Bloodborne (and other from software games), to all of you that don't like them.

I am super new to the Soulsborne games, and From Software in general. I only started playing Soulsborne games in January of this year, so I'm a little late to the party. The first game I played, and am still playing, is Bloodborne. I've since beaten dark souls 1 and 3. I gotta say, I love all the games, but Bloodborne is probably my favorite. 

I had the same frustrations that all players who start their first From Software game experience. I died a lot. I couldn't tell you how many times I've been killed in Bloodborne since I've started, but you know what? I don't care. The reason I'm writing this is because recently I've been browsing Amazon and other places to buy Bloodborne (cause I only have the digital release, and I want to have a physical copy at some point) and I was curious what the people who have rated this game, or any other soulsborne game, low ratings are saying about it. It made me laugh to read that a vast majority of them were rating the game really badly because of things in the game that I think are brilliant.

Obviously the biggest one you're probably expecting is that the games are too difficult. A lot of people would even say unfair or cheap. I have to respectfully disagree. I would equate this to if an average person were to go into a boxing ring with a professional boxer. When they got their butt kicked by the boxer, would they come out of the fight claiming the boxer cheated or was unfair? Well, they would probably not say anything since they'll be unconscious, but when they eventually wake up, if they were to say that, most people would look at them and say "What did you expect? You fought a professional boxer."

I use this analogy when I'm talking about Bloodborne because this is a game that has a set difficulty level, meaning that, at least your first time playing, the game is the same difficulty for everyone. Just as a professional boxer will have the same peak level of performance regardless of who they fight, Bloodborne is the same for all players. Why then, do people criticize the game for its difficulty while others praise the game for the same level of difficulty? I think the answer lies in personal perception/patience (or a lack thereof).

One thing that people complain about in regards to the difficulty is the open-endedness of the level design, meaning that the game is not clear where you should go at any given moment. I absolutely love this, which is interesting because if you were to ask me 5 years ago, when the game came out, if I loved that kind of gameplay, I would have likely said no. One other thing that frustrates people who first pick this game up is the lack of a map system in the game. This forces you to learn the level design by memory. Goodness, isn't that awful? Sarcasm is kind of hard to convey in written form I realize. No, it's not awful because this map is constructed in such a way that, for the most part, it's not to difficult to remember the level design, and in most cases, you'll remember the enemy placements for one reason or another. I have most of Bloodborne's levels and it's enemy placements memorized, save for a few, because the game does such a good job of constructing the levels in a way that is memorable for the player. There are exceptions, like the Nightmare Frontier, which is probably my least favorite area in Bloodborne, mostly because everything looks the same and it's difficult to find where you are at many points in that level. The enemies and boss in that area are great, but the area itself is not for me. In fact, if I don't have to fight Amygdala, I prefer to just skip him so I don't have to run through that area again. 

I'm sure there are a plethora of other reasons that people dream up to say why they don't enjoy the Souls games in general. I think there are legitimate reasons, and I also understand that these games just aren't for everyone. Honestly, if you don't like them, that is totally fine, but if you don't enjoy them, just leave the rest of of us in peace and let us enjoy them. You already know that if you talk to a Souls fan and you bring up the fact the games are too hard, you're just stoking a fire. In my humble opinion, these games certainly are hard, but once you get used to them, they generally aren't. There are some parts of each game that still get me every time, but for the most part, they are fairly manageable, especially if you're doing plot crucial bosses only. 

So, yes, I love the Soulsborne games (save for DS2, but that's a different story) and I'm happy I finally was able to get into the franchise, because I certainly think I would be in the complaining boat if I was still in high school. I didn't use to like difficult games, but Soulsborne have shown me a new part of myself, which is super fun. So if you don't like the games, that's fine, but that doesn't make them bad or poorly designed. There are areas of every game that are more poorly designed, just like every game ever created, but for the most part, they are very well crafted and fun. 

Artorias is unfair and not fun to fight.

