>>1582464 Personally I played Dark Souls 1 on the 360 without a Gold Pass this was before the PC release, even before the DLC, and a bit of DS 2 pirated on PC, so for me, PvP was never a thing in regards to souls games. Or, in other words, when I think back to DS1, I don't think about some dude with the Giant Armor Dad fucking my shit up, because it never happened, I just remember getting lost in the Tomb of Giants without having even unlocked Sen's Fortress. I do know there is a subsection of the community that is very passionate about the PvP in Souls games, and had an argument with some fag back when ER just got released, that PvP was what kept the games alive, and that if you were to go on Youtube you would see it for yourself. I did what he said, and the most popular videos were trailers or reviews, not PvP videos, I also sorted by most recent videos and they were mostly live streamers doing normal playthroughs of the games (DS1, DS2, DS3), which should be at least 90% PvE, rest being random invasions if any, so again barely any new content from the PvP guys. My conclusion was that the PvP guys are just a loud minority in the Souls community and FromSoft did not suffer in any way shape or form from ignoring them. On the other hand they are releasing that Battle Royale game, so it will be interesting to see which game will have a longer lifespam, the PvP one or the PVE one. Though I can see that if the PvP one were to fail, the pvp fags would scream that it was just because it was on the Switch 2 as a coping mechanism. I am not saying it will fail, only that this is what I think would happen if it were to flop.

I only enjoy invasions when they're opt in. Dark souls 1 made it so you could only get invaded when you turned back to human which I enjoyed. Forced invasions however are annoying and will just make me play offline instead.

>do you miss 1v1 invasions. Yeah. Getting invaded when I have a butt buddy to gank them with isn't tense or scary. Invading gank squads is exhausting and not fun. >but what about the 1/100000 minmaxer trolling newbies??? Mandatory gank squad invasions filters out anyone that would try invading casually and forges the ones who persist into sweaty minmaxers using cheese strats. It literally makes that problem worse. >>1582572 The PvP game is obviously going to fail because it's a switch 2 exclusive and that isn't cope.

>>1582464 i didn't like them because i'm bad at the game i'm not shitposting that shit actually sucked

>>1582464 There should be wild PvP. PvP should be off by default but no more of this "defender needs overwelming power before they're even an option to be targeted", it needs a balance. Remove the "already with summon" bullshit from ER because of they really want co-op they would use mods that remove them from the servers or offline mode. Another thing it needs is more timers and item disabling, every online action needs proper commitment: You get your ass kicked you don't have to worry about another for a few mins, if you DC with someone else in your world then no reconnecting to online for 5 mins etc etc. There should be more NPC invading like in DS1, it should be manditory for the story I can only recall ER's DLC doing that . I also think there should be more little tricks that change fights up such as DS2's seeds, or a item that disables everyone's estus or somekinda gravelord item that adds more enemies to your current world and is tied to your player character (along side actual gravelording that sends enemies to other worlds). Ideally there'd also be a short grace time to find eachother and to use these items before combat. Finally depending on who is invading who, there'd be sepcial items that force kill someone who is hiding to prevent ER AFK "farming" from happening again; Hosts should defend themselves by fighting and then focusing on surviving. After some time (~7 minutes) If no damage is delt to the invader, the invader gets to smite the host, if the host fights and survives to the time limit then it's the host's to use . >>1582572 It's 100% going to fail, the ONLY fromsoft game nintendo has ever sold is DS1 remastered and then they suddenly drop a PVPVE exclusive on a new console that is constantly out of stock?

I want DS1PTDE's invasions back. Let it be entirely possible for an SL1 dude to invade me and fucking blast me into the stone age with Chaos Firestorm. Yeah, that shit sucks during progression, but sometimes you already see a death coming up before the invasion, so you die in a fresher way than getting clubbed to death by an Infested Barbarian in Blighttown. Fuck it dude, I miss DS1.

>>1582955 >>1583265 Well if they were to release it on the PS5, then the discussion would be about how barely anyone owns a PS5, and the game would inevitable flop. If it were to get a PC release then the discussion would be about cheating/hacking and how From would be forced to close the servers even with Easy Anti Cheat on, so it would inevitable flop. No matter what platform they choose to release it on, there will always be excuses for why something would flop.

