this post was submitted on 30 May 2025
103 points (96.4% liked)
Games
19193 readers
172 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This reads like a crutch though and reflects part of the problem: games are being treated like products and not carefully curated, cohesive experiences, which's why its consistent inclusion everywhere is being criticized.
If everyone is using the same crutch, no one should be surprised if people start complaining they're seeing the same crutch everywhere instead of interesting new ideas.
Would you say the same thing about dodging in bullet hells?
What OP said is right. Parrying is an easy mechanic to give dopamine, just like dodging lots of things in bullet hells.
At one point, the choice for defensive mechanism aren't infinite. We usually see armor, dodge and parry/block.
Parrying is clearly popular by looking at smash successes from FromSoftware where this is a key mechanic in the games.
People usually complain about parrying when it isn't clear when to parry, or parrying is inconsistent. It feels cheap. The mechanic itself isn't the issue, but how it is implemented.
It depends on how (and where) its implemented is his point. It needs to be woven into the comvat system as it is in FromSoft, Batman, Ultrakill, or Cuphead, not tacked on because its easy or popular. Each of those uses parrying in a different way to enhance its combat. On the other hand, if you take these mechanics without the greater context or understanding of why it works, then it'll tends to stand out as bad, or remain unused. Doom Eternal is an example that immediately comes to mind. The whole game is about fast paced combat, with a plethora of new mobility mechanics, that is, until you encounter one of the enemies you need to parry. Then, the game comes to a grinding halt while you wait for the enemy to take action, so you are able to react, completely opposite the rage-fueled persona and the mobility focus of every other mechanic. Compare that to Ultrakill, where parrying isn't just a reactive way to mitigate damage, its a situational attack that allows you to keep moving and keep up your carnage.
Game mechanics work best when they're cohesive. Parrying, due to its simplicity can be tacked on easily, breaking this cohesiveness if not given the same weight as the rest of the mechanics.
OP's point is that parry in itself doesn't need much more around it to feel rewarding.
The guy I replied to said that this is a crutch. I asked if that applied to bullet hell dodging because dodging in bullet hell is a core gameplay element and you'll be hard pressed to find people calling that mechanic a crutch. But you'll find shitty bullet hell with a terrible implementation of the mechanic.
The mechanic itself isn't a crutch and has been used successfully numerous times and I fail how to see how the mechanic in itself is crutch, and not the bad implementation by some devs.
Show me a great game mechanic and I can find you terrible implementation of that game mechanic.
Its a crutch because its expected to hold the game up, rather than the game supporting its own weight. In your bullet hell example, dodging isn't a crutch, it's the foundational mechanic. A better example would be a slot machine system (something that is near-inherently engaging) being added to a bullet hell game, not because it fits but because its fun independently and helps distract from the fact that they haven't put any effort into the core gameplay. The mechanic isn't a crutch, its inclusion as a tacked-on addition is.
Then it can be said about any mechanic, isn't it? In Soulslike, parry is part of the core mechanics.
When Balatro exploded, a ton of copy cats tried to get in on the action. It happens all the time. Why is parrying any different?
Using your clones example, the Slay the Spire "clones" that give roguelike deckbuilders a bad name aren't Inscryption or Monster Train or Balatro. Its things like Across the Obelisk and Wildfrost, that are good, but fail to capture what makes others great, and the numerous low-effort copies you've likely never heard of that viewed it as an easy way to make a good game without understanding it. Its not that Roguelike Deckbuilders are bad, obviously, its that lazy, or thoughtless use of the mechanics that is. A game isn't one mechanic, and trying to treat it as such just results in a messy or bad game.
Whoa AtO catching strays? I enjoy it a lot, particularly great that it's multiplayer
It is a fun game - I bought it and have put a dozen hours or so into it, but it also really doesn't capture the brilliance of Slay the Spire or the other more influential roguelike deckbuilders. In particular, a lot of it feels either clunky or repetitive. It is a good game, but just good rather than amazing.