Yeah, in and of itself it's a pretty fun fight - it's just the camera and input buffering issues that i've hit my limit on.
The input buffering is an explicit design choice, which doesn't assuage your issues with it at all, but it's not unintended or a bug.
Oh, i know - It's just a design choice i violently disagree with and makes the games feel less controlled to me.
Edit: I'd actually be interested in the argument FOR input buffering, at least to this degree. I can see it having some value, but i've always found the level of it in Dark Souls games to be very frustrating and to actively hamper my ability to control my character
patience is a virtue, basically. they want you attempting to react to enemies, not mashing dodge and then interrupting dodge to attack by breaking inputs afaik. it's also to prevent you from chaining dodges forever to iframe everything on low equipment rolls to some extent.
Yeah, in and of itself it's a pretty fun fight - it's just the camera and input buffering issues that i've hit my limit on.
The input buffering is an explicit design choice, which doesn't assuage your issues with it at all, but it's not unintended or a bug.
Oh, i know - It's just a design choice i violently disagree with and makes the games feel less controlled to me.
Edit: I'd actually be interested in the argument FOR input buffering, at least to this degree. I can see it having some value, but i've always found the level of it in Dark Souls games to be very frustrating and to actively hamper my ability to control my character
Generally the goal of input buffering is to reduce the difficulty in timing things, and generally I support its inclusion as a result.
+8
Options
Zxerolfor the smaller pieces, my shovel wouldn't doso i took off my boot and used my shoeRegistered Userregular
so what you're saying is that souls games need roman cancels
+1
Options
3cl1ps3I will build a labyrinth to house the cheeseRegistered Userregular
So I can't comment on Sekiro, but I know in the Soulsborne games they want every attack you make to be a deliberate choice with potential consequences. They don't want you animation canceling an attack to dodge roll, they want you to pick better times to attack so that you don't get punished for doing it. IIRC it's the same reason that parries in Soulsborne are largely anticipatory rather than reactive, the gameplay is meant to be about planning and control, not reaction speed.
Whether that's an argument for it, I dunno, I guess that's a question for whether you agree with their thinking or not, but that's the stated design goal.
I personally will say that I don't think animation canceling in Soulsborne would be good. I like that everything you do has weight and can't just be easily canceled if it turns out you made a bad choice.
So I can't comment on Sekiro, but I know in the Soulsborne games they want every attack you make to be a deliberate choice with potential consequences. They don't want you animation canceling an attack to dodge roll, they want you to pick better times to attack so that you don't get punished for doing it. IIRC it's the same reason that parries in Soulsborne are largely anticipatory rather than reactive, the gameplay is meant to be about planning and control, not reaction speed.
Whether that's an argument for it, I dunno, I guess that's a question for whether you agree with their thinking or not, but that's the stated design goal.
I personally will say that I don't think animation canceling in Soulsborne would be good. I like that everything you do has weight and can't just be easily canceled if it turns out you made a bad choice.
I might be wrong here but this seems irrelevant to input buffering. Input buffering is when your inputs are stored so that they go off later; it isn't relevant to whether or not you can animation cancel except that if you can animation cancel input buffering is (maybe) pointless (though often you have a mix of when and where you can cancel what so it still has a purpose). You can have games without animation cancelling with a wide variety of input buffering windows.
E: The issue with input buffering being too strong is that it wouldn't just lock you in to a single animation, but that pressing attack twice would lock you into both attacks even if the second attack came out way later and could theoretically have let you choose not to attack instead.
I need to test it out because I was under the impression that there is no input buffering on attacks in Sekiro
I think it was even compared to God of War which has a lot of input buffering
0
Options
BroloBroseidonLord of the BroceanRegistered Userregular
they might have a more generous input buffer for the multiplayer component
having a lenient input buffer makes it easier to stop your inputs from being "eaten" by packet loss, and I don't think the souls games use anything like rollback to correct for that issue
As an example in a game with animation cancelling, think about a DMC game.
