoms you are fighting.
I don't understand why Elden Ring is such a massive step backwards from DS3 in terms of multiplayer support.
Have you considered how big the open world is? Isn't that actually just better, to have a big, open world? Think about how long it takes to go through? That's better. Multiplayer is stupid. Do it sometimes, or maybe not at all. Big, open world.
Empty big open world @@emotionaljonxvx
"I don't understand why Elden Ring is such a massive step backwards from DS3 in terms of multiplayer support."
They made it clear in pre-release interviews. "A less frustrating experience for all sides". i.e. it's casual souls.
It's more frustrating for invaders@@ianwilliams2632
If it's going to be like that then they can't be as rare as they are right now. In ds3 almost every knight type enemy would drop them quite commonly.
The comment that people know very little about the mechanic there judging is very correct, I invaded a guy in fringefolk hero grave his over level friend runs right into me as I spawned right in the path of the chariot host and him die to the chariot told me I was being real scum invading people right there that it was a trash move and I was trash I told him I'm doing near far from stormvaile I can't choose who or where I invade definitely not where I spawn he argued with me telling me I could and I did it on purpose 😕
Lmao some dude got mad at me for invading him in Farum Azula & accused me of the same thing
Ask yourself this. What are you trying to do when you invade? Kill the host? Stop their progress? Make them go all the way back and do it all over again? You consciously made that choice in real life to do that to someone. That makes you a dick whether it is a mechanic in the game or not. I've been playing From Software's games since their PS1 debut and I've never been the type to invade to ruin a players game.
@@TheMeanArena oh brother
@TheMeanArena I like doing pvp in these games I like getting invaded and I hope that after I fight someone they go man that was fun I'm not invading to be a dick or ruin anyone's time I don't grief people or run in with op bs to kill everyone in a single hit cause I like the combat and have a fun time doing it
@@andrewbryant6059 Yes that's what you like but the person receiving the invasion may not like being forced to stop what they're doing and PVP. It should have always been optional and for those that invade because they want to PVP, there's the Colosseum where you meet only people who do want to PVP.
"invasions" can't be optional or they wouldn't be invasions now would they
Every day I pray that elden ring pvp gets better and that hosts who don’t like invasions realize that it’s part of the game
Not going to happen. Some people absolutely cannot stand the feeling of losing to another player, so much so that they entirely forgo the possibility of any PvP in any of the games they play, be it by playing offline, or modding the game.
Elden Ring PvP will not get substantially better, but there is hope FS will try to improve it in the next game.
@@youtubeenjoyer1743 We can only hope cos as pvp stands right now it’s becoming a shell of it’s former self if it hasn’t already happened
@@youtubeenjoyer1743yep. & a lot of them just dont like pvp at all, they just see it as me *bothering* them. not as an unexepected fun encounter. invaded some guys in stormveil a couple days ago & they were wavin & emoting to be friendly, & i did for a time, but i let them know it was time to fight. when they died, one of them shot me a message saying: "bro just let us play" lol. they don't even try to learn how to pvp & get discouraged when they lose, i imagine seeing that invasion notification just results in an eyeroll & groan for them.
@@Munnwort I feel like the major part of that is all the bad design choices in the game. Why do you have to resummon password phantoms every time you respawn? Why does the taunter tongue reset on a loading screen? Why are there so many area restrictions when somebody connects to your world? This friction is multiplied when you consider invasions, as PvP is the most dangerous content in the game. Sites of grace are placed very liberally, so losing and respawning is not a big deal, apart from this unnecessary friction of things to do every time you respawn.
i like pvp but unwanted invasions have never been fun im just there frustrated from dying to a boss my 3 billion runes sitting there and then your goofy ass shows up with the most annoying twink meta build and im just like man i wish these games let you co-op+pvp in areas ive already beat instead of ones im struggling with.
My first playthroughs of Ds1, Ds2 and Ds3 took around 60-100 hours for each. I was often in human form or embered while playing and i occasionally played coop in my world and others. In each game, i only encountered an invader 1 or 2 times throughout. If being invaded once over the course of a 60 hour playthrough is traumatic enough to ask for it to be removed or made optional its the players issue not the games. Solo invasions don't even exist in Elden Ring and if your playing with friends it's probably on seamless coop.
The game basically doubling or tripling the fromsoft fanbase came with its downsides. The entire mindset of “git gud” has become a culture we veterans have failed to successfully pass on and it has allowed a new culture of ultra toxicity to fester that increasingly becomes more antagonistic as both sides continuously clash in personal grudges. The fact that the balance between host and invader is no longer a fair balance too and the fact that unless they use a taunters tongue the battles will always be at LEAST a 2v1 has also forced invaders to reach a skill level well above the average casual player’s or abuse mechanics and OP gear or perish has probably not helped either
very true. when every invasion is a 3v1 or a 3v1 spam fest, it forces you to reach a whole new skill level. & then you start getting messages about how you're a tryhard, you're toxic etc. lol
All invaders are toxic, period. I don't care if that's been a staple of From Software's games since Demon's Souls.
I like invasions. I've always liked invasions. They are one of the most interesting ways to fight people in a game. The first experience of getting invaded was by a twinker in ds1. It was not fun. But it gave a bit of a laughter.
Invasions need to be balanced though. I like getting invaded and then have some kind of sword dance off. Not get invaded by some tryhard who uses buffs on all their weapons and spams throwing daggers when you are at 1 HP. That doesn't leave a good name to invaders. A lot of players would say that they hate that.
What I liked about Ds2 is the fact that those kind of players barely even existed or at least I didn't get those tryhard players at all when I played it. I like fights that are fair or at least give a fighting chance to the host. I don't like it that I am doomed to die by the invader or doomed to have to skip the invader by fighting a boss. I would be fine with dying to an invader if it didn't happen each and every time an invader invades me. It would get frustrating especially in one of the souls games. There is only a finite amount of humanities, human effigies, or embers in each of these games. If me and my brother have to keep looking for more when we keep dying, then there is quite a problem with pvp. Elden Ring almost fixed that problem. With the new item, it was more common and you could acquire more of it. Although it was annoying to farm if you kept dying. Also the affect goes away if you leave the game. If they made it where you could just summon people without an item, then I think invasions wouldn't be the worse for online coop. I think ds2 did pvp the best although human effigies were a thing. If there were a way to gain infinite human effigies(or get rid of them in general) then ds2 would have the best invasion/pvp system.
These are just my thoughts. I would like to see yours. I am not the biggest pvp person and I don't play these games for the pvp, but there are ways to make it more enjoyable for both pvers and pvpers.
So I think invasions shouldn't really be focused on fairness so much as the ability to facilitate interaction. It's okay if a player is bad at the game and gets killed so long as the game gives them adequate incentive and opportunity to make sure they can get what they need out of the experience.
Invasions don't have to be a win or quit scenario for players, especially considering how little impact they really have over the progression. If you die to an invader, you lose some time and possibly your runes. It's far from full-loot PVP or getting put in a death spiral.
I really like what DS2 did with having invasions occur whenever an effigy isn't burned. It made multiplayer a constant option. Something like that I think is a good design to follow up and develop, rather than locking it behind bosses not being killed or having a cooperator.
All said, I want everyone to enjoy the game as much as possible. I want people who don't like PVP to still enjoy it because it enriches the PVE, rather than seeing it as an impassable obstacle. I think the ultimate goal would be to remove the divide in people's mind, so that by the end of the game every player is well-acquainted with both PVE and PVP because they're all just pieces of the same experience. It's a tough balance, to be sure, but these games are the closest and I want them to go even further with it.
but that divide is quite big... most pve players have certain expectations and tastes that align, much the same for invaders. and once you have made up your mind youre not inclined to immidiatly change it. sure you could try make everyone like each other, but at the end of the day im trying to gain by invading other people and whatever that is, most humans dont like theyr fantasy world overtaken and taken advantage off whatever the gain. and whatever the courtesy i try to uphold. they just want to win too. winning feels good. i dont blame them
I think you have a point with finger remedy being more readily available, but I just wanted to point out that there are several unlimited effigy farming methods in DS2 that don't even require you to engage with the multiplayer and for low risk. The company of champions covenant at the beginning of the game makes normal enemies unlimited respawn, so you can farm any item that any normal enemy drops to your heart's content without it affecting your online experience. Including effigies and even covenant rewards.
there should be places where you always get invaded no matter what, places where you are supposed to coop (think radahn's fight), places where both are the case, and places where you're on your own
That's just an awful idea.
I'm hoping the dlc adds this. Imagine a post pontiff type of area but a bit longer
I want an area/feature like the Nightmares in Bloodborne where there's an enemy in a difficult position on the map that summons invaders until you defeat them. I miss that concept so much.
It sucks that EVERY TIME my son and I try and co-op we get invaded over and over. Just makes it to where we just don’t bother and that kinda sucks.
