Runa216 said:
But that's exactly it, Sekiro is not souls. It clearly shares the same ancestors, but it