Good input buffering: you are actively smashing XXXXX, and the quick attack combo plays out at full speed without waiting for any press specifically after a previous attack ended since it's clear you want to combo.
Bad input buffering (too generous): You press XXXXX at the start of the combo and are now locked into all five attacks, totalling 1.5 seconds after your last press.
Bad input buffering (too limited): you mash XXXXX but your attacks come out staggered because it only cares about the inputs after an attack finishes, so you should have been rhythm gaming it to get the combo to chain properly.
As an example in a game with animation cancelling, think about a DMC game.
Good input buffering: you are actively smashing XXXXX, and the quick attack combo plays out at full speed without waiting for any press specifically after a previous attack ended since it's clear you want to combo.
Bad input buffering (too generous): You press XXXXX at the start of the combo and are now locked into all five attacks, totalling 1.5 seconds after your last press.
Bad input buffering (too limited): you mash XXXXX but your attacks come out staggered because it only cares about the inputs after an attack finishes, so you should have been rhythm gaming it to get the combo to chain properly.
I disagree with calling some versions good and some versions bad.
They are different approaches that create different outcomes that can be deliberately used to craft a specific play experience.
Your too generous example can be used in a game where you want to force the player to be very deliberate. If you press X 5 times you you get 5 attacks. If you did not want 5 attacks, don’t press X 5 times. This makes the player be judicious. This is a valid choice, and is neither inherently good or bad, but needs to be viewed in the larger context of the game’s design decisions.
I think i'm nearing the end of Echoes of the Eye and while it's good it's not as good as Outer Wilds the base game. Too many "how the fuck would I have figured out to do that?" moments that i've had to look up.
As an example in a game with animation cancelling, think about a DMC game.
Good input buffering: you are actively smashing XXXXX, and the quick attack combo plays out at full speed without waiting for any press specifically after a previous attack ended since it's clear you want to combo.
Bad input buffering (too generous): You press XXXXX at the start of the combo and are now locked into all five attacks, totalling 1.5 seconds after your last press.
Bad input buffering (too limited): you mash XXXXX but your attacks come out staggered because it only cares about the inputs after an attack finishes, so you should have been rhythm gaming it to get the combo to chain properly.
I disagree with calling some versions good and some versions bad.
They are different approaches that create different outcomes that can be deliberately used to craft a specific play experience.
Your too generous example can be used in a game where you want to force the player to be very deliberate. If you press X 5 times you you get 5 attacks. If you did not want 5 attacks, don’t press X 5 times. This makes the player be judicious. This is a valid choice, and is neither inherently good or bad, but needs to be viewed in the larger context of the game’s design decisions.
There is a reason I used DMC as my example because it is associated with a specific playstyle where both locking in moves and preventing the player from doing basic combos easily are absolutely against the design intention.
Even in Dark Souls you rarely lock in two moves ahead by mashing, so my example was also very hyperbolic.
If you don't have any input buffering you end up with situations where your attack doesn't happen because you pressed the button a frame too early.
My preferred version is when you can press the button very early, but you have to still hold it when the game is looking for the input. Like jumping in Quake.
As an example in a game with animation cancelling, think about a DMC game.
Good input buffering: you are actively smashing XXXXX, and the quick attack combo plays out at full speed without waiting for any press specifically after a previous attack ended since it's clear you want to combo.
Bad input buffering (too generous): You press XXXXX at the start of the combo and are now locked into all five attacks, totalling 1.5 seconds after your last press.
Bad input buffering (too limited): you mash XXXXX but your attacks come out staggered because it only cares about the inputs after an attack finishes, so you should have been rhythm gaming it to get the combo to chain properly.
I disagree with calling some versions good and some versions bad.
They are different approaches that create different outcomes that can be deliberately used to craft a specific play experience.