>>1582464 I miss it so much. The pitfalls were always worth the thrill of the heights, and yet the writing is very much on the wall with games like nightreign: people don't pvp anymore. Dark souls and demon souls used to be a great union of pve and pvp that was embraced by both hosts and invaders, a time where summoning a phantom for anything other than a quick boss kill was seen as the pussy footing it was. But now invasions are practically an after thought in game like elden ring, something tacked on to tick a box rather than a core gameplay element, and I can't help but feel this mentality fostered by fromsoft has grown out of control and created a new audience to souls games, the care bear. People who see all forms of invasions as trolling rather than game content, the people that the seamless coop mod was made for, the people that fromsoft made nightreign for. It's sad to see what was a core pillar of the series become so much a shell of it self that large groups of players actively scorn it, and as much as I want to blame the games going mainstream or normal fags poisoning the well, the sad truth is that fromsoft was slowly phasing out pvp as early as dark souls: think about it, what really is the reason to go human in dark souls? Unlike demon souls there's no hp bar benefit to burning a valuable humanity, there's literally no stat or gameplay benefit at all, other than the ability to summon phantoms. While the community embraced invasions at the time, the developers had already in theory limited it to only target players that had access to a gank squad, and it's been a slippery slope ever since.

>>1584336 If they released it on PC there would be no excuses, PC is the standard.

>>1582955 >The PvP game is obviously going to fail because it's a switch 2 exclusive and that isn't cope. the Switch 2 is set to have the largest install base of any console ever if anything it will fail because it's another BR years after the fad has passed >>1584565 honestly, I think people don't PVP anymore because you can't invade like you used to also streamers are all pussies, back then they'd rawdog online in DS2 and get invaded constantly, generating a million clips and getting a bunch of traffic from it now if someone in chat says "The Rapier scales with Dex fyi :) " they go on an hour long rant about backseating and people trying to ruin the game for others and toxicity or whatever retarded buzzword they use now real chud hours, but truly whenever something goes mainstream it goes to shit, no exceptions

>>1582572 Invasions absolutely gave the games longevity. Because exploring the world's lore and trying new builds and whatever feels so much more real when you're grounded in the world by the idea someone could walk up and shank you at any moment. I've beat this drum a million times but the unpatched original release of DS1 was a better game, and in what respects it's worse were the right kind of bad. In both respects, FROM sanded off the immersion and souls became less of an RPG and more of an action game, and I don't think the core mechanics are anything special. So I suppose it's ironic to claim people who want the singleplayer experience are the worst off, but that's what I'm saying. I think the host should have every advantage except disconnection, but otherwise fend for themselves. Running and hiding from invaders at release who brought super-DEF equips and spells so they could slow walk after me like the terminator, or trying to get a party of three up the belltower with invaders coming in literally seconds after you cross the threshold, trying to summon while the invader's coming up the ladder, laughing and going, "Oh fuck I'm dead just go" and listening to my noob friends try to pull through was great, especially when I'd hear the bell ring from their world. Ultimately I never engaged with invasions that honestly, and sweat exposed the flaws in the system, but even when I'd wait out an invader to spam Wrath when they stepped into the small area I was hiding, I thought there'd be more and better invasions going forward. If I'd known the series would become something I'm no longer interested in I'd've treated invaders better in Lordran. Now, playing 1 again, the patched and disconnected world feels lifeless by comparison, and I just turn it off. I played through all of ER in coop and we always dueled invaders even when we didn't stand a chance, and I found both the coop was kinda dull and the invaders were all built for one-trick antigank attempts. I had an invasion in DkS2 where I was on a nodeath nobonfire run so I only had broken or shitty equips and no levels in ADP, so I cleared a loop in Huntsman's Copse near the start where you go into the house and you can drop down to return, and he comes up behind me so I shove through the ambush and start running, equip the greatclub, and pancake the invader when he comes through the door, then heal and run away, and I just keep looping and faking him out, and I swear I can feel his anger as he starts tagging me with spear running attacks. Finally he realizes he can run the other way but I'm ready and I run back across the narrow walk under the poison butterflies, and I turn around and do the greatclub's spinning launcher at the edge of the poison mist, and he stops short, gets poisoned, and just stands there in the poison, staring at me. Fairness isn't the problem. It shouldn't be fair and you should have a bad experience, it just needs to not be defined by bad netcode and metafaggotry.

