this post was submitted on 27 May 2025
40 points (66.7% liked)
Games
19164 readers
200 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
I dont understand why some people think every video game should be catered to their playstyle preferences. It's ok to not like every single video game. It's ok if some people like video games that you dont like. Just play what you like and ignore the rest. It's so easy.
It gets frustrating when the thing you don't like is a very common feature though, and it's valid to complain.
I agree games often come with features that are worthy of complaint. I really don't think the parry feature that this author speaks on is one of them though. At least not in their given examples. I'll admit I have not yet played Clair Obscur, but the other example given was of Dishonored, a game the author claims is beloved to them. I've played Dishonored 1 and 2 several times over. It is an extremely re-playable series because it offers players a multitude of ways to go about each mission. The parry feature of that game is in no way necessary for many play styles. Forgetting the fact that you can play through the game as a pacifist, parrying isn't even necessary if you wanted to charge every enemy head on as a blood-thirsty maniac.
The author talks about i-frames and hitboxes as if those concepts can't enter into a conversation with casual gamers. Its ok, if you want to play a game that doesn't require a lot of thought when it comes to those two things, but there are tons of games that fit that bill. Even ones that have parry mechanics like Batman and Spiderman games. It's the equivalent of saying that double jumping is a bad mechanic because its not physically possible in real life, so it doesn't belong in video games... Oh wait the same author said that too! Under a picture of Elden Ring of all games!
tldr; The author specifically complains about 100% optional mechanics that in no way affect one's ability to play the game otherwise.
I think with parrying specifically, it's frustrating to see it become a crutch for games to add combat depth, or pop up as the central mechanic everywhere at the expense of exploring new combat ideas.
Dishonored is obviously not a bad example of parrying, so I'll give a bad one I just encountered recently: Slitterhead. The game has plenty of cool combat mechanics, but it repeatedly puts you in scenarios where parrying becomes either your only option or your quickest road to victory, which trivializes the rest of its cool combat ideas.
I think games like Ninja Gaiden II or Bayonetta perfectly handled parrying: it's a tool that unlocks combat depth, but not the only one, and combat is still fun without it. Not to say anything is wrong with a game like Sekiro, but to see games blindly copy this design philosophy is disappointing.