Your too generous example can be used in a game where you want to force the player to be very deliberate. If you press X 5 times you you get 5 attacks. If you did not want 5 attacks, don’t press X 5 times. This makes the player be judicious. This is a valid choice, and is neither inherently good or bad, but needs to be viewed in the larger context of the game’s design decisions.
There is a reason I used DMC as my example because it is associated with a specific playstyle where both locking in moves and preventing the player from doing basic combos easily are absolutely against the design intention.
Even in Dark Souls you rarely lock in two moves ahead by mashing, so my example was also very hyperbolic.
You can definitely lock a move in like 2 seconds in the future in Monster Hunter, for example.
Sincerely, a great sword fan.
0
Options
Zxerolfor the smaller pieces, my shovel wouldn't doso i took off my boot and used my shoeRegistered Userregular
I think i'm nearing the end of Echoes of the Eye and while it's good it's not as good as Outer Wilds the base game. Too many "how the fuck would I have figured out to do that?" moments that i've had to look up.
A lot of that could be alleviated if slides were easily reviewable, because all the critical information required to progress are there, but if you miss something or need to go back and take a closer look, you have tediously hunt them down, and heaven help you if you're not sure which slide you're looking for. The ship log gives you only a glancing review, and when I played, I knew there was a critical piece of information I missed from a log, and I sure as fuck wasn't about to chase down that one slide again. Ended up looking up a youtube compilation of the slides instead and figured it out.
A broader problem is that the way everything is set up seems random as hell. In the base game, everything had some sort of connection. This was done here, which relates to over there, which explains this, etc. You could go explore someplace else and work your way back if you get stuck. The DLC is much more contrained, and there doesn't seem to be a rhyme or reason why this macguffin is stuck over here other than we needed to make a puzzle. It's as if the visitors are bunch of escape room enthusiasts that wanted to make this convoluted world to challenge future explorers or something.
As an example in a game with animation cancelling, think about a DMC game.
Good input buffering: you are actively smashing XXXXX, and the quick attack combo plays out at full speed without waiting for any press specifically after a previous attack ended since it's clear you want to combo.
Bad input buffering (too generous): You press XXXXX at the start of the combo and are now locked into all five attacks, totalling 1.5 seconds after your last press.
Bad input buffering (too limited): you mash XXXXX but your attacks come out staggered because it only cares about the inputs after an attack finishes, so you should have been rhythm gaming it to get the combo to chain properly.
I disagree with calling some versions good and some versions bad.
They are different approaches that create different outcomes that can be deliberately used to craft a specific play experience.
Your too generous example can be used in a game where you want to force the player to be very deliberate. If you press X 5 times you you get 5 attacks. If you did not want 5 attacks, don’t press X 5 times. This makes the player be judicious. This is a valid choice, and is neither inherently good or bad, but needs to be viewed in the larger context of the game’s design decisions.
There is a reason I used DMC as my example because it is associated with a specific playstyle where both locking in moves and preventing the player from doing basic combos easily are absolutely against the design intention.
Even in Dark Souls you rarely lock in two moves ahead by mashing, so my example was also very hyperbolic.
You can definitely lock a move in like 2 seconds in the future in Monster Hunter, for example.
Sincerely, a great sword fan.
Having never played GS much, I need to clarify: Are you talking about locking in a two-second charge cycle, or are you talking about pressing the button for a followup attack two seconds before it releases and then having the followup attack trigger without further button presses?
The former is just the GS being slow as shit. The latter is input buffering.
As an example in a game with animation cancelling, think about a DMC game.
Good input buffering: you are actively smashing XXXXX, and the quick attack combo plays out at full speed without waiting for any press specifically after a previous attack ended since it's clear you want to combo.
Bad input buffering (too generous): You press XXXXX at the start of the combo and are now locked into all five attacks, totalling 1.5 seconds after your last press.