I miss when this board wasn't full of fucking cuckchanners

>>1584565 Alot of people are just tired of dealing with minmax loadouts

>>1587516 in reality a lot of people build an ego doing the PVE and then try the PVP one time, get smoked, and assume a guy with a broken sword and no armor was doing some fucked up minmaxing bullshit to oneshot him because they're really good at the game and there's no other way they could've lost that badly in a fair fight

>>1582464 Dumb cuckchanner But I did like how DS1 dod invasions where you use humanity to get invaded, so you had a risk/reward between summoning and boosting estus charges, and getting invaded. Since you were likely to use humanity at some point to get more estus, you'd just naturally get invaded which was nice. However that also led to a lot of players "keeping their head down" and staying hollow as often as possible >replace DS and DS2 with aesthetically inferior versions Doesn't DSR look the exact same?

>>1593820 To expand on this a bit, this ego mismatch is probably the thing I hate the most in current online communities for pretty much any PVP game, because you need to constantly read the most retarded of opinions in regards to anything skill based in video games. Single player games are designed such that you're expected to win eventually, so they will trend to >50% winrate even for idiots, which builds their ego, then when they lose more often in online PVP, which is balanced to trend you towards 50% W/L, they blame the game rather than themselves and then come all over the internet to bitch and moan. The current generation of gamers is composed of a milion DSP-likes of blind, oblivious egotistical retards. I'd mostly have no issues with these people, provided they kept to themselves, but some-fucking-how there are so many of them and they're so loud that even games that should have NO ISSUES with the players are gutted because retards are just so fucking loud (games like Helldivers 2, for example).

>>1593831 >Doesn't DSR look the exact same? Not at all. There's a lot of textures that have been redone, but the biggest loss was the subtle filter that made the game look like a moving painting. A lot of VFX have lost all personality too, infamously the liquid fire of the bonfires was turned into a normal fire. It's not a Demon's Souls deal where you can say it's completely ruined, but it definitely looks worse overall.

>>1582464 >excluding retarded takes such as "2+2=4", am I insane for thinking this? If you actually care, spin up a private server for DS1 and invite friends, the Dark Souls Remastest mod guy had a guide on how to do it somewhere. >>1584565 >people don't pvp anymore Literally everyone above 90 IQ figured out that nowadays public PvP is the domain of nolife tryhards and cheaters, and sticks to SP or coop as a result. This isn't limited to FromSlop, which drove away its original userbase for reasons mostly unrelated to the multiplayer, you can see it especially in the AAA world: CoD going F2P should have been enough of a warning, but investors get upset when they hear that line might not go up so... >>1593820 >>1593838 >muh ego Retarded excuse, didn't save RTS and won't save invasions. >muh Helldivers 2 was fine and was ruined by casuals Max difficulty was literally nothing but avoidant gameplay, the devs literally refused to ever play it yet still tried to "balance" it blindly, all the while the vast majority of people who proved themselves capable of clearing it didn't like it: defending that kind of shitshow doesn't make you more skilled, it makes you a contrarian faggot.

>>1596212 It's all literally ego though, because it all revolved around difficulty levels. You're an example yourself from not understanding the root of the issue in that people were really just pissed off that they couldn't play at the highest difficulty BECAUSE it was the highest difficulty, and again, HD2 is the perfect example of this because you could always just lower the difficulty if you didn't like the way it was, but gamer dads couldn't take that they weren't the hugely skilled gamers that they thought. It's not even about "muh being more skilled" anyway, all of the options were literally right there, they could have just lowered the difficulty and played the game to the balance that they thought was right. "oh no there's like 5 chargers and 4 bile titans in this difficulty, I could play on difficulty 6 where there will be only one of each but I will piss and moan until it's difficulty 10 that has only one of each!!". The devs followed the very same design standards behind the original HD1, where the main focus of the game was avoiding triggering alarms at all costs and then having things spin out of control if you fucked up, nowadays it's just a snooze fest where you trigger alarms, throw the "I win fire barrage" stratagem on top of it and headshot whatever big bad comes out with a single shot from your support weapon, but the option to have that kind of gameplay was literally always right there. FYI, the most played difficulty in HD1 was difficulty 6. And that's a game where there was 15 difficulty levels, not 9 or 10. Why did they have to murder difficulty 10? I will tell you why, HD2 got too popular which led dumbasses into believing whatever bullshit some casual was spouting and moaning about on youtube, and them they rallied behind each other like a retard mob. Trust me when I say this, the issue is always casual retards having an opinion on balance. They don't know what they want, they just want to feel good and improve their social standing, nothing else.

