I'd say there is an argument to be made where the knowledge about the sysytems and the ability to make good builds is the skill that is being tested. The effective build is one that can beat the game, but an efficient build can go far into the endgame. But that requires mechaincs and choices to be plentyful for such a skill to matter. If there are many choices that are presented but they work only when grouped/combined in specific ways, then it is a skill to be able to recognise those combinations.
I prefer strategy-based combat than skill-based in RPG because I think building a character synergizes with strategy while combat based on reflexes clashes with stats : like having to, say, make 3 headshots to take out a guy because your gun or skill is weak. Or not having to bother parrying or dodging because you made a really tanky character. It's probably possible to make both systems work but it's a tough balancing act, and RPG is already hard to balance by nature because by the end game 2 players can have vastly different possibilities.
Path of exile had my absolute favourite game mechanic in one of their seasons that then became core: Delve. Delve lets you progress into a mine to search for gear and new areas. If you had good gear/skills you progressed down in the main layout for more challenges but if you lacked the skill/gear to do that or just wanted to explore you could progress sideways. Both ways where endless so none of them where wrong. The player could play as they wanted and still get progress from their point of view. Whats challenging for som are not challenging for others. I love when games gives the players the option to change the options to what challenges them. Warhammer 40k: Mechanicus and Pathfinder: wotr comes to mind in this regard. For ARPGs i wish mote games did what PoE did in Delve; progress the way you feel is challenging. Who cares what the "elite" players tell you is the right way, go your way.
Great video. Sekiro has a surprising amount of versatility in its prosthetics that I failed to realize on my playthroughs and only was able to witness through some crazy RUclips videos. If anyone wants to try out sekiro but are worried its just parry spam should definitely look into these videos, its genuinely quite adaptable
I dont think Tainted Grail: Conquest to be easy or hard. Most classes have combinations of traits and cards that just break the game and makes you auto win against anything. And if you are unlucky and dont get those combinations you might instead have a hard time. At least back when I played it.
Asmongold has a point. In elden ring you can indeed win the game with no build only skill. It will be hard, but some have done it. Many of em do these challenge builds.
Yes. But so does Rhykker. Elden Ring is not in the same ballpark as Diablo IV, Path of Exile etc. Like Rhykker says, Elden Ring prioritizes skill whilst this brand of ARPGs favor builds a lot. The thing is... how should builds work in RPGS? I think good builds with good gear should give you an edge, but it should not be able to allow you to brute force your way through a game.
@@YeOldEntertainment I think there should be a way for a player with a meme or bad build to beat a boss by being better at the game. For example, in RAID shadow legends (it has a similar problem to diablo 4), you can do the clan boss by spending money or being lucky to get heroes with the skill "block damage" or "unkillable", build them, and ignore all the mechanics of the boss. Craft potions, consumebles, dodging everything perfectly. You dont need any skill. If you dont do that. I hope you enjoy never completing that boss until the uber late game while your lucky and whale friends do it first month. I think Diablo 4 has the same problem. You either do a specific build, or you fail.
@@YeOldEntertainment Yes it should make it easier. Not braindead, but easier. A certain amount of input should be required no matter the build. But it should not be : "Build A makes the game a joke. And every other build is a struggle." And build A is: stack defense and hp to survive the 1 shot. Aka grind the stats for hours. You cannot dodge the attack, you cannot use a pet or something to take the damage for you. You cannot use your skill and timing to get pass it. Grind for hours is the only way.
The situation here is like comparing apples and pumpkins. Both Souls games and ARPGs are RPGs but that is about where the similarity ends. In a loot driven ARPG, most of the core mechanics are built around getting better gear, but in some grindy ARPGs the game is made BY DESIGN a loot focused game just to bloat playing time. This was not so much of a problem for ARPGs in the early 2000s because in that time most devs were still making games to be fun, challenging and have interesting mechanics. They were making games for the love of the game. This all changed when big money corporations started to take over prolific gaming companies and started to corrupt this core principle of game development: make games fun. They replaced it with: make games profitable. This has had a devastating effect on game design in the last 10 years because many game devs have been forced to put less emphasis on FUN and more emphasis on MONEY making game mechanics. Blizzard has unfortunately fallen into this category of developers that is making design decisions mostly for making money instead of making fun engaging video games. This came to a head with the blatant MACRO-transactions cash grab that is Diablo Immoral and unfortunately they took a lot of mechanics and gearing systems from that game or the same devs that worked on that also worked on D4. They focused more of the game mechanics on gear rather than interesting gear+build+perks combination that is used in other games to create a fun character in late game. When your end game viability becomes entirely dependent on the gear that you have to grind for many hours, then that is not longer a fun game and it becomes a chore. This is a way for a game dev to artificially inflate the game time of an otherwise bland game: create a boring grind for gear. This is just a lazy and uninspired way of going about game design which more and more devs are taking instead of creating fun and engaging end game content. And i dont think any gamer that is worth his salt will say that they love farming some piece of gear for 10 days just to make a build work. Devs that do not respect a player's time do not deserve the payment for that game imo.
I know this might sound petty and completely out of scope for the video but i kind of lost respect of Rhykker when he started taking the RAID sponsors. I get it, people need money. But I feel its one thing if somebody like IH takes a sponsor for a game and something completely different if your main content revolves around your fundamental opinions on a game. One he started promoting it, I cannot take any opinions about the game he supports seriously anymore, since he was praising a p2w mobile game in the same breath. That being said, most quotes used in this video seems to make decent sense.
@@YeOldEntertainment oh yeah definitely, while I personally hated the direction D3 took and was one of the people that moved onto PoE closed beta and never looked back, I get that people will have different tastes in games. Although I'm actually very disappointed in the fact that some fundamental issues that should have been addressed after the early access beta still exists in D4, like the absurd stash space limitation and fundamentally boring "skill tree". I understand D4 is not trying to be PoE but the glaring issues of these things were obvious since the beta, and while I understand Blizzard has probably played other ARPGs (giving the benefit of the doubt here) to get inspiration on the direction they want to take their game considering the amount of stuff taken from games like Lost Ark, I don't feel like the experience of D4 is an improvement to D3 either. I do give credit to the visual aesthetic and controls, those are fantastic
anyways point is, I do think Rhykker reacting to the criticisms of D4 is a good thing overall, but I wish he actually took more initiative on addressing the problems of the game and not just let other people do it for him and reacting to it. I think criticizing something and acknowledging the flaws is very important, ESPECIALLY when you like the game overall. I think Darth Microtransactions also has some good feedback on these issues although his content is a bit more emotional.
@@BDtetra The thing is that Rhykker genuinely likes the game a heck of a lot more than Asmongold or DM Diablo IV, he doesn't seem to be as bothered as some people in the community by some of the problems. But I think he acknowledges Asmongold's criticism as legitimate, and that's... good (I think).
Thank you for reminding me of how amazing Icewind Dale's soundtrack is.
Fantastic music choice in the video as always :D
Hehehe. Glad someone noticed! thanks!
I'd say there is an argument to be made where the knowledge about the sysytems and the ability to make good builds is the skill that is being tested. The effective build is one that can beat the game, but an efficient build can go far into the endgame. But that requires mechaincs and choices to be plentyful for such a skill to matter. If there are many choices that are presented but they work only when grouped/combined in specific ways, then it is a skill to be able to recognise those combinations.
My original script originally talked about what you said... but it was 13 pages long XD. But yes, you are fundamentally on point.
That would be a veeeery loooong video. hehehe Welcome aboard.
When can we expect bg3 review?
Yes of course, writing down my notes on all categories as I answer right now.
Love your Take Ye Old! excellent!
Thanks man!
Fantastic discussion. Thank you!
Thorough and intelligent. Excellent video!
I prefer strategy-based combat than skill-based in RPG because I think building a character synergizes with strategy while combat based on reflexes clashes with stats : like having to, say, make 3 headshots to take out a guy because your gun or skill is weak. Or not having to bother parrying or dodging because you made a really tanky character.
It's probably possible to make both systems work but it's a tough balancing act, and RPG is already hard to balance by nature because by the end game 2 players can have vastly different possibilities.
Path of exile had my absolute favourite game mechanic in one of their seasons that then became core: Delve.
Delve lets you progress into a mine to search for gear and new areas. If you had good gear/skills you progressed down in the main layout for more challenges but if you lacked the skill/gear to do that or just wanted to explore you could progress sideways. Both ways where endless so none of them where wrong. The player could play as they wanted and still get progress from their point of view.
Whats challenging for som are not challenging for others. I love when games gives the players the option to change the options to what challenges them. Warhammer 40k: Mechanicus and Pathfinder: wotr comes to mind in this regard. For ARPGs i wish mote games did what PoE did in Delve; progress the way you feel is challenging. Who cares what the "elite" players tell you is the right way, go your way.
Great video. Sekiro has a surprising amount of versatility in its prosthetics that I failed to realize on my playthroughs and only was able to witness through some crazy RUclips videos. If anyone wants to try out sekiro but are worried its just parry spam should definitely look into these videos, its genuinely quite adaptable
I dont think Tainted Grail: Conquest to be easy or hard. Most classes have combinations of traits and cards that just break the game and makes you auto win against anything. And if you are unlucky and dont get those combinations you might instead have a hard time. At least back when I played it.
Asmongold has a point. In elden ring you can indeed win the game with no build only skill.
It will be hard, but some have done it. Many of em do these challenge builds.
Yes. But so does Rhykker. Elden Ring is not in the same ballpark as Diablo IV, Path of Exile etc. Like Rhykker says, Elden Ring prioritizes skill whilst this brand of ARPGs favor builds a lot. The thing is... how should builds work in RPGS? I think good builds with good gear should give you an edge, but it should not be able to allow you to brute force your way through a game.
@@YeOldEntertainment
I think there should be a way for a player with a meme or bad build to beat a boss by being better at the game.
For example, in RAID shadow legends (it has a similar problem to diablo 4), you can do the clan boss by spending money or being lucky to get heroes with the skill "block damage" or "unkillable", build them, and ignore all the mechanics of the boss. Craft potions, consumebles, dodging everything perfectly.
You dont need any skill. If you dont do that. I hope you enjoy never completing that boss until the uber late game while your lucky and whale friends do it first month.
I think Diablo 4 has the same problem. You either do a specific build, or you fail.
@@YeOldEntertainment
You could give consumables or make it possible to dodge.
There are entire games made only on dodging stuff from the boss.
@@YeOldEntertainment
Yes it should make it easier. Not braindead, but easier. A certain amount of input should be required no matter the build.
But it should not be :
"Build A makes the game a joke. And every other build is a struggle."
And build A is: stack defense and hp to survive the 1 shot. Aka grind the stats for hours. You cannot dodge the attack, you cannot use a pet or something to take the damage for you. You cannot use your skill and timing to get pass it. Grind for hours is the only way.
The situation here is like comparing apples and pumpkins. Both Souls games and ARPGs are RPGs but that is about where the similarity ends. In a loot driven ARPG, most of the core mechanics are built around getting better gear, but in some grindy ARPGs the game is made BY DESIGN a loot focused game just to bloat playing time.
This was not so much of a problem for ARPGs in the early 2000s because in that time most devs were still making games to be fun, challenging and have interesting mechanics. They were making games for the love of the game.
This all changed when big money corporations started to take over prolific gaming companies and started to corrupt this core principle of game development: make games fun. They replaced it with: make games profitable. This has had a devastating effect on game design in the last 10 years because many game devs have been forced to put less emphasis on FUN and more emphasis on MONEY making game mechanics.
Blizzard has unfortunately fallen into this category of developers that is making design decisions mostly for making money instead of making fun engaging video games. This came to a head with the blatant MACRO-transactions cash grab that is Diablo Immoral and unfortunately they took a lot of mechanics and gearing systems from that game or the same devs that worked on that also worked on D4.
They focused more of the game mechanics on gear rather than interesting gear+build+perks combination that is used in other games to create a fun character in late game. When your end game viability becomes entirely dependent on the gear that you have to grind for many hours, then that is not longer a fun game and it becomes a chore.
This is a way for a game dev to artificially inflate the game time of an otherwise bland game: create a boring grind for gear. This is just a lazy and uninspired way of going about game design which more and more devs are taking instead of creating fun and engaging end game content.
And i dont think any gamer that is worth his salt will say that they love farming some piece of gear for 10 days just to make a build work. Devs that do not respect a player's time do not deserve the payment for that game imo.
Would be cool if Asmon or Rhyker responded to this vid. Good commentary.
I'm betting on... "unlikely" hehehe. But thanks.
The asnwer is very simple:
d4 bad Baseg
I know this might sound petty and completely out of scope for the video but i kind of lost respect of Rhykker when he started taking the RAID sponsors. I get it, people need money. But I feel its one thing if somebody like IH takes a sponsor for a game and something completely different if your main content revolves around your fundamental opinions on a game. One he started promoting it, I cannot take any opinions about the game he supports seriously anymore, since he was praising a p2w mobile game in the same breath. That being said, most quotes used in this video seems to make decent sense.
He is a Diablo fanboy. But he is sincere in his fanboyism. He's not unreasonable. I think he does a pretty good job covering the ARPG genre.
@@YeOldEntertainment oh yeah definitely, while I personally hated the direction D3 took and was one of the people that moved onto PoE closed beta and never looked back, I get that people will have different tastes in games. Although I'm actually very disappointed in the fact that some fundamental issues that should have been addressed after the early access beta still exists in D4, like the absurd stash space limitation and fundamentally boring "skill tree".
I understand D4 is not trying to be PoE but the glaring issues of these things were obvious since the beta, and while I understand Blizzard has probably played other ARPGs (giving the benefit of the doubt here) to get inspiration on the direction they want to take their game considering the amount of stuff taken from games like Lost Ark, I don't feel like the experience of D4 is an improvement to D3 either. I do give credit to the visual aesthetic and controls, those are fantastic
anyways point is, I do think Rhykker reacting to the criticisms of D4 is a good thing overall, but I wish he actually took more initiative on addressing the problems of the game and not just let other people do it for him and reacting to it. I think criticizing something and acknowledging the flaws is very important, ESPECIALLY when you like the game overall. I think Darth Microtransactions also has some good feedback on these issues although his content is a bit more emotional.
@@BDtetra The thing is that Rhykker genuinely likes the game a heck of a lot more than Asmongold or DM Diablo IV, he doesn't seem to be as bothered as some people in the community by some of the problems. But I think he acknowledges Asmongold's criticism as legitimate, and that's... good (I think).
imagine thinking D4 is fun KEKW
Imagine thinking there's a skill ceiling in Diablo 4 😂.
I like builds and I like to get good but I'm just a casual 😊
Bump
bump