Bad input buffering (too limited): you mash XXXXX but your attacks come out staggered because it only cares about the inputs after an attack finishes, so you should have been rhythm gaming it to get the combo to chain properly.
I disagree with calling some versions good and some versions bad.
They are different approaches that create different outcomes that can be deliberately used to craft a specific play experience.
Your too generous example can be used in a game where you want to force the player to be very deliberate. If you press X 5 times you you get 5 attacks. If you did not want 5 attacks, don’t press X 5 times. This makes the player be judicious. This is a valid choice, and is neither inherently good or bad, but needs to be viewed in the larger context of the game’s design decisions.
There is a reason I used DMC as my example because it is associated with a specific playstyle where both locking in moves and preventing the player from doing basic combos easily are absolutely against the design intention.
Even in Dark Souls you rarely lock in two moves ahead by mashing, so my example was also very hyperbolic.
You can definitely lock a move in like 2 seconds in the future in Monster Hunter, for example.
Sincerely, a great sword fan.
Having never played GS much, I need to clarify: Are you talking about locking in a two-second charge cycle, or are you talking about pressing the button for a followup attack two seconds before it releases and then having the followup attack trigger without further button presses?
The former is just the GS being slow as shit. The latter is input buffering.
On long recovery great sword moves you can buffer your next swing what feels like years in advance, but I’ve never actually timed it.
hey so uhhh not gonna post any specifics here for content warning reasons, and I know it kinda sucks to just barge in all "X is problematic, do your own research" but maybe don't buy fight knight
hey so uhhh not gonna post any specifics here for content warning reasons, and I know it kinda sucks to just barge in all "X is problematic, do your own research" but maybe don't buy fight knight
hey so uhhh not gonna post any specifics here for content warning reasons, and I know it kinda sucks to just barge in all "X is problematic, do your own research" but maybe don't buy fight knight
Somebody here recently mentioned the Telltale Batman games, and conveniently that game worked for a TrueAchievements challenge, so I am now up to Chapter 3 of the first game. I like it a lot! The recommendation that pushed me the most was that you don’t have to be grimdark Batman, and it has been fun mixing in some actual “I’m not gonna punch this thug just to make him talk” with “No, this thug deserves a broken arm for trying to mess with me.”
Chapter 2 end spoilers
I saved Catwoman instead of Dent, and now I’m kind of regretting it. Maybe I was metagaming and figuring “well if I save him now he’ll probably still end up Two Face later on” … I don’t know. Oh well, I’m just accepting the choices I’ve made and rolling with it.
hey so uhhh not gonna post any specifics here for content warning reasons, and I know it kinda sucks to just barge in all "X is problematic, do your own research" but maybe don't buy fight knight
Oh hell, what did they do?
sexual assault allegations, primarily
uuuuuuuuuuggggggghhhhh
+7
Options
BroloBroseidonLord of the BroceanRegistered Userregular
hey so uhhh not gonna post any specifics here for content warning reasons, and I know it kinda sucks to just barge in all "X is problematic, do your own research" but maybe don't buy fight knight
I think i'm nearing the end of Echoes of the Eye and while it's good it's not as good as Outer Wilds the base game. Too many "how the fuck would I have figured out to do that?" moments that i've had to look up.
I played it for a few days, stopped, and just haven't got back to it, for what feels like that reason. There's still places that show up on the map as "you haven't found everything here" but I don't know what it is I'm meant to find and I _think_ I've been everywhere though obviously I haven't.
(only spoilering very early-on story here)
Also, in the main game, while I always had to get in my ship and go somewhere, there were enough different places to go that it didn't feel repetitive. Thus far in Echoes of the Eye, once I'd found where the story happens, I'm always going to the same place, and once I'm there, I have to get in a raft and sail around, it feels like there's less freedom to explore because of the mechanics of navigating that world -- if I miss where I wanted to go and float past, I'm pretty much stuck and it often seems quicker to restart the whole timeloop and try sailing more carefully, which doesn't make it feel less repetitive.