 I know the title makes it seem like I don't like Artorias, which is not necessarily true, but I'll explain.

I love the Souls series. I didn't start playing them until this year when my brother convinced me to try Bloodborne in January. I've sinced played all of the Souls games, but I've only beaten Bloodborne, Dark Souls 1 and Dark Souls 3. Dark Souls 2 infuriates me and I haven't gotten around to beating Demon's Souls yet, so stay tuned on that one. Dark Souls 1 is my favorite game to replay of the Souls games, not including Bloodborne, simply because I enjoy the areas of the game more than the other games. Dark Souls 3 is my favorite to play, but traversing the game to get to the bosses is not super fun, since I don't enjoy most of the areas of the game, especially early on. 

Anyway, that's not my point. What i wanted to talk about today was why I don't like Artorias's boss fight, although I like his character overall. 

Now while reading this, especially if you are a huge fan of Artorias, you'll probably think that I'm a whiny crybaby or that I should "Git Gud" or whatever else you want to say against me. I think that Artorias's boss fight is generally well designed, but there are several issues I have with his fight that you may or may not agree with when you read them. Full disclosure, I know he's perfectly possible since I've beaten him before, so don't say I'm mad cause I can't beat him, since that's clearly untrue.

#1: His hitboxes on several attacks are much bigger than they should be. I'm mostly talking about his jumping stab slam attack he does when you have some distance between you and him and his stupid sword charge attack where he stabs his sword toward you and steps forward a few steps. There have been several fights I've had with Artorias where he will jump in the air and stab the ground, and well before he lands, I will dodge forward and get behind him, and despite the fact I'm standing behind him and no part of him touched me at any point in that animation, I still get hit, and if he's buffed, almost definitely one-shotted. This attack generally isn't a problem to get out of the way of, but there have been several times it hits me when I'm clearly out of the way, which when you watch the footage just looks dumb. Then the bigger problem, that stupid charge stab attack I mentioned. I can swear that despite the fact he's using a sword, his sword must grow some kind of extra extension to the end of it that extends to the side of the sword, since that attack will hit you often even if you dodge to the side as he stabs. Most times I get hit by it, I never touched his sword at all, but I still get nailed, which also could result in a one-shot if he's buffed. This is a problem that also plagues Dark Souls 2, which I will admit is much more present in that game so I won't compare Artorias to anything in that game since he's better designed than most if not all bosses in DS2. 

#2: His buff is unfair. I'm not saying this because his buff hits too hard, since that's the point of buffs, but I think it's unfair that he gets to use the buff so early in the boss fight. This essentially means you have to deal with his buffed attacks for 80% of his fight because that's about how much health he has when he buffs himself. Couple that with his narrow windows for allowing you to heal, and you'll see my problem here. I know this is an early attempt to create "second phases" which became staples of the series later, this one just doesn't feel fair to the player since he hits so hard for so much of the fight, and couple the hitbox issues with that, the issues get compounded. 

#3: He's too fast for DS1. The Sanctuary Guardian also suffers from this a little bit, but Artorias can and will stunlock you with most of his attacks. Plus his most overpowered attack where he swings his sword upward with no warning and backflips backwards will do at least half your healthbar, not to mention it will also knock you over, and before you get up, he'll most likely do his front flipping slam attack to finish you off, so basically, if he catches you with an attack you can't see coming, you're gonna get killed. That's fair isn't it? 

There's a few more nitpicks I could say with Artorias, but I will just leave it here. I love his lore, I love his placement in the DLC, save for the fact I have to kill him every time I want to attempt my favorite DS1 boss, which is Kalameet, and I love most of his fight, but those issues are so glaring that they make my blood boil whenever I play this game. I played it 3rd, so Bloodborne and DS3 spoiled me with the superior speed and movement, and I don't have Artorias nostalgia from playing the game a long time ago, which is probably why a lot of people applaud this fight and call it near flawless all over the place, same with Ornstein and Smough. Overall, good fights, but far from perfect and nowhere near my favorite in the series.