>>1584565 >>1582464 It'd be fine if the penalties for loss weren't as bad.

>>1596304 >if you disagree you actually prove me right Faggot behaviour. >people were really just pissed off that they couldn't play at the highest difficulty BECAUSE it was the highest difficulty False, people who could win at 10 thought it was stupid and unfun and repetitive, so they went and bitched to the devs about it. The vast majority of players didn't even touch 7-8 let alone 9-10, and thus felt no need to bitch about problems they were not experiencing in the slightest: players sticking to the middle difficulties forever is not a surprise, 40% of DRG players stick exclusively to Haz 1 and 2 and less than 10% regularly play Haz 5. >The devs followed the very same design standards behind the original HD1 Those standards were shit, if you want to make a stealth game you do so from the ground up instead of slapping half-assed stealth mechanics and penalities for combat on top of a game entirely built around combat: same exact thing that killed GTFO, you advertise a shooter and then people refund when they see it's 90% red light green light stealth. And besides, not even the devs themselves cared about those standards, since they refused to play according to them. And even if you decided to tolerate that inexcusable lack of principles, changings things up because "players are having fun wrong" is always a recipe for disaster and I refuse to feel an ounce of pity for anyone clueless/arrogant enough to do so. >muh casuals, muh social standing Yeah right, surely the casuals were the ones keeping tabs on online drama around difficulties they weren't playing, it's not like casuals generally play a couple hours each weekend and that's it. Face it, you're asshurt because you enjoyed something most players didn't, and you got shafted since you bought an online-only GaaS so you can't just stick to old versions, private servers, or modded lobbies. Serves you right, for all that bitching and moaning about casuals lapping up AAA garbage you fell for the same memes as them. By the way, your screencaps are bad and you should feel bad: imagine trying to pin gender inclusiveness and journo nonsense on the same casual crowd that by and large refused to buy Concord, Veilguard, AC Shadows...