See, if I had a son (I don't), I would relish the opportunity to fight alongside them against some random attacker. If it's a skill issue, fair enough. Invaders can be quite strong and the PVP isn't exactly easy.
But if it's the fact that you want them to only experience certain parts of the game and feel inclined to help them along the way, that sort of goes against how the game is built. I'd hate to miss out on invasions because I wasn't "ready" for them. That's sort of their biggest appeal. They happen when you aren't ready. That's what the game is teaching you, and it's a valuable lesson.
I've met kids a third my age who are way more competent in games than me, so I think they're plenty capable of learning the ropes. So when it comes to invasions, I wouldn't think of them as a separate experience that's in the way. I'd embrace them as part of the experience.
But hey, I don't wanna tell you what's right for you and yours. Just the same advice I'd give anyone trying to introduce someone to the series.
@@emotionaljonxvx He is just learning ER. This is also my first play through of a Fromsoft game. I understand the mechanic and we don’t mind pvp but it would be nice to be able to experience some pve without an invasion every 5 minutes. We will just not play together until he learns the game.
@@lonewanderer2287 Understandable. I'd say if you do try Co-Op again, maybe consider the white cipher ring to call in a Hunter for added support against an invader. You're the target audience for that mechanic and while a lot of blues are AFK or completely useless, when they actually engage any 3 characters together make a dangerous build.
IDK why people want this game to be a co-op with buddies, run through and stomp out everything like other games. Like Destiny or MMOs or something. They clearly want the game to remain difficult even if you summon help, either being invaders or more health for enemies. If nothing happened, then there'd be almost no shared experience of difficulty in these games.
Casual co-op is never going to mesh well with a franchise with the explicit design goal of invoking loneliness and isolation punctuated by fleeting connections.
09:07 And I apologize for the second comment. But I want as many people as possible to see this.
What kind of defenselessness of the host can we talk about if the dude has double Reduvia. How did he get a duplicate at this stage of the game? Is this fair? Transferring items to each other and trading is complete nonsense and should be removed if such players want fair pvp.
In this case, the battle takes place 2 on 1. And I would like to ask a question to PVP haters: friends, if you cannot win this battle, then what do you need to win? Two more reduvia and extra 2 hands? Maybe heavy machine guns, air support and airborne drops from Helldivers 2? Maybe there should be a big red button with the inscription: kill all living things, or a personal death note?
To your question. I don’t need and don’t want to win this battle, that’s the point. I don’t even want to engage in it. Leave me the fuck alone. I’ll keep disconnecting so as to ruin your invasion. Seems to be the most effective way.
Invasions always being on is way too tough for newcomers. Speaking from experience, my time in Dark Souls 1 with my first invasion, the invader reset my progress by closing a gate that took me an hour to get to and open. That is a memorable experience but after that, I played offline for the rest of the game. You cant force that mindset on newcomers that arent wanting to PvP some soul veterans's twink build and have poo poo pots thrown on them. it is just way too negative of an experience to always have on for people that dont even understand the basic game mechanics. I agree there should be ways that invasions happen outside co-op or taunter's tongue but forcing people offline would be what would happen and as you said, it would be a chain effect where indirect multiplayer would suffer. I dont know what the solution is but it makes sense as a mechanic and thematically that if you open your world to help, you also open it to invasions. Imo having 2 helpers is too much. multiplayer would be so much more balanced if you could only have one summon and maybe one blue if you get invaded but blues shouldnt be a feature that is just always on. you should have to pay some souls to hire a blue or something that costs the host. Having only one summon would make it a lot more of a choice of whether that help is worth the invasion or not because right now, 3v1 is almost always way too unfair for invaders in any session where the host isnt a complete newcomer.
what gave me a lot of perspective of invaders was invading, myself. it would help a lot if there were points in the game where the story needed you to invade or accomplish some goals as an invader. it would open invasions up to be way more casual because the biggest issue imo is the fact that the only people invading are way more prepared and way more experienced than 90% of hosts will ever be in their first playthrough.
Idk if you played Dark Souls 2 but it had the best invasions system. The invasions always being on leads to the most balanced experience for all parties. You see invaders are a minority of players, having the invasions on for everyone all the time means that during the average playthrough you'd see a handful of invaders maybe 10-15 ish (probably less tbh) which for an entire 20+ hours someone's first time playthrough is very manageable. Everyone having them on also mean that coop players could play without getting swamped with invasions like in Elden Ring. Invaders also have a varied pool to invade, and quickly because the pool is huge. So spreading out the invaders means everyone wins, solo players get some reasonable surprises now and again and are eased into this unique mechanic, co-opers can play without every area being a slog, invaders get to invade without having every invasion being 1v3 instagib L2 spamfests.
@@Julius064 Forced PVP is dogshit.
Not only should it be mandatory with 0 strings attached to have it start, a group of people (specifically me as one of them) should be paid by fromsoft to just invade nonstop.
Also an office at the headquarters would be nice but hey I’m not trying to ask for too much
I'm good with remote work. I only ask that I be given the title of "Warlord." I wanna be warlord.
@@emotionaljonxvx warlord has a nice ring to it
LOL
I personally don't like invasions, well, I don't like pvp in action-heavy games in general and even in less action-driven games it's usually not my favorite part. If I want to play with a friend I use seamless co-op mod (less because of the invasion aspect, and moreso because of, well, everything else), and that is offline-only anyways. When playing solo I just don't bother with any of the online-mechanics apart from leaving a funny message here and there.
Yes. 100%. ESPECIALLY in Elden Ring.
If I am going through the process of summoning a human, its NOT because I want to 'super fun' multiplayer invasion extravaganza. It's because i have banged my head against one of the many walls of this game over and over and am sick of it and want help.
Invading is basically sanctioned griefing. If you feel like From has made invasions less fun, THANK GOD. Go to the arena, or lay down a duelist sign.
Yes, lay down those duelist signs so we can summon ya'll and beat you to a pulp for runes which you deserve if you use the excuse of invading (griefing) is part of the game as an excuse to be the dicks you are.
My first experience with Elden Ring was starting it up, joining my friend at Gatefront ruins, and being killed by people with Mohg's spear before we even had torrent yet. We kept at it for awhile, but both quit somewhere after Renala. Neither of us had much interest in single player games, and the co-op experience (especially for a beginner) is a constant stream of invasions by people that you have absolutely no chance against. I get a lot of people like this, but for us, being fodder just wasn't much fun. When we discovered the co-op mod, we gave the game another shot and eventually finished it - one of the most enjoyable gaming experiences of my life.
This shit is exactly why I'm glad the Seamless Co-op mod exists and use it to play through the game with my brother. Just be sure to turn invasions off and up enemy health and damage if needed to help keep the challenge up. Being in the early lvl 20s and getting crushed over and over would just make me put the game down too.
That is exactly the problem with invasions. Might I recommend don't buy their next game if you can't opt out of invasions. When they announce their next game, there is a big campaign to not buy it if it contains force pvp invasions.
Elden ring was my first souls game and I remember all the times I would do varre's quest online to get to mohgwyn early and all I would get were 3v1 cancer ass ganks and it was impossible to win a single one of them. It really made some of my first days playing elden ring sour
It's a rough first-time invader game for sure, probably the worst. I honestly don't think it gets much better the more you do it, but it's still fun under the right circumstances.
I try to remember Saint Riot's (paraphrased) timeless advice; If you don't want to lose invasions, don't fight 3 guys.
But Elden Ring is sort of a mess when it comes to how gankable invasions are. For me, it ruins the fun for everyone. No sense in ganking when it's only ever 3v1, and no sense in fighting a gank unless you're good enough to handle it (I am not).
thats another thing! the games multiplayer is so flawed that noobs looking to dip their toes into invasions just get discouraged & put it down. just bad design all around
@Munnwort Invaders are supposed to add another layer of challenge to summoning, so when killing invaders is effortless, there really is no down side to summoning. Zero risk, massive reward
I personally play mostly over and rarely pvp. I can say that I don’t feel like I’m experiencing any less of the game. The option for pvp is fine as is.
I wish I shared your contentment. For me, the balance is all wrong when you try to PVP actively. It's lackluster as a host too, but it becomes a lot more problematic the more you engage with the multiplayer.
Offline is and should always remain an option. I'd just like to see them take online to the next level.
@@emotionaljonxvx understandable
I very much enjoy DS2's system the most as an "on paper" system (barring soul memory tiers). It feels more opt in when you consider that there are online mechanics to mitigate invasions (hollowing reduces chance, while burning effigy guarantees no invader for 30min).
It was not a perfect system however, there was a ton of micro you had to learn and do to maintain activity.
Completely agree with your take on the invasions being a secondary tacked on feature. It is by design that they are pushed to the side in every title. I think if they made a game with the invasions at the forefront, PVE design might suffer due to PVP design bleeding into PVE. But PVP still could be better as a result.
