Why are modern games obsessed with parrying? | Semi-Ramblomatic
-
I love Yahtzee and have since a hundred years back when a friend introduced me to him via...Amnesia or something like that (then had me play his bomb ass adventure game - the first one I ever played). I am so thankful that he posted a video on this. Cause these modern games going hard on timing based hyper-tough combat have pretty much made the inaccessible to me. Everyone has gone gaga over these modern souls-like games. I just don't think I have the brain for quick responsive reactions. That's okay, cause not every game is made for everyone. I do however love bigguns, body horror and phantasms. I have seen the majestic and creepy things in games like Elden Ring, and would love to smash the hey out of them. I just don't think there's a chance I could ever "get gud" enough to play to the expected parameters of this type of game when I can't even do quick time events right. First mil to the person who can bring Soulslikes to the common man! Until then, I'll play my turn-based clicky games with a dumb smile.
Dude, I'm fucking AWFUL at parrying - to the point that it's just a mechanic I simply don't interact with at all - in Soulslikes (and I'm not great at dodging tbh either) and I've made it through the majority of the bosses in Elden Ring base (haven't gotten the DLC), ALL of them in DS3, and I'm currently working through DS2. (Plus both the Star Wars Jedi Souls games completely solo, which are honestly just My First Dark Souls with a SW skin lol)
If at first you don't succeed, roll a caster and summon people lol
-
Prime 'content'
Because that’s all that content is. Stuff to fill emptiness. I hate our timeline so much.
This is fairly benign compared to the AI generated slop which is now in the process of taking over every social media.
-
This is a timely addition to the recent discussion on this comm
I think no discussion about parrying is complete without mentioning Ultrakill. It strikes a good balance between being usable without being an auto win button.
In Ultrakill, besides from dealing extra damage and gaining style points, parrying enemy attacks is one of the most effective ways to regain health. Low on health? Find an attack to punch and you’re back in action.
This creates a risk reward system. Committing to a parry is risky. If you miss you lose health - and it’s easy to miss when there’s 10 other things going on at the same time. It’s not always easy to find an opening to commit to.
It also had a bug in early development where the player could also parry their own shotgun bullets if timed correctly. This was developed an intended mechanic, so Ultrakill is the game where punching your own shotgun bullet makes them go faster.
-
This is a timely addition to the recent discussion on this comm
The funny thing about Clair Obscur is that because they made parrying "mandatory" people now focus on all-hit runs as the hard thing to do instead of no-hit runs. So they're proving that it is actually not mandatory and that the game is really a normal JRPG that is just a bit hard in the beginning.
-
Dude, I'm fucking AWFUL at parrying - to the point that it's just a mechanic I simply don't interact with at all - in Soulslikes (and I'm not great at dodging tbh either) and I've made it through the majority of the bosses in Elden Ring base (haven't gotten the DLC), ALL of them in DS3, and I'm currently working through DS2. (Plus both the Star Wars Jedi Souls games completely solo, which are honestly just My First Dark Souls with a SW skin lol)
If at first you don't succeed, roll a caster and summon people lol
I beat every boss in base game Elden Ring without parrying once, using melee only, and no ashes or player summons either (I summoned NPCs a few times if it was an NPC I liked or an interesting story, which meant summoning them for Morgott, Fire Giant, and the two gargoyles). I even got Malenia, eventually! I don't say this as a brag, because I am NOT good at these games. I say it to say that if I can do it, basically anyone can.
I think it's a matter of mindset. You've got to go in psychologically prepared to fail a over and over again, and you've got to be analytical enough to figure out why you failed. If you're really struggling with a boss, maybe don't even try to attack for a couple of runs, just focus on figuring out when to dodge and when you have windows. Maybe your current weapon isn't the right one for the job because it's a bit too slow to hit this boss or it does a damage type that the boss resists. Maybe you just need to go somewhere else for a bit and come back with more vigour and a better weapon. Elden Ring is really good for letting you do that.
Obviously that's not going to be a process that everyone enjoys, and if someone doesn't enjoy it that's totally fair enough. It's a game, we're all just here to have fun. But the actual skill floor is one almost everyone can achieve if they want to and approach it ready to experiment and learn
-
This is a timely addition to the recent discussion on this comm
wrote on last edited by [email protected]When dabbling in fencing and (watching) Historical European Martial Arts, I find parrying pretty satisfying IRL.
-
This is a timely addition to the recent discussion on this comm
I think, part of it is also that it's a rather isolated feature which is fun on its own. You don't need multiple systems working together to make parrying fun. Instead, you just react in the right moment and there's your endorphins. Pretty much the hardest part about implementing it, is to make enemy attacks readable, which you likely need for dodge rolls, too. And then especially for AAA titles, which can't afford to experiment much, such an isolated feature is just a no-brainer to include.
-
I think no discussion about parrying is complete without mentioning Ultrakill. It strikes a good balance between being usable without being an auto win button.
In Ultrakill, besides from dealing extra damage and gaining style points, parrying enemy attacks is one of the most effective ways to regain health. Low on health? Find an attack to punch and you’re back in action.
This creates a risk reward system. Committing to a parry is risky. If you miss you lose health - and it’s easy to miss when there’s 10 other things going on at the same time. It’s not always easy to find an opening to commit to.
It also had a bug in early development where the player could also parry their own shotgun bullets if timed correctly. This was developed an intended mechanic, so Ultrakill is the game where punching your own shotgun bullet makes them go faster.
Didn't Furi do this in 2016? I'd be surprised if it was the first game to tie parrying to health gain either. In the slew of action games that came out in the PS2 era, someone must've done it.