>>1596507 <>if you disagree you actually prove me right >Faggot behaviour. Yes? Yes it does, it exactly does especially when you dismiss ego as the keystone for that, when ego stroking has been the core design tenet of all game design for the last 10 years, lmao. >False, people who could win at 10 thought it was stupid and unfun and repetitive, so they went and bitched to the devs about it. Like who? The very same idiots who thought there was a meta? That you had to pick specific weaponry to make it through difficulty 10? That couldn't deal or didn't know how to deal with all the enemies that the highest difficulty tossed at you? Because it was always perfectly manageable, you just had to not play like an idiot in the highest difficulty. A lot of complaints from weapon balancing stemmed from the fact that people are just idiots and wanted to kill everything with 0 effort, case in point being all that argument about "using overpowered weaponry" being in the game's case, when yes, you DO use overpowered weapons, quite a lot in fact. You're a single soldier killing upwards to 500 enemies, how is that not overpowered? >The vast majority of players didn't even touch 7-8 let alone 9-10, and thus felt no need to bitch about problems they were not experiencing in the slightest: There is always is a lot of bitching man, and they were indeed trying to touch it, but it's a mob cycle where people fan each other's fire, again, your included, without really understanding things deeply enough. They lack self reflection. >Those standards were shit, if you want to make a stealth game you do so from the ground up It never was a fucking stealth game, you didn't have to run or hide 24/7, you just had to avoid walking into more reinforcements and losing control when you were already engaged in a fight, which yes, it is hard, intentionally so at the highest difficulty the game had, but we had a lot of bitching and moaning until they inevitably killed all the originality the game had. Go play Helldivers 1 and tell me that's a stealth game. HD2 was literally the same fucking shit. >those standards were shit Right, you're a moron. Nevermind. >And besides, not even the devs themselves cared about those standards, since they refused to play according to them. Absolutely not, the devs cared a lot for the way they were doing things, and they played up to difficulty 6 which was their comfort zone AND THEY LOVED THEIR OWN GAME. They WANTED the harder difficulties to be fucking hard, but people bitched and moaned to no end. The game had a lot of depth in understanding all the enemies weaknesses, the small details, how each stratagem worked very well. Now you just vomit whatever you have on top of the blob of enemies and move on to the next. >Face it, you're asshurt because you enjoyed something most players didn't Yes? I know that. Do you think I'm disagreeing from that? Good game design is fucking dying because casuals have been deliberately worsening the industry's expectations for the last 20 years, why do you assume I would have no issue with that? >Serves you right, for all that bitching and moaning about casuals lapping up AAA garbage you fell for the same memes as them. Does it? Launch HD2 was pretty fun, I took my fill of it when it lasted. Arrowhead made some decent games before that I still enjoy even through their reddit humor. The fact that I trusted a new game to keep being fun afterwards says nothing about me other than the fact that I might be gullible for the things that I like, but says everything about casuals once again ruining everything they touch. >By the way, your screencaps are bad Caps are from 2015 to 2018 when this shit was just starting up. And you're an absolute retard because those are the games that are extremely woke, everything else that is only barely or slightly pozzed, people still eat up with 0 issues, see also: BG3, Cyberpunk, KC2, etc.

>>1596564 >ego stroking has been the core design tenet of all game design for the last 10 years The absolute state of PvPfags.

Cuckchan thread is shit and this should've just been in the souls thread, so sageposting, but I will contribute. I think the biggest problem with solo invasions and why they don't feel as fun in ER and DS3 compared to past games is the rise in popularity of net-decking when it comes to builds and all that. Following clickbait youtubers or looking up "most efficient PVP invasion build" and just following that. Ends up making things very stale in the long run since all the invaders end up feeling the same or just rushing to the most OP bullshit and not experimenting. That practice makes PVE discussions more boring too and leads to people skipping a layer of engagement when it comes to buildcrafting in these kinds of games, such as in Remnant 2 where 90% of people you'd encounter would be running one of the same few clearly-guide-made builds, but this shit hurts the PVP side the most by removing a lot of variety and thus the invaders get stale fast. Look at the launch of DS:Remastered compared to the launch of the original when it comes to invaders and the experience from such and the difference was massive. Like, I've been doing an ER run with taunter's tongue on and 95% of the invaders were using the bloodhound's fang and the same min-maxxed armor set in the earlygame. It's just fucking tiresome. I was so happy when I finally fought a guy using a poison sword and board even if it was a deadlier build (since no poison cures that early unless you route for them) it was a much more fun fight. Or when I ran into a bleedmaxer using an uchi and a nagakiba once I got past Godrick. I remember back in DS2 where nearly every invader would be on some wacky bullshit and there was a lot of build and fashion variety, but now everyone has a stick up their ass about meta, twinking, netdecking, and minnmaxing. DS3 was bad about that shit too, and I despised it, but at least you'd occasionally see some cool shit.

>>1597102 I remember better times when a large part of /v/ talked shit on QTEs and sony movies, nowadays you refuse to observe reality for what it is.

>>1596212 > spin up a private server for DS1 and invite friends

>>1598241 Don't you guys have friends?