Unless they find a happy medium where the PVE feels more like PVP in that it tests you in similar ways, prepares you for the real deal better than the current NPC invasions, and bridges the gap a little between PVE and PVP, so as to get new players on board with the PVP system instead of simply not discouraging the typical knee-jerk reaction that a lot of players have to invasions.
Expanding on this a little, what would your thoughts be on a bounty system where players have more direct incentive to invade? Like say for example, they add a bounty board kinda like book of the guilty. You can hire bounty hunter players to go find/invade a certain player and kill them for a reward. Or the other way around, becoming a wanted player and fighting off bounty hunter players and getting spoils for your kills. Surely it would bring its own set of problems to the game but I think the pros would outweigh the cons and add some immersion to the invasions.
I would even go as far as to advocate for full loot invasions if it was done well and balanced in a way where you could avoid losing your gear if you are smart about it.
I'd entertain pretty much any PVP-focused incentive. Bounties are an interesting idea though unless they dramatically increased the importance of some currency, it could be tougher to incentivize.
I'd love some covenant-based system that sets up natural enemies like they've had in the past, and just way more areas that act as territories and facilitate automatic invasions. "Oh, you want to kill Aldrich? Then you'll have to make it past his goons." Something like that should definitely be expanded on, instead of completely removed in favor of nothing.
As far as full loot, I'd appreciate if you got your opponent's runes because they're easy to regain and it'd be a nice risk/reward incentive. Taking gear would probably require them to rebuild the game in a way where gear farming is part of the loop. Certainly possible but probably not the easiest mesh into the existing game design.
At the end of the day same here, I just want more incentives to promote activity. Territory/covenants are probably the most feasible and logical fix for fromsoft to implement.
As for ideas on a bounty system I was thinking maybe some kind of equipment based reward like smithing stones, ashes of war, or weapons/armor that are unique to that online medium. Rewards would be tied to # of pvp kills like the DS covenants.
Full loot would need a full game restructure no doubt, it would shake things up too hard in the current system. But I would be all for a game that's like that. I spend a lot of time farming in these games anyways, usually while waiting for a summon or invade to happen.
That would be how blues were supposed to be, but ds3 made them obsolete without the constant invasion system.
@@maxdragonslayer Precisely. Honestly the concept of a blue (non territory blue) is much better than the actual experience of being a blue unless you are playing around with pvp mods. I never understood why they did this unless it was an intentional choice to curb all types of invasion across the board except for territory.
@shambleshef they dont even have territory without covenants of any type like the watchdogs its so lackluster, and with how bad pvp was balanced, it almost killed the game after launch
Its like pvp and covenants are needed to make this game what it is who would have thought
I don't do invasions, the only time I play online is to help people with bosses. If they get invaded I give them about 10 seconds to go through the fog wall, if they don't I bounce. Still I like that online bring invasions, it's yet another reason to not have games online only 😊
The game definitely should have an offline mode and I never want them to remove it. That said, you should try invasions some time. It's a pretty steep learning curve for most people but man, it opens up a whole new game.
Exactly! I leave immediately when I get summoned and they're at the boss fog or looks like they need help in a dungeon but then they are stroking that taunters tongue. Nope! I'm not here to pvp by forcing it.
FromSoftware has made every attempt to solve on how to balance PvP, but basically gave up in Elden Ring, knowing full well what they wanted; a wider audience. No matter what you said in this video, they aren't able to be as objective anymore, because now they gotten a big bite of that sweet sweet larger casual audience.
After Shadow of the Erdtree, I have no doubt its downhill from here. Every game that involved PvP at all has proven to only have gotten worse after every new iteration. The only question is, will FromSoftware continue to keep PvP but as a second thought, or just abandon it to keep a bigger audience?
Downhill for who? Doesn't every game have to have PVP and invasions? No!
@@TheMeanArena Every Souls' game lasts as long as it does thanks to it.
I like the DS 2 version of invasions because it can happen no matter what and you need to either play offline or use an item to stop it. It feels less like the game is punishing me for reversing hollowing or playing with people and more like a natural part of the journey.
My main dislike of invasions are the sweats that will wait by large mobs of enemies. While I understand avoiding ganks, sitting down the entire invasion until the host give up and decide to pass by and, be engaged by, an already difficult mob to finally attack, just feels so unsportsmanlike.
Yea thats the point if they wanted a duel they'd go arena and if you don't wanna get invaded dont summon
Invaders that hide behind mobs have no skill. That's why they do it. Then again, nobody invited them so when they get 3v1, that's their own fault then again, 20v1-3 isn't exactly fair and balanced at all.
In all honesty, I couldn't disagree more with the idea that invasion improve the game, with the caveat of specific circumstance invasions that are built for a reason. I've played since DS1, and encountered Invasions in each game besides Bloodborne. And I've plenty of friends who also play as well for around the same time. I haven't enjoyed any kind of invasion besides the Bell invasions in DS2, as the areas were built with that mechanic in mind. Besides from that, I've never enjoyed being invaded, and neither do my friends. I know that experience is anecdotal, but it's my own opinion anyway.
Aside from that, I would absolutely hate if their next game would include more "required" multiplayer. I would at that point, just play offline if I was able. If I couldn't, I woulld still try to play, and I hope I would enjoy it. But If the PVP was similar to DS1, or even more often, I most likely wouldn't enjoy it.
I agree with the idea that invasions are much more disruptive than engaging, due to mainly twinking and try-harding.
If players opt out, then there will be less players to be invaded and the PVP fans will have to duel or arenas. If you opt for anyone to “allow pvp” then single players can be invaded if they want, and not dependent on only allowing invasions on those who opt into multiplayer. ✌🏼
latency is still an issue.
@@LyllianaofMirrahcompletely agree and that’s a problem that is difficult to resolve for everyone. It’s an aspect of PVP I don’t like either and I’m not a big fan of PVP anyway 😂
@@Carl-vx9ws plus the dlc weapons going to be the new meta. the base game weapons going to get steam roll lmfao
@@LyllianaofMirrah quite likely, at least the DLC level enhancements don’t apply back in the base world
@@Carl-vx9ws is there anyone or youtuber who explained this leveling system they had on dlc?
I enjoy invasions. It transforms the game for sure. I love being invaded at random but the taunter’s tongue diminishes that element so I don’t use it and that’s a shame.
Invading is fun too but every other invasion with a solo host or two people stood at a safe grace is not my personal idea of fun. And there’s a lot of that in Elden Ring in my experience.
The chaos of fighting through the level as or against an invader is what attracts me to the mechanic.
so you just want people to suffer? so what if they stand by a grace or bonfire? I've lost millions of runes and souls to asshole invaders that find it fun constantly resetting my ability to level up. Oh don't get me wrong, I still got gud and tbh did low level runs thru bosses cause I'm stubborn, but ffs most of my friends just wanna chill and get thru a game after a hard day's work, we don't have the time to spend fighting op twink builds and THEN FIGHTING A BOSS MULTIPLE TIMES.... get some perspective, it should be optional.
tbh I honestly don't care for your "fun" as an invader. I care about MY fun, I bought the game, I shouldn't have to give you any level of "Fun" in the game I AM PLAYING FOR ME.
I think we all know by now that ER does multiplayer far worse than DS3, which came out 6 years before. No covenants, less players in each world, open world invasions and invading only coopers and ganks drastically reduce the longevity and amount of people who can be invaded. Initially I didn't even mind no covenants, but now I'm like "that added so much dynamic activity and longevity to DS3" for me, and they could've easily had it in Elden Ring.
The lower player limit means invasions are almost always 3v1, especially with the garbage infinite "hunter" system (you're not a hunter if you're just a ganker with no friends) and also killed fight clubs, which were incredible in DS3 as well. I love the multiplayer even more than the base game, and they completely gutted all of it in ER; coop, duels and invasions. And there's barely anything new in the coliseum compared to 3. A complete joke.
I just dont like when invaders keep running away trying to control the fight/map
It can be frustrating when you're trying to fight someone and they don't wanna fight back, though I would say that invaders have a much higher burden. They really need to use the level to their advantage, otherwise they'd just have to be significantly better than 2 or 3 people all fighting them at the same time.
Even in a 1v1, invaders are set up to have a lot less at their disposal. They get halved healing and are almost guaranteed to be lower level than the host. They can try to offset those disadvantages but as you climb in the level brackets, it becomes insurmountable from a balance perspective.
Really, I'd just say that if the invader is running, it's probably because they have to.
@TheRealJohnHooper And Jackie Chan could beat any number of guys as long as he has unrestricted access to a ladder. Not every invader has that level of competence, not every host is helpless. It's way more nuanced than any analogy is gonna cover and if hosts/summons are having a really tough time taking down an invader, that's less a problem with the invader and more a problem with the host.
If you don't know how to fight, why are you playing a game where you fight things?