-
I think, part of it is also that it's a rather isolated feature which is fun on its own. You don't need multiple systems working together to make parrying fun. Instead, you just react in the right moment and there's your endorphins. Pretty much the hardest part about implementing it, is to make enemy attacks readable, which you likely need for dodge rolls, too. And then especially for AAA titles, which can't afford to experiment much, such an isolated feature is just a no-brainer to include.
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.
-
I beat every boss in base game Elden Ring without parrying once, using melee only, and no ashes or player summons either (I summoned NPCs a few times if it was an NPC I liked or an interesting story, which meant summoning them for Morgott, Fire Giant, and the two gargoyles). I even got Malenia, eventually! I don't say this as a brag, because I am NOT good at these games. I say it to say that if I can do it, basically anyone can.
I think it's a matter of mindset. You've got to go in psychologically prepared to fail a over and over again, and you've got to be analytical enough to figure out why you failed. If you're really struggling with a boss, maybe don't even try to attack for a couple of runs, just focus on figuring out when to dodge and when you have windows. Maybe your current weapon isn't the right one for the job because it's a bit too slow to hit this boss or it does a damage type that the boss resists. Maybe you just need to go somewhere else for a bit and come back with more vigour and a better weapon. Elden Ring is really good for letting you do that.
Obviously that's not going to be a process that everyone enjoys, and if someone doesn't enjoy it that's totally fair enough. It's a game, we're all just here to have fun. But the actual skill floor is one almost everyone can achieve if they want to and approach it ready to experiment and learn
I mean, I am all for failure as a whole. Cause it really is true what they say about the growth being in the action of failure. I also like tactics, but I like to have the space to think on the tactics I am enduring. I think it's cool that a game introduced that in a very action-oriented way. There seems to be a lot of creativity in the creatures as well, which I like. I will say as I get older my reaction time has lessened even worse than I'd say it originally was. I never played shooters or anything, although I had friends go ham on them. I think perhaps it might be an incongruity with what I want out of a game with swords x boss battles. The game I think of when I think of big papa boss battles is Shadow of the Colossus. Cause it's pretty much the only one I have ever played like that. I feel the game though, while exciting, is actually pretty slowly paced. Which makes it more accessible to me. Most "sword" games though, I want to play like a dumb-dumb. I wanna hack, slash, and feel all powerful. Smash everything in sight (Dynasty Warriors). I think the two clashing might also be making it difficult for me to pick it up.
But I guess the third thing is that pretty much any time I have grabbed a game that is hyper popular nowadays I don't really seem to like it much. That might be an age thing too, idk. Might be a lot of things, but I generally think I might not be the audience for most AAA games. In fact, I know I am not =P!
-
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.
-
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.
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.
-
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.
-
My summary, for those who don't want to watch a ten minute video:
-
Parrying has gotten very popular.
-
It works fairly well.
-
Not everyone wants to play a game that relies on responding to cues.
-
It doesn't give a feel of being able to control combat.
-
Overuse of one mechanic can make it unappealing.
Not everyone wants to play a game that relies on responding to cues.
Overuse of one mechanic can make it unappealing.
I feel the same about games that rely on reactions during cutscenes or climbing. On the one hand having to be on edge all the time is annoying, but on the other, the absence of interaction can hamper suspense.
For example, I've been playing Horizon Forbidden West lately - There's a lot of climbing, and the devs love to throw a mid-climb "post you're hanging on starts to fall" gag, but with no reaction mechanic, it's pretty much always harmless and kinda feels "why bother"
-
-
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.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]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.
-
If you ask me, if done correctly it's very satisfying when parying, feels like a rhythm game.
I agree..
It's very rewarding
-
I had to give up on Soulslike games. It's not that I can't do it, it's that every boss makes me feel frustrated for 30 mins to an hour and I'm cursing a blue streak, pissed off when I'm supposed to be having fun. Not worth it to me or my blood pressure.
I've tried a couple soulslikes and I think I could get into them but it seems like they need a decent chunk of time dedicated to them before you can have any fun. I did enjoy a more stripped down version that I found in Titan Souls though-- it's a boss rush game with simple and tight mechanics, so you can jump in and try a boss or two without any other lead up.
-
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.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]A few years ago, I would have fully agreed with you, but having tried my hand at (hobbyist) gamedev broke those rose-tinted glasses for me. It's just extremely hard to curate gameplay mechanics.
The only real way to know whether a mechanic works in your game, whether it's fun, is to implement it. That means you'll be programming for weeks and at the end of it, you might end up deciding that it actually isn't fun, so you get to rip it back out.
This is also a somewhat linear process. If you think of another mechanic at a later point, you're not going to re-evaluate all previous mechanics to see whether a different combination would've been more fun. Instead, you just decide whether this new mechanic adds fun to your mechanic-soup or distracts from it.Point is, even as a hobbyist and idealist, with theoretically infinite time, I quickly learned to swallow my pride and appreciate when something just adds fun, whether it perfectly fits in or not. You're just not going to create the perfect game. And a game that's a sum of inconsistent, fun parts is still more fun than a coherent game that doesn't exist.
Of course, this does not mean, you should include mechanics even though they're overused. That seems to rather be a result from long development cycles, where games decide to include the mechanic when it's not yet overused, e.g. when a popular game featured that mechanic, but once the game comes out, then a whole bunch of other games have come out before, which had also decided to include that same 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?
-
Didn't Furi do this in 2016? I'd be surprised if it was the first game to tie parrying to health gain either. In the slew of action games that came out in the PS2 era, someone must've done it.
Pretty sure this kind of game mechanic (expose yourself to an enemy attack for a skill check that regains health) can be traced back at least to the Dodgeball DLC for Outside
. Game mechanics are like TV tropes, they echo what came before them, almost without exception