>>1598261 No________ __ _ ______________

>>1597328 >blaming the players for netdecking How about you blame FromSoft for rewarding guidefags at every step while trolling honest players with nonsense quests, lolrandom loot distribution, and so much more? And that's before getting into PvP specific issues, such as players being intended to manipulate matchmaking via level/upgrade brackets. >I remember back in DS2 where nearly every invader would be on some wacky bullshit and there was a lot of build and fashion variety GEE, I WONDER WHY DS2 HAD BETTER INCENTIVES FOR GOING OFF-META, WHAT THEY COULD HAVE POSSIBLY INCLUDED TO STOP REDDITORS FROM PUSHING THEIR BELOVED UNOFFICIAL LEVEL CAPS THAT JUST SO HAPPEN TO REWARD THEIR OWN MINMAXED BUILDS, IT PROBABLY STARTS WITH "S" AND ENDS IN "OUL MEMORY" >>1597383 >only play shit full of pandering >complain everything is shit and full of pandering >get mad when people tell you to stop playing shit full of pandering If you wanted recs for games released in the last 10 years that don't coddle your ego, you could have just asked, have a few I played recently: AI War Fleet Command (yes it was more than 10 years ago, no I don't care, fucking play it) Cryptark HOLE Recursed The Final Station Nuclear Option (actually passable PvP)

>>1598261 Why do you think I'm here?

>>1598241 >almost 20 years of PvP >no group of friends to play together This is why matchmaking is cancer: it teaches you that you don't need to look for someone to play with because a machine will do it instead, and when the machine stops working you're helpless.

>>1599456 One could also cease being a faggot misanthrope and look for an active community wherever it is

>>1599323 It's not just fromsoftware's fault, blaming them alone for the netdecking issue is dumb. Yeah these games can be cryptic but that's half the fun, figuring it out for yourself and experimenting. Most people nowadays don't have interest in doing that though, and that's a problem across a lot of games, not just souls. I think it has something to do with normalfaggots not wanting to fuck around as much and something related to crowd appeal but I can't be sure. Oddly enough I think you have a point with the soul memory thing, the only games that netdecking/lack of variety wasn't an issue in that I've played lately were Lords of the Fallen (2023) and Salt and Sacrifice. Both had basically nonexistent level matchmaking and scaled invaders up or down instead. They still had their "metas" mind you but just like the Demon Souls, DS1, and DS2 days you barely saw them and instead found a fair bit of variety. Salt and Sacrifice was greatly helped by its covenant system though, with several different types of invaders and co-op summons with varying goals, another comparison you can make to earlier vs later Dark Souls games with covenants being lamer in 3 and then gone in ER. Of course Remnant 2 serves as a counterexample to the matchmaking thing regarding netdecking, however, since there is literally no matchmaking there, just world scaling with host's numerical power level (derived from weapon upgrades and archetype level). Remant 2 is a strange fucking anomaly in that regard as a whole though, it's pure PVE so you think people would be willing to experiment more, but you barely see any experimentation and you see EVEN LESS of such at lower difficulties, where you think you'd see people using wackier and less optimal builds and use off-meta weapons more. The netdecking thing with Elden Ring is also strange. As a guy who does a ton more jolly co-op than invasions/duels you see tons of variety in the PvE builds people run, minus the 110-150 range where most PVP builds are, but invaders have notably less than hosts. I think people running specific anti-gank setups could be a reason but I doubt it's the whole story. Duelists are even fucking worse and it gets to a point you feel like you're fighting the same ten or so people over and over due to the lack of variety. PVE builds still have their meta, I'd be a filthy rich if I got paid for every quad-buffing Varre-bullgoat/Varre-raptorcloack bleed build or every "haha comet azur go brr" build I saw after all, but you don't see clearly "I looked this build up on the internet" shit nearly as often.

>>1598241 >>1599456 can't tell if you guys are fucking with me, but to spell it out, obviously the entire point of random invasions is that neither player knows what they're going to get the whole fun of it is seeing what kinda builds and playstyles other people are cooking up, and maybe you see something you like and try to pivot into that, or make a mental note to try it on a different character if you're just playing with a small group of friends it'll stagnate very quickly This is such an effective tool to lengthen playtime, World of Warcraft for example keeps buffing and nerfing classes/specs on a carousel every 3 months so people get oneshot by an ele shaman and go "man I wanna play that" and make an alt, which is another 30h+ of gameplay to get ready, 1 of those being for leveling you really think none of these MMOs can figure out a fucking DPS sim that 90% of the playerbase uses and balance accordingly? kinda went off topic, but you get what I'm saying, running into randoms is more fun and more effective at stimulating organic replayability