(possible minor spoiler but it's just for the mechanics, not the story)
I did find the hidden elevator in the darkness off to one side of where your ship lands, which helped a bit, but there's still a lot of the world that needs a raft, as far as I can tell.
0
Options
PiptheFairFrequently not in boats.Registered Userregular
sad child finds mom at convenience store not buying cigs
I think this is the first thing they've produced that publicly acknowledges operators. Like, they've been around for years but but people just don't talk about it to try and preserve the reveal for new people. But I guess they can't tiptoe around it in this case.
hey so uhhh not gonna post any specifics here for content warning reasons, and I know it kinda sucks to just barge in all "X is problematic, do your own research" but maybe don't buy fight knight
I mean I am trying to remember what quest I'm on? The sacrifice I think?
Ok, then I think you're in the clear spoiler wise.
The Sentients have arrived, led by Natah in the trailer, the Sentient Mimic that posed as Margulis/Lotus. Basically this trailer just highlights the Void powers of the Tenno and the feelings of betrayal the warrior children feel from Natah's deception. That's kinda it, the rest is just fancy cool shit.
Man I wish I’d chosen Easy difficulty for playing Huntdown. It took me 50 goes to beat the penultimate boss on normal so I’m not looking forward to the final boss
Edit: oh thank god, the last boss puts a save point in between the two phases, no previous boss did that and if actually makes the last boss easier
Prohass on
0
Options
BroloBroseidonLord of the BroceanRegistered Userregular
Somebody here recently mentioned the Telltale Batman games, and conveniently that game worked for a TrueAchievements challenge, so I am now up to Chapter 3 of the first game. I like it a lot! The recommendation that pushed me the most was that you don’t have to be grimdark Batman, and it has been fun mixing in some actual “I’m not gonna punch this thug just to make him talk” with “No, this thug deserves a broken arm for trying to mess with me.”
Chapter 2 end spoilers
I saved Catwoman instead of Dent, and now I’m kind of regretting it. Maybe I was metagaming and figuring “well if I save him now he’ll probably still end up Two Face later on” … I don’t know. Oh well, I’m just accepting the choices I’ve made and rolling with it.
Spoilers for the opposite choice of what you made:
If you save Dent, he'll still develop the Two-Face personality later on, but he won't have the scars. However, Catwoman gets injured and takes off.
Posts
patience is a virtue, basically. they want you attempting to react to enemies, not mashing dodge and then interrupting dodge to attack by breaking inputs afaik. it's also to prevent you from chaining dodges forever to iframe everything on low equipment rolls to some extent.
Generally the goal of input buffering is to reduce the difficulty in timing things, and generally I support its inclusion as a result.
Whether that's an argument for it, I dunno, I guess that's a question for whether you agree with their thinking or not, but that's the stated design goal.
I personally will say that I don't think animation canceling in Soulsborne would be good. I like that everything you do has weight and can't just be easily canceled if it turns out you made a bad choice.
I might be wrong here but this seems irrelevant to input buffering. Input buffering is when your inputs are stored so that they go off later; it isn't relevant to whether or not you can animation cancel except that if you can animation cancel input buffering is (maybe) pointless (though often you have a mix of when and where you can cancel what so it still has a purpose). You can have games without animation cancelling with a wide variety of input buffering windows.
E: The issue with input buffering being too strong is that it wouldn't just lock you in to a single animation, but that pressing attack twice would lock you into both attacks even if the second attack came out way later and could theoretically have let you choose not to attack instead.
I think it was even compared to God of War which has a lot of input buffering
having a lenient input buffer makes it easier to stop your inputs from being "eaten" by packet loss, and I don't think the souls games use anything like rollback to correct for that issue
Good input buffering: you are actively smashing XXXXX, and the quick attack combo plays out at full speed without waiting for any press specifically after a previous attack ended since it's clear you want to combo.
Bad input buffering (too generous): You press XXXXX at the start of the combo and are now locked into all five attacks, totalling 1.5 seconds after your last press.
Bad input buffering (too limited): you mash XXXXX but your attacks come out staggered because it only cares about the inputs after an attack finishes, so you should have been rhythm gaming it to get the combo to chain properly.
I disagree with calling some versions good and some versions bad.
They are different approaches that create different outcomes that can be deliberately used to craft a specific play experience.
Your too generous example can be used in a game where you want to force the player to be very deliberate. If you press X 5 times you you get 5 attacks. If you did not want 5 attacks, don’t press X 5 times. This makes the player be judicious. This is a valid choice, and is neither inherently good or bad, but needs to be viewed in the larger context of the game’s design decisions.
There is a reason I used DMC as my example because it is associated with a specific playstyle where both locking in moves and preventing the player from doing basic combos easily are absolutely against the design intention.
Even in Dark Souls you rarely lock in two moves ahead by mashing, so my example was also very hyperbolic.
My preferred version is when you can press the button very early, but you have to still hold it when the game is looking for the input. Like jumping in Quake.
You can definitely lock a move in like 2 seconds in the future in Monster Hunter, for example.
Sincerely, a great sword fan.
A lot of that could be alleviated if slides were easily reviewable, because all the critical information required to progress are there, but if you miss something or need to go back and take a closer look, you have tediously hunt them down, and heaven help you if you're not sure which slide you're looking for. The ship log gives you only a glancing review, and when I played, I knew there was a critical piece of information I missed from a log, and I sure as fuck wasn't about to chase down that one slide again. Ended up looking up a youtube compilation of the slides instead and figured it out.
A broader problem is that the way everything is set up seems random as hell. In the base game, everything had some sort of connection. This was done here, which relates to over there, which explains this, etc. You could go explore someplace else and work your way back if you get stuck. The DLC is much more contrained, and there doesn't seem to be a rhyme or reason why this macguffin is stuck over here other than we needed to make a puzzle. It's as if the visitors are bunch of escape room enthusiasts that wanted to make this convoluted world to challenge future explorers or something.
Having never played GS much, I need to clarify: Are you talking about locking in a two-second charge cycle, or are you talking about pressing the button for a followup attack two seconds before it releases and then having the followup attack trigger without further button presses?
The former is just the GS being slow as shit. The latter is input buffering.
On long recovery great sword moves you can buffer your next swing what feels like years in advance, but I’ve never actually timed it.
Oh hell, what did they do?
Chapter 2 end spoilers
uuuuuuuuuuggggggghhhhh
https://rivalerose.wordpress.com/why-i-left-the-fight-knight-project/
obvious content warning with this, but it's the best first-hand account of what happened
I played it for a few days, stopped, and just haven't got back to it, for what feels like that reason. There's still places that show up on the map as "you haven't found everything here" but I don't know what it is I'm meant to find and I _think_ I've been everywhere though obviously I haven't.
(only spoilering very early-on story here)
(possible minor spoiler but it's just for the mechanics, not the story)
trailer for upcoming warframe patch
sad child finds mom at convenience store not buying cigs
Everything is working. Installed an SSD and changed the RAM profiles without breaking anything.
Time to see what this thing can do.
*loads up Caves of Qud*
I think this is the first thing they've produced that publicly acknowledges operators. Like, they've been around for years but but people just don't talk about it to try and preserve the reveal for new people. But I guess they can't tiptoe around it in this case.
There are two major story beats that this trailer specifically builds on that if you haven't seen in game, yeah, it's fuckin gibberish.
Ok, then I think you're in the clear spoiler wise.
Edit: oh thank god, the last boss puts a save point in between the two phases, no previous boss did that and if actually makes the last boss easier
.
Spoilers for the opposite choice of what you made:
It's amazing more hasn't been done to push Kotick out. He fucked with the money, man!