@TheRealJohnHooper I think taking the real world justifications (and lack thereof) for physical violence is a really weird way to talk about a video game.
Like, they're not even remotely the same thing.
Also, UFC fighters (among other violent professionals) beat on defenseless people all the time. That's a terrible comparison.
@@emotionaljonxvx They are in a way though. If you bullied or grieved someone in real life, more than likely they're going to do something to you for doing it. Now doing it online isn't any different, you're just doing it to people you don't know with no consequences for those actions. Games with grieving mechanics is just an excuse and out for people who like being bullies.
This is probably a mega hot take from someone who has spent hundreds of hours invading across all souls games, but I think invasions should become opt in and out.
The way ER has handled PvP and invasions is a huge downgrade from previous games. It’s clear that Fromsoft either doesn’t have enough time/resources to improve it, don’t care enough, or are just borderline incompetent.
If you’re going to force PvP on active players then you need to be ready to make patches to adjust balancing and glitches. Obviously these kinda of games will never be perfectly balanced, but there is no excuse that some of the most game breaking PvP glitches are taking over a year to patch out.
They certainly haven't put the work in to inspire confidence, I'll give you that. It's the sort of thing where I think they have the resources and skills required to do it well, they just need to focus those things there instead of on trying to get the world as big as possible.
It's obviously a matter of taste and design, but I'm pretty set on the direction I want them to take. Every other RPG on the planet is a single-player / Co-Op No PVP game with no reason to play once you beat the main story. This is the only series that at all captures putting PVP into the game in such an interwoven way, without having a big option that says "PVP world" or "PVE world"
They've made hundreds of millions of dollars. Time and resources is all they have.
As an invader, ladder camping with a stormhawk axe is a scumbag move. This is why pvers hate reds
I agree with most of what you said, but when you said no to a constant invasion system, what you describe is the constant invasion system without soul memory with a minor cool down of 2-5 min after each invasion with covenants being like what we had in ds3 this would have been the best version of eldin ring we could have got as it would enhance with it being a open world it would feel more full instead of as empty as it is now ive already made a post on reddit explaining this
They would have to completely redesign the game to add covenants and have them make sense like they did in DS3.
@TheMeanArena if the had added them in the beginning then wouldnt have had to worrie about it
Even when I was a new player in any of these games, I liked being invaded. It made the world feel alive. These new players are such total cowards they can't even conceive of defeating an underleveled opponent with a two man advantage.
The issue is we have too many casuals that don't like adversity that's out of their control. It really annoys me how some of these hosts play. They really have no spine, they'll never attempt to attack the invader or they'll expect you to kill their boss for them
Or maybe the issue is, they don't like forced PVP?
Difficulty settings? Do you mean like beating the game with a toothpick at RL 1 vs 125+ RL one shot build?
There's nothing more satisfying than beating a 1v3 as an invader. You have to be patient and well prepared. That being said in Elden Ring it's the most unbalanced it's ever been. Blue's spawn almost instantly gankers use busted setups (power stanced bleed nagi's, ripple crescent halberd with sleep grease etc) with spirit ashes like Dung Eater lol using fogwalls like godskin noble at volcano manor for example to get away and have the advantage of a wall for us invaders they can safely spam from without fear of being hit back. I absolutely love the invasion mechanic but it seems like if it keeps heading in the direction it is it'll soon be a thing of the past.
i would want invasion like part of the game, like you can invade regardless of host help or solo. HOWEVER!. i would like them to add a Invader no Heal and a time system.
Basically remove healing from flask, spell , items in general basically having that lock.
Time limit invasion what I mean by that.
- one makes you look for host, rather than wait- " there invaders that wait for ambushe's this is time consuming for both pt's
-two it acts as a rush senarious to both parties " the invader has a time limit to kill, die, or be send back to his world , allowing pressure to be in both party"
-three have invader's respond close to host/coo oppers-
-four Make a field that traps host and invader in a small room to combat, this will allow for invasion to be fast, and decisive. allowing less time for invader to wait for invasions.
- five have host that have been invaded a 5min cooldown per invasion, regardless of win or lose scenarios, this will prevent them from having stuck in there progress, but no give them to much lee way to be not on edge every now and then.( the hole point of host getting invaded is to face different challenges with different outcomes, same apply to invaders).
-six- rewards should be significant to both party's EX:( host beats invader, get full Heal and MP charge back, and invader get's armor or specific effects as reward's if not convenient oriented.
if feel that his steps would make it more viable for the general concept of invaders that is. (YOU ARE NOTHING MORE THAN A SMART AI) not a mini boss. but that fall into balancing stuff.
but that my ideas anyways...
I don't agree with the no heal part but definitely a timed out option. You run, you get booted for not engaging host which is the entire purpose of invading.
Great video as always, Jon.
I think what I always meant by “well, it’s a singleplayer game first”, wasn’t to be reductive towards multiplayer-sorry about that-but more like, if the multiplayer results in more average players feeling like there are too many roadblocks to enjoying Elden Ring, then it should just remain a singleplayer game first and foremost. I’d love to see how multiplayer could change, or revert to a previous system like DS3’s which I find to be “the best” of all the games-but only if it means more people actually feel encouraged to play.
If multiplayer stops being opt-in, then it’s either always turned on or off. No using an item or performing an action to “switch modes”. That’s what i find opt-in to mean. If multiplayer is always on, in an ideal blend of multiplayer interactions with the singleplayer experience like you described towards the end, the one thing that would stop me from wanting that to happen is IF it results in less new players, or decreased player retention among new players, not just veterans. It’s something of a conservative sentiment. I have to be convinced of the result first before approving any changes in the system. That’s just me, though. I’m not actively trying to be the multiplayer police.
It’s also just really hard for me to conceptualize what an ideal blend of multiplayer and singleplayer would end up being like. How do you make it so *most* unprepared players end up having fun by being killed by a stylish “ideal” invader? How to you make someone who isn’t a veteran who “gets it” want to re-invest the time they spent progressing however far they did before being killed? For NPC enemies it’s “easy”, you just rely on the player’s volition, their desire to overcome the obstacle. But when it’s an invader, how do you stop the player from going “well, I’ll never fight that guy again except by random chance, I guess I’ll turn off the game since I don’t want to deal with random roadblocks”? That’s the thing I’m worried about the most.
Again, I would love to have things be better, I’d love it if we had covenants or something engaging back at least, I really don’t like being the pessimist, but right now it feels like all I can do is shrug my shoulders. I don’t have faith in From. I don’t have faith that leaning into multiplayer even more would somehow make players feel better about it, *because* it’s From. They bungled the colosseums, after all. I think I would rather they improve those before invasions and co-op, honestly, but that’s neither here nor there I suppose. Sorry Jon. :/
I’ll also add, I rewrote this comment a couple times. It’s really hard to articulate the gut feelings I have towards the idea of possibly subjecting new players to even improved invasions. It’s not, hostility, I *do* want people to find the fun in the system, but more, caution, I guess. Just, take my expression with a couple grains of salt.
I hear what you're saying and you raise valid points. For me, I think games are a unique medium that can allow people to engage in a way that doesn't have to necessarily be intentional. They just have to make sure the system allows for interactions, encouraging and incentivizing behavior they want to see.
If multiplayer is always on or off based on an internet connection, they'd have to make the game incentivize people to play online and risk invasions. I think having appropriate cooldown timers between invasions and work wonders. I'd be open to a finite number of invasions in a certain area. I'd be more than happy for a system to parity the number cooperators with invaders and I'd also entertain the outnumbered setup we have now provided invaders get a little more interaction with the environment and NPC enemies.
All said, it's not an easy thing to do, much less get perfect. But FromSoft is doing it in smaller doses and with a skewed balance. I just think the balance has gotten worse with Elden Ring without gaining much on the other side, but I am someone that thinks Elden Ring is mostly a miss with its open world design. I just want to see them further improve the vision of invasions and cooperation in a way that no other series can, instead of backing off and making "just" another single player RPG.
Maybe a hot take, I know that every souls game has had its share of knowledge checks, twinks, griefers, and competitive skill ceiling, but I think that Ds3 (the only pvp I played extensively and absolutely love) probably brought about the ruin of the invasion experience for casual players. People went absolutely hard in Ds3, pushing the skill level pretty high and I think that “tryhard” mentality, in addition to the smoothness of PvP mechanics and poor balancing, which granted has been prevalent in every souls game, detracts from the goofy and interesting interactions that can be had from such a unique experience like invasions. I think that people optimize and meta game by default nowadays and fromsoftware pvp is not suited for this approach aside from those willing to opt in to taking PvP seriously, due to poor balancing / implementation of systems that leaves hosts and invaders in a constant tug-of-war in which the only solution is reliant on people’s own discretion to create a fun experience for both sides. I really don’t know how to express what’s changed but it just doesn’t hit the same in Elden Ring. Anyway no idea how to fix it or what I even want from PvP anymore so I’ll just end it with a shoutout to the random guy who invaded me in Bloodborne in the Nightmare of Mensis just to open a shortcut, wave, and jump off a cliff.
I've been playing since launch, offline only. I don't even want to see the ghosts, messages, and blood stains. I only go online to complete the invasions for Varres quest. Then I go right back offline. I've probably invaded about a hundred times. It just feels like an annoying part of a quest instead of a fun and exciting game mode. I don't get it.
I wish there were an invasion mod that adds the old school solo invasions back. EAC and its awful latency made me quit pvp half a year ago, and a mod would bypass all that plus we could play above 60fps. It's hard to go back once you've experienced better, and sadly I'll probably be doing the DLC offline too for my first playthrough for those buttery smooth frames.
I couldnt believe the multiplayer was the same as past games with it being open world.
Being restricted where you can go, still dissappearing after 1 boss kill even if its just a random open world boss just feels bad.
Especially when youve got games like Remnant 2 (yes i know theres no pvp) and Lords Of The Fallen that allow you just just stick with it.
I found those way more enjoyable to play with friends. Even though the latter wasnt all that great of a game.
For the actual PVP i hate that theres no covenants and no real reason to invade.
However that doesnt mean I'd want invasions active at all times. That would be fun at first but an annoyance not long after.
I liked the previous Ember/Humanity systems.
I can't imagine who finds fun in chasing an invader for 1 hour because they just run everywhere and back because of how large the pvp play area is. Boring ASF!
Playing with multiplayer off > getting invaded by the wall
emotional jon, what do you think of dlc weapons? i think they're too fast paced for the base game weapons to keep up. especially that special dodges they had on the beastclaw and the reverse grip curved swords
They're gonna be so annoying, though they do look pretty cool. I'm always interested in different styles of play but I'm very confident they're gonna have a tough time getting the balance right.
@@emotionaljonxvx it will be, the fact that base game aow or weapons is still OP. says that they do have trouble balancing it.
babe wake up new emotional jon video
When talking about developer intention I think it is clear that ER was intended to give the most amount of options to the host. Number of weapons/number of builds, Ability to change your ash of war, spirit ashes, the open world and the option to be invaded or not. As long as that intention does not change I don't think the core issue will.
There is another large concern going forward. DS3 was fine at the time but it is 2024 now and the standard for online infrastructure is a lot higher than 2016. A lot of fighting games has gone from delay based to rollback netcode and became a lot easier to find matches and I fear that Fromsoftware neither has the knowledge nor the willingness to invest in their online infrastructure when invasion kills only amount to 2% of the deaths of all players.
I've seen it said that Japanese developers have a development culture resistance to newer technologies like rollback netcode because they don't want to invite risk or uncertainty into the development process, even if it'd be a big boon overall. It might be a decade before FromSoft considers something like that.
Then again, Elden Ring might just be the last multiplayer title at all. I doubt it but it wouldn't surprise me.
I think invasions are fine as is, what makes it worse is the community. There are invaders who cheat, try hard, or even abuse mechanics, same for phantoms and hosts. But so what? So what if the host is cheating, you’re invading THEIR world. What makes the pvp different from other souls games is the variety of weapons in the game. When there are bosses or enemies with over 5k health, you’re gonna need strong weapons. Nerfing them kills the pve.
So they do have separate balancing for weapons between PVE and PVP (added in a patch way back when) so I think that addresses a lot of the unintentional damage a nerf could have.
The community is the best part of the game, toxic and all. Sure, plenty of people are going to ruin things for others but that's part of what makes it a video game. Games should strive to incentivize the best behavior of their players but also plan for players to not care and just be jerks. It's the nature of the internet.
I think it's completely possible to have a good multiplayer experience in the presence of bastards.
@emotionaljonxvx yeah I agree. I've also seen a lot of people hating on fromsoft because of the new dlc weapons and talismans even when it's not out yet. Fromsoft will eventually balance things out, but maybe they wont, we won't know until it's out.
@@nakiangoderich3014 I share many folks' concerns with the new weapons but I want a light greatsword real bad.
@emotionaljonxvx I understand the concern but when people begin saying that "fromsoft is really out of touch" it gives a level of disrespect. $40 for what is essentially elden ring 1.5 and their shitting on them?
Even more when players like steel and jee all they do were complaining in streams about the new weapons, instead of giving appreciation to the work from has done in creating a new world, bosses, enemies, and over 100 weapons. It's disgusting.
In all soul games as you play the game it gets explained on why you will get invaders to come and try to steal from you, its part of the story and lore so
I don't see how people skip this at all.
In Dark Souls -1 people will have to go invade to get humanity in order to give it to Quelaag and level up the covenant and get rewards.
As a Blue Sentinel you would invade the world of the guilty, which it's the world of invaders that got reported in the book of the guilty or
simply the people who kill npc's or even destroy they illusion of the Princess.
I enjoyed DS1 the best for this reason, in Elden Ring you get to learn about this by talking the white mask Varre and doing his quest
just so you can get to the world of Maugh on which Varre him self will invade you no matter if you offline or online.
As many already know that there are many more npc characters in the world who will invade you too, I get why some people don't like the pvp
but at the same time they are buying a game that offers both things at the same time which is PVE and PVP.
It does seem pretty clear that they're meant to be interwoven. I just wish they'd take the time to really give multiplayer the same level of attention they give everything else. They could make something truly exceptional.
@@emotionaljonxvx I agree 100%
As a life long souls fan, i think invasions need to be left in the past, and the future games should provide a pvp arena for every new game if there is multiplayer.
100% agree. While I've played solo for years. I enjoy helping people with bosses or dungeons but then here comes invaders forcing me to PVP. I PVP on the side when I choose. I don't like forced PVP and probably won't be buying their next game if they don't step away from it.
One day they will realize coop is busted in this game as an invader you do a 3v1 somehow someway drop it to a 1v1 then 5 seconds later it’s back to a 3v1 because of hunters
Not if you keep giving them your money every time they release a new game. Stop buying their games and make it known why then they might change.
@@TheMeanArena I enjoy almost every aspect of the game I’ve never had a gaming experience like it I’m not saying they did a bad job, the PvP was an afterthought if anything so I’m just happy it’s in the game to begin with so I’m going to buy the next game for the pve but I’m probably not going to dabble in PvP as much as Elden ring I have 3000 hours in the game and 150 of those are pve lol
If only Legacy Dungeons were mandatory invasion zones...
IElden Ring was my first Fromsoft game, so I had no idea that Multiplayer had already been in every Souls game. I thought I was getting a single player RPG. Ive been playing Elden Ring pretty much every day since launch, and I've never tried multiplayer. I play offline only, don't do any co-op or pvp. Never even tried the coliseums. I don't care if my build or my internet speed is better than some random. I don't care about competition or bragging rights. I care about playing a game on my own and having fun without other people getting in my way.
That's my issue with consoles these days. Too much "social gaming".
It seems to me like you are trying to push your idea of what people should enjoy. Some people just like to to play together with friends.
Anti-PvPers when they buy the hard video game and someone shows up to make it marginally more difficult 😡
Dont forget the part where those same anti pvpers then start frequenting PVP-oriented channels and forums to be toxic to players who do enjoy the system
Elden Ring PVP made me not enjoy the game anymore. On top of all the balancing issues, the wait times and network problems have made the experience too frustrating to care.
Oh, and Uniqueness does not mean good. I don't really care how Unique my experience is within this kind of game, this isn't a roguelike (God, I hope Miyazaki doesn't get that idea lol).
At least in Elden ring, I'm only really playing for the story nowadays, I haven't really enjoyed the game as a game itself due to personal taste, but I still love the game for the story. I also do enjoy Cooperating with friendly people... not unfriendly people.
Somehow, I think we're both playing the wrong game.
@@emotionaljonxvx I do really think we are. I enjoy playing a Cooperative souls like with a deep rich story, you enjoy playing the same soulslike, but with a deep and interesting set of Player vs player mechanics. and there's nothing wrong with either of our choices. my statement about not caring for a "Unique" experience, is only associated with getting randomly invaded. I understand that the game itself is unique, it's probably the best, and most unique game to come out since DS1 itself!
I didn't ever think you'd ever read my comment, as it's pretty drowned out among other comments, so thanks man. Really enjoying the videos. A lot to think about.
What's wrong with the unique invader system?
@@Blittsplitt5 Like I say, I don't personally think being invaded really gives me a "Unique" game experience. To me it feels, and has always felt like a rather big annoyance. I've been playing Dark souls games almost all my life, and have a ton of experience with being invaded. Not so much invading though.
I have NO problem with a genuinely unique invasion experience, like certain areas having players being summoned to defend, or being summoned for a boss fight to fight another player or something like that. That's cool with me. As it doesn't interrupt the flow of my game. Some random guy invading me like they could at any other place in the game? That's not special, that's not interesting, that's not an intention of the game. What I mean by that, is that most of the areas, in most of the Fromsoft games, are carefully thought out, and balanced for the player. adding what will be a very tough enemy most likely is not "intended" for the area. With places like, the forest hunters covenant, or bell guardians. Those are places you're MEANT to be invaded, and ARE balanced around that mechanic.
But, I know a few people really like invasions, and are upset at Fromsoft for gutting not just the normal invasion system. But also removing pretty much ALL special invasion systems. It's pretty stupid to me that they wouldn't want to add the spice that they did in the other games.
I've made a comment similar to this in a Drunk Souls post because it's one of the biggest differences of opinion I have with some top tier invaders/players, and it concerns the idea of seamless co-op and optional/opt-in invasions. I understand the perspective of most of the things these players argue about, but the idea of seamless co-op and opt-in invasions being implemented is genuinely confusing to me. Don't these dudes get that's part of how we go into this situation? The loosening of the concept of Souls multiplayer and its core functionality has led us to this half-baked "you make your own fun, here's some arcane rules though" formula. It really is the worst of both worlds.
I can quote well-known invaders saying crap such as "co-op is ass in ER", and the first time they actually co-oped without it being streamed TT events was like this or just last year. You can't make this stuff up. This is genuinely the propagation of ignorance under the guise of expertise, synthesized under the false equivalence that invading grants invaders knowledge of co-op by default. Well, does co-op grant you knowledge of invading then? I think not.
Even in the DLC gameplay reveal I saw comments getting hundreds of likes in a few hours that insisted the multiplayer is garbage and dead on PC, killed by the infinitely superior seamless co-op. That's funny, I must be invading and co-oping every day with paid actors. What a clown I am.
The cherry on top of this irony cake was seeing most of the invaders move to PS5 over time. That's how cool seamless was uh? Makes you wanna change platforms and invade the players *who don't have a choice* . Again, you can't make this stuff up...
I've always seen the biggest obstacle to playing on PC to be EAC. From my understanding, it adds a noticeable amount of latency to every interaction and really mucks up the already not amazing connectivity.
As far as Seamless Co-Op or other opt-in requirements, I just wish the games would implement multiplayer as broadly and consistently as possible, so players don't feel the need to completely separate themselves from another portion of the community.
I've always understood the appeal of Seamless to just make multiplayer better, though for players who use it to deliberately escape invasions, well, that's the same reason I don't use it. I'd love to ride my horse around with friends and make the chore of building a character less so. But because it uses a different save system and doesn't support invasions, it's basically half a game for me.
Invasion just ruins thr gameplay flow for me. Im trying to explore, do quests, and ejoy the experience. Having it interupted mid session and forcing me into pvp with someone who can two shot me is not fun at all. One of the reasons why I only play offline. Everyone should have the ability to play how they wish, with or without player interaction
You just solved the problem you're complaining about
Did you not watch the video? If you want an easy mode (coop) you will be one upped by having an enemy player in your world to compensate
Seamless Co-op is the way to go for this. More fun with friends and less sweaty tryhards trying to screw you over.
After watching your videos and convincing some friends to play DS3 I'm replaying it again, but this time I finally decided to give invasions a chance. They are so fun, and a lot more interesting than Elden Ring invasions.
There is something in finding a new player scared in a corner when the bad red man comes only for them to realize than that bad red man is giving them souls (runes) and helping them reach the next shortcut before claiming their life in a duel after the host finally accepts to fight, and maybe he liked it, maybe he now wants to do the same to others. And that's something that I will never be able to experience in Elden Ring because that type of host can never be invaded
Haha, while it has been years since I loaded any Souls game up, I used to do stuff like that. I got messaged and described as 'the friendliest Darkwraith they had ever met' more than once.
The online components especially invasions are the x factor that fromsoft games have that extends the life of their games because even if the pve is fantastic it does get stale over time and having enemies other than the same pve over and over again really does add to the experience imo.
See my big problem with invasions is that 99% of the time you’re gonna get invaded by a dude who’s sweating his ass off doing hot swaps using all the metal builds and coming at times where you’re not ready for it there’s a difference between an honourable dual and buddy trying to get a free win You can say everything you want about it being 2 on one cuse odds are u just summoned. A pve main it’s really quite simple. You wanna fight go to the arena oh, but that just doesn’t hit the same you like being that nuisance, right?
Like Jon said a big part of the problem is the game doesn’t really communicate the co-op invasion relationship to players, but isn’t that partly on you and co-opers to have builds that can also handle PvP? I’ve run the gamut of invading, duals, blues and co-oping and if I’m helping friends in co-op I know part of my job is being able to deal with PvE and invaders at the same time. If you have a full squad of min vigor 99 int mages spamming comet azur and stars of ruin they can invalidate 99% of the game but are probably gonna get folded instantly by a halfway competent invader, imo that’s a fair trade off when invasions are an explicit difficulty compensation for the power that co-opers give. If you have a 3 man team of decent builds the odds should be greatly in your favor against a single meta sweat.
@@Un_ImportantThe actual problem is that there's absolutely no limit to the amount of time someone can show up, the second you summon you are open to constantly get hit with swants of the enemies even if you don't have the thing that actively brings them to your world open and active, in fact I've found that sometimes that thing almost deters them from showing up which is wild and miserable. But then on top of that why should people who want to play the game with their friends have to, with no way to obfuscate or go around that kind of situation, absolutely have to occasionally just not get to play because someone else across the world to decide they want to get the numbers in their game to be a little bigger so they can stroke it a little harder to it. There's an obvious line of logic that's not being crossed here to not explain a very evident problem that what you're talking about also brings up
Cuz I mean with the original games it was nowhere near as bad, with the earlier versions there was a way to go about it to where you could make it the way it is now, but the items that basically boost the amount whatever blah blah blah don't do anything at this point because for some reason naturally from soft kept cranking up the multiplayer ratios or whatever they do prepare to do this and so now you're perfectly able to get invaded every single time you summon someone, but you're more likely to get struck by lightning after winning the lottery after surviving a shark attack then you are to summon another cooperator
"where you’re not ready for it " Lmao thats the point its an invasion. I remember the first time I got invaded I thought it was amazing. ITs fun don't be scared of losing, yes I know you're scared of losing and hurting your ego its a game its fine.
@@Julius064 Bro really just said well my personal opinions different so yours is wrong like shut the fuck up
I disagree with one of the axiomatic premises here.
These games are really not designed as single-player games first, and I say thag having done my first _several_ playthroughs of Demon's Souls and Dark Souls 1 exclusively offline. The resource availability, farming for covenant items, ability to manipulate the world tendency in Demon's, and tension of going through zones and the choice to go alive or undead _profoundly_ alter the experience. The rate of souls, covenant items, and especially Humanity in Dark Souls 1 is _way_ too low absent multiplayer, and was absolutely finite outside of the Tomb of Giants in earlier patches of the game.
Invasions are the epitome of what the franchise was to much of its core audience and the move away from it is a primary reason why I personally never bothered with Elden Ring.
I miss solo invasions but.. they ain't coming back. It seems like, barring a miracle, we got nothing from the DLC to improve the Elden Ring PvP situation. So to me this is revisiting a tired and sad topic that I have accepted already. The only way I can get back at those casuals is to invade early into the DLC lifetime. I dunno if I can pick up this game early enough though, so likely by the time I start invading it will be against mostly try hards :(.
Unfortunately as an Xbox player for me online functionality requires a price tag of 10$ a month ;/ so invasions are actually anti-optional
Yeah, subscriptions are going to destroy everything good. Sort of how internet isn't a public commodity (in many places) and is at the pricing whims of profit-seekers. I wish I didn't need to play upwards of $100 a month just to use the internet at a reasonable speed.
Invasions already are optional. To get invaded you need to summon. By summoning (an action YOU willingly perform) you engage in multiplayer AND thus agree to get invaded. Period.
Right, I don’t get the problem here😂
Yeah, they certainly are. I just want them to make it even less optional, something that can occur anywhere at any time so long as you are online. It's a nuanced topic when you get into it but as it stands, yeah they are currently opt-in.
I find the "opt-out of invasions feature" argument hilarious since we already have an opt-out feature in the games: It's called playing offline. All the current versions of the games, minus Dark Souls 2, have settings in the network options to set your game to starting in offline mode that doesn't involve logging out of your service network (Xbox Live, Steam, or Playstation Network).
I have a sneaking suspicion that FromSoft may end up removing invasions in Elden Ring 2 (or whatever new game they're working on). If that happens, coop is going too. Apologies if I sound like a vindictive bastard, but I cannot wait to see those people who complained so much about invasions ruining their play sessions with their friends and wanting them removed start complaining that they can no longer coop with their friends.
I, too, fear the end of invasions. For me, I think of the whining of the anti-invasion community like the babies in Children of Men.
Sure, it's really annoying that babies cry, but the world without any crying means something is very wrong.
I like that players hate invasions because it means they're impactful. I just wish FromSoft would take the time to better implement the multiplayer systems to make sure that every player has what they need to enjoy both PVE and PVP simultaneously, eroding the artificial barrier between them and making the game a lot more cohesive.
@@emotionaljonxvx I don't see how opting out will ruin your pvp or invasions. Sounds like you guys all just need to be invading each other instead.
@@Karazu1kun Invasions against unwilling players are essential to them being invasions. If everyone who was invaded was ready for it, the whole thing becomes something else entirely.
The game does a lot to give hosts a number of advantages and the overall risk is extremely low, so I have a hard time thinking invasions should be restricted any more than they already are.
Elden Ring has made solo invasions a non-factor, so only players in co-op have to deal with them at all. It's a 2v1 and often a 3v1. If players can't handle that, I think that's perfectly acceptable and helps to reinforce that there's plenty of room to improve. If those players don't want to be invaded, well, that's sort of the point. It's supposed to be an obstacle.
Whether or not those players like it is irrelevant to what the invasion is trying to accomplish, much in the same way that players may not like fighting a difficult boss or dying to falling for a trap. It's a game, there will be obstacles. A player-controlled obstacle is just the most interesting and unique.
I cant PVP i dont know why…i try to invade in every level and no change…
I've always thought that it would be cool to take control of one of the enemies in the level. Your literally invading an enemy and technically if you think about it doing pvp at the same time. You could also give the enemy health and damage boosts when taken control of to actually make it easier. Obviously they would have to figure out how to make controlling the enemy easier as of now its all controlled by ai that can be kinda dumb at times. Like im staring right at them and they don't care 😂
I think that sacrificing Rune Arcs to avoid invasions for a [specific amount of time] would be a fairly good compromise-- Hosts would be forced to make the choice to have an increased buff/health and co-op to fight the boss is worth more than the possibility of invasions.
Moreover, I personally never liked the idea that there's several factions in the world im playing in, yet it feels so empty-- so having people, both lore and in-game, actively working against your goal works very nicely.
But i guess until FROM themselves decides to hear our pleas, the sad reality is that nothing will change-- but has that ever stopped a man from hoping?
We hope, we dream, and we complain. This is the way.
Hell yeah
Watch what you say. We might end up willing a Dark Souls MMO into being.
I'll want that right up until I get it, then I'll hate it and make dozens of videos about every way it should/could be better.
What kind of makes me confused is Elden Ring is a Fromsoft game. These games have a reputation for a reason of being very hard and brutal. Adversity and getting kicked around like an empty basket are to be expected. And many can indeed handle if this adversity is delivered by a hard boss, dungeon, level or mechanic. But a player doing it? That to many causes disproportionate amounts of disdain and anger. Why? Did they not come here for that brutal, hard experience? Why can't more people think of an invader as a random pop-in boss? People can no more control other people and how they play than they can control a boss.
Yet many seem to think by screaming hard enough at someone they can control them. Which most certainly won't work because being a jerk can in pvp be penalized very quick and swift. All it does is add toxicity, which has very negative effects on all people. Getting killed by another player is the game working as intended. Screaming at the other player and engaging in some mental violence is not. For a certain kind of person, learning to choose to just take the L, stop having a superiority complex, and calming down would do wonders. No need to take it so dang personally. But that's beyond anyone's control but they themselves.
Ultimately, the only way to learn why there is a sufficient population of people who don't really handle losing well, would be to talk with them and get a good conversation going. For all my pondering, I cannot fully understand the mindset myself either, despite seeing a lot of angles where it might come from. It would thus be invaluable to this discussion. As all of them can't be the smug superiority complex redditor types who need all the humble pie they can get hurled at them. There must be quite a lot of differing types of people and players who compose the camp of people who don't handle losing to another player too gracefully.
But this is very difficult to get going. As it takes immense bravery and open mindedness. Not to mention enough humility to be self-aware of one's negative gaming habits and tendencies. And to have both thought about them/to be willing to publicly bring forth that internal dialogue. This isn't a game problem so much as it is a people problem.
As a toxic, POS gamer myself, I get why people get mad when it's just a game. I think games that facilitate any level of built-in friction (especially PVP) should just focus their overall design to give players who aren't seeking that friction out adequate incentive to participate with as many opportunities as possible to prepare themselves.
I love thinking of summoning a phantom as a call of aid (which it is) but I hate the idea that calling aid actually is the only basic way to call of opposition. It makes me think I'm just not supposed to summon people and instead rely on spirit ashes or whatever if I need help.
I want invasions all the time, and for cooperators to come to my aid when possible. A PVP system built around random encounters and transient experiences.
im already only at 2:25 and there is a lot wrong with what your saying in reality with i will start by mentioning that elden ring has nearly 3 times the concurent players dark souls 3 had in 2016 and this is like what is this, 3, 4 years later? nevermind the million concurent players on launch. full stop, invasions as they were in dark souls 3 was the best method where every boss kill would grant you the ability to be PvP'd but also to summon allies with covenants that helps those who didnt wanna haveta go without co-op or the ember buff with things like the way of blue and unique covenants that put you up to randomly ALWAYS be able to be sent into pvp unless you had allies or were in a boss fight. legit turning off invasions all together IS NOT something that should happen and quite frankly, to some degree the requirement to be embered i still feel was stretching it and in areas with invasion covenants like the farron swamp or anor londo, you shoulda been able to be invaded regardless but also still able to summon blues at least with the way of the blue covenant. full stop, it was a part of the community interaction and the ability to always randomly be invaded even while solo added to the fun and intrigue as opposed to now where invasions are only a gank box with if ya ask me, thats partially why a lot of plays probably fell off as the pvp in elden ring quite frankly SUCKS and now only serves to stroke the ego of gank squads or grant catharsis to the few who can manage to kill them.
2:50 theres a difference between playing offline and turning off invasions. turning off invasions means only turning those off while still being able to summon which at least you seem to agree hopefully is a bad thing with i would at least say that yea, offline play exists to allow for total safety from multiplayer shenanigans but also prevents you from engaging in those yourself so its a trade off like ya said to remove some risk but at the cost of experiencing less of the game.
8:34 ok so you were giving me the bad vibes early on but you were just playing devils adovcate i see... well like i stated, personally i think the only being invaded while you have summons is actually a good way to do it IN MOST PLACES but in say for example legacy dungeons, i feel all shoulda had covenants that worked like the watchdogs of farron where you could randomly be summoned to invade at all times barring when you have summons or are in a boss fight with in legacy dungeons, solo players also should be able to be invaded regardless of if they have summons or not or rune arcs and furled finger calling remadies active or not.
Ok sure, lets take out the invasions for these sooks.
Good luck finding the dlc guys xD
Invasions should always be on for multiplayer
1.25x for optimized experience
Plays offline but online steam. Gets invaded. Loses shot
Is this what happens to these guys?😂😂
It would be better if everyone was subject to invasions, better if the Taunter's Tongue actually could give you solo buff. Goal would be to make co-opers smaller part of invasion pool, making it less likely for them to get invaded. DS2 also had a system where you can block invasions by burning a Human effigy or beating a boss which is cool too.
"People shouldn't be forced to play the game they don't want to" is asinine. ER shows that we cannot self-govern. But this game gave up the "prepare to die" struggle-model for the "player freedom"-model that Miyazaki keeps banging on about, so it's inevitable.
Being used as a mop on your own floor is such a great analogy. Those who hate it need to be carried by OLPs, and those who love it embrace the whole experience. Souls felt like a metaphor for real life: sometimes people you meet will be dicks, sometimes they will love you no matter what. Having to deal with that is a life lesson.
Invasions are a core symbol of the "souls idea": that each individual has a duty, and is on a journey. Some journeys may well entice us to interrupt others' journeys as an integral part of our own character's story. If we can't roleplay as a red, then why should others be allowed to roleplay as a host? We're all on our own journeys in life, and the phantom mechanic in Souls perfectly expresses that in the most extreme way. "When you walk through this world, you will meet challenges". That applies to all of us, and the sense of community & belonging (even if it's belonging to something a bit BS, at times) are as important as balance & fairness, imo, even at the cost of a smaller more dedicated playerbase.
FromSoft lost faith in their purpose? You just called out a whole studio going hollow. I love it.
Amazing combo at 6:52 btw. You really got a lot out of this build.
invasion was never an option and ER never had an invasion, you can only keep your fingers crossed for the next game
I think all players should stop using the word "invasion" when it comes to red players in ER, some other replacement word is needed maybe invited / guest / I don't know
online system in ER is some kind of system of colorful players with no purpose
I definitely want to keep calling them invasions because it's both what the existing game calls them and where the mechanic comes from. Elden Ring has absolutely devalued the mechanic to near irrelevance but I want to keep the conversation around invasions and what they should be, especially when they're missing the mark.
It’s the perfect word for what the red boys are doing.
@@emotionaljonxvx I understand that players call mechanics the same way the game does, but that doesn't change the fact that it's not true.
This word has a different meaning, creators or translators use it incorrectly, inconsistent with the meaning. We should not use words inappropriately, it means that everything can be described in one word and it has no meaning at the same time.
Invasions should be invasions.
And opening the door to a killer should be an invitation to the killer.
To me this is a bad description of the item.
In ER we have a completely different type of pvp and it should have its own name. If they don't understand this creator, I think the players should make them aware of it because it will end up in the fact that instead of a better system we will get something that can be found in many mmo's where before attacking another player we have to challenge him, and he has to accept and this will also be called an invasion because the initiating person asks at all.
I understand that my point of view may be radical and crazy, the example is a strong hyperbole, but isn't this what happened to this genre right now? "souls-like" doesn't really mean anything these days
Absolutely not. In fact I’d add the ability to be invaded if you have a rune arc equipped so that not every invasion is a gank fest. Invasions are a core element of the souls system.
invasions already are optional.
I don't like them. And I don't need immersion breaking notes from others.
That's cool. I'd never want them to take away the option of playing entirely offline, removed from other players.
So play offline
Literally just play offline goofy it's on the main menu when you start the game
@@aidanrock8719 I do that, still doesn't change the fact that I don't like em. ;)
Sooo chill my fellow goofballs. :P
we relish in your pain
Nah I'm too broke for psplus
Imagine spending quite a lot of money on a specialized console gaming computer, then paying a tenth of the said computer's price for the game, and then saying you are broke.
@@youtubeenjoyer1743you just can’t help but be negative wherever you go online huh? 😭
I'd certainly like to see the industry move away from subscription requirements (sadly that's not going to happen without some serious high-level intervention). I get the desire to not have the multiplayer focused when you can't participate, though I'd still argue for the single player remaining as good as it is, if not improving as well. I just want them to broaden the scope of the games in more concise ways. Less "open world" and more "single player AND multiplayer"
I love a lot of things about Elden Ring, the open world, the legacy dungeons, the bosses, and the evolution on souls combat. But I fear that decisions such as only allowing invaders to invade coop players, making the roll fast enough to course correct mistakes, and having ways of completely bypassing boss mechanics ie freeze pots on Malenia, mark a worrying trend towards snubbing the core base in favor of appealing to new players. They have shown that they can ride this line, such as with boss balancing with spirit summons. Use spirit summons and Elden Ring is the easiest of all the games, but don't and it's the hardest thanks to bosses being much more complex than before. This is a win-win for veterans of the souls series and newcomers. I just hope they'll push more in that direction rather than doing things like they did to invaders where they ruined their experience for the sake of the casual player who doesn't want to deal with invasions.
If FromSoft does something as simple as:
A. Rune Arcs open you to invasions and co-op
B. You automatically get Rune Arced when you beat a boss
C. Remove the Finger-Remedy entirely
Then it would make the game's multiplayer at least playable. Its still measurably worse than Dark Souls 3-lacking covenants, invasion zones, 6 players max, multiplayer rewards, and the loving sense of community that birthed fight clubs and the "Return To Souls" campaigns that happen annually... But it would at least be better than what we have now.
I would be genuinely shocked if the DLC brought Dark Souls 3's multiplayer back into Elden Ring. But I don't count on it. We'd be lucky to get covenants, or even a single multiplayer reward.
Let FromSoft see this!
No
👏👏👏👏
i simply can just hope that this will never ever happen. Nowadays everyone just want the easy way. Invasions is a core mechanic since ever. And it‘s the best beside all Games are Masterpieces itself.
Elden is already so unbelievable easy with all the spirit ashes, summons and the not working downscaling of them. Most times 1 invader vs 3 ppl. who then stand for weeks at a safe place instead playing the game. I will never forget how my heart pumped back in 2009 in demon souls when i got 1st time invaded. of course i lost like the chump i was back then. But since all souls games teach the most important life lesson - nothing is for granted, but it will be if you are training and willing to get better.
As an invader i see so many people who let there overleveled summon do the whole game for them. they are just watching and rushing through the game of the century. they show no respect for the work. And alone this discussion shows exactly what i mean. new players who have absolutely have no clue about the series taking all the good things and then screaming about the bad things. It reminds me of my hometown berlin, where rich people come here get all the fancy appartments in the most lively street areas to feel the unique power of the city. but then 2 weeks later, they realize „hey, its not only cool, its also very loud.“ so they start to sued all the bars and clubs they where coming once, because they want it like in their boring villages they come from. If you dont like it - leave. If you don’t like the game in its whole - play another game. but leave us alone.
All others are more than welcome and we are happy do help you and assist you at your - hopefully - own journey.
Funny thing is, when the overleveled summons are distracted the host dies so often to the weakest PVE enemies, not because their are not capable of winning - they just never learned it, because mami is always doing all for them. Nearly all people over the world who overcome that and started to make their own jorney say, thats was the best decision the ever made. because you can’t buy the feeling to beat a hard boss by your own after hours for any money in the world.
Invasions are there to balance the game. invaders are like mini bosses. challenges you need to overcome. nothing comes for free. if you wanna make it easy by chilling with two friends - thats the price. and in elden the price is already so cheap like never before. i just hope that they fix with a DLC patch that you only can turn taunters tongue off at graces or till you die or fight a boss and not like now, where people lure in invaders and then turn it off.
No they should not
NO.
Its never gonna be the same. Youre never gonna get your favorite souls games pvp back. Things change and we arent always gonna like it. Its gonna be ok.
No, they should not be "optional." No one other game or series of games has anything like Invasions. Why should From be forced to snuff out such a unique mechanic just because some hosts got their feelings hurt after they died in a game about dying? If these players dont like it, they can play something else. "but i want to play with my friends!" well I got news for you, lil' timmy; Elden Ring is not a co-op game. Being able to play with friends is a privilege, not a right.
Personally, my solution for ER pvp has always been to limit the number of phantoms a host can have to just one. Seriously, no one needs to have two bullygoat mages holding their hand thru ER, one is enough. If you want a second co-op phantom, you use the taunters tongue. This makes invasions ever so slightly less skewed in favor of hosts, and it facilitate more tag-team invasions. Basically, the more phantoms you have, the more invaders you risk.
Who cares lol play offline. You might miss a try finger but hole message big deal.
I think you said it well in another video, but the minute you use the invasion finger you are no longer the target audience for the game, you become a collaborator in the developers vision for the experience of another player, making the game better, adding content. We are a resource they can use to make their games better and it would be foolish to waste that.
Additionally, I’d say the lack of focus on invasions makes sense to me for a developer since who is going to invade the testers? Will it make the gameplay take longer? What if something weird happens? We can’t account for that, we have deadlines and we need to make sure the game runs a to b without bugs in an offline experience first and foremost and.. oops, it’s launch date guess we gotta scrap the multiplayer.
I think you're right that development challenges around PVP make it hard to focus on. I always suspect that they never bother to see how ganking might be an issue or what PVP balance looks like pre-release, meaning it all has to be done after the fact when the vast majority of the team is on to the next project.
A little tired of the era of safe everything around. Why are players afraid of losing something in a game where there is no real death?
Invasions are part of the genre. By removing the invasions, a whole layer of gaming culture will go away. Why do we need fashion if no one sees it? Why have an interesting build if it won't catch someone off guard?
All people who are against PVP have to do is stop whining and leave others alone. Nobody owes them anything, Fromsoftware are not mom and pop, but developers of RPG games for sweaty nerds.
Let them sweat!
I don't understand why this is even considered annoying when you only lose runes and time when you die. "Oh no, I lost all of my15 minutes of progress in a dungeon someone else was killing everything for me in because this jerk killed me like any enemy could do. My power fantasy is being disrupted!" Try a game like ark where you spend a week building a base and someone destroys it in an hour lol. Elden ring is pvp light in the extreme.
If it's about runes, get over yourself and go farm more and stop complaining. Get the build you looked up on the internet all set up and get on with it.
If it's about time, you're already wasting it playing a game. Either enjoy the time you spend fighting in your fighting game or play a game that makes you happy.
If it's about ego, you suck. Get better. Everyone that gets mad when they die because they suck inherently deserves to die. You only stop deserving it when you get better and get a better attitude about it.
Plus, pvp is great fun in this game. Most of the time I've been invaded the invader was pretty nice. Lots of times they'll give you a little bow and let you get ready before you fight too. Real princess bride vibes, it's great. There's even times I've befriended invaders. There's a kind of fundamental human truth in nonverbally making friends with people that are supposed to be your enemies. It's one of the greatest things about multiplayer gaming to me. Elden ring invasions are basically just a good time generator if you understand how to have a good time.
With the dlc's weapons pvp is gonna get even more chaotic and unbalanced lol