I re-read my post and I don’t think I was being quite as clear as I thought I was. I was speaking generally not specifically combat. I think most people are of the consensus that the soulslike combat seems to be the draw of this game. I was speaking more of the loot driven system of Diablo/ARPGS for instance as apposed to the combat. I agree they need to choose a style (and I think souls like is my preference).
My post was more that I think people are getting ahead of the developers on what they are planning and envisioning what they want rather than what it will be. I was wondering what level and or power level we are suposed to be by the time we finish the final section in this build we are playing? Are we all just overly powerful for what is in front of us and is that part of the problem?
I agree with you in principle but I would say that you could argue this is more a Diablo with soulslike combat. I agree it will be it’s own thing but you can’t ignore the games that were the inspiration. I think a lot of people are worried about powercreep in the game which is a ARPG thing and therefore the sticking point on this thread.
I am not entirely sure the developers are currently moving on their vision but getting a feel for which idea they come up with the community likes.
I was curious (and asked it elsewhere but never really got answers) how different the game felt for people the second time they played it? Did it feel like playing a souls game for the second time or was it more like playing Diablo for the second time? Did it retain that feeling that people had the first time they played it?
i’d agree if it wasn’t for the fact that the way this is being discussed rejects or outright cancels possible design choices that could strive for a different game genre/type.
if in this topic i was reading stuff like (as an example) “yeah so the slowness and intentionality of combat is overshadowed by the classic arpg characteristics and certain elements of combat”
this is still posing the soulsy side against the diablo side but without narrowing the vision as much.
some people in this topic are discussing like this (and dont get me wrong, i have no right whatsoever to say how people should discuss or what they should say, and that is not what im trying to defend here), but i see some saying “it has to be either souls or diablo” and this is what i heavily disagree with.
of course everyone is free to argue and counterargue, im just putting out there my perspective
also, quick edit, i think i expressed it poorly and aggressively for no reason so that’s my bad lol
“Soulslike” and “Diablolike” are just labels grouping different characteristics of a game. U can simply resolve those labels to their actual meaning if you dont want to stereotype wicked to be more souls or diablolike. In the end we are talking about these base characteristics and what of them fit into the new “wickedlike” characterisics-group. Its interesting to see what fits and what does not fit or even go together.
Labels simply things which can lead to different understandings of “soulslike” and “diablolike”. Merging those together to create a new “Type” must be a painful process … its always like that because ppl want to keep there comforts and what they are used to. This discussion is part of this process. I really respect that Moon tries this … its a risky path. After all we got certainty about what works and what not, but somebody has to try it out. There is no other form of learning.
Here I am reading user tips on making changes to the game in one place or another, and I come to the conclusion that these very tips, no matter how they spoil the game, since:
It is still unclear what the game as a whole is from the developer, since at the moment we have early access, which does not give us all the fully realized ideas of the developer. it is not optimized to the end, not all mechanics work correctly and other things. Hence the conclusion that we don’t see the whole picture to talk fully about the game.
The game developer, after listening to our advice, can easily forget the potential of his own idea, i.e. how exactly he wanted to raise it, move away from his own interests, which can greatly affect the quality of the game as a whole.
The game is still very well implemented, but at the moment its early access gives us very little, so to speak, only the beginning of adventures, crafting, and something else we haven’t even seen. I have already played the game for 100 hours, playing it I skipped a week of work, this suggests that for me personally, the game has become ideal and I want to play it endlessly, the only thing I would like at the moment is more locations, since in the data I have already worn everything to holes with my 3 characters. Some advice from myself, the only thing that can be the development of crafting is higher, but again, it may already have it all, it’s just that it’s in an early version of the game.
I get where you’re coming from. Truly. I have thought about this a lot.
My take on that topic is the following:
I have faith the dev team knows what they are getting themselves into. This is not the first EA Game, that asks for feedback.
As long as we just discuss ideas or directions the game could take and systems that could work, we are strictly talking hypotheticals.
This forum is a soundboard for:
What the community cares about, likes and dislikes and wants to see, what could potentially be included or addressed in some way
What minor or major problems the community perceives, which should be solved or at least addressed in some way or another
What ideas the community has, that could potentially be salvaged
Based on this, imo we have to trust Moon Studios to not follow the communities lead blindly - which I am sure they wont - and keep talking
… And maybe take a hiatus from time to time, wait for the next patch and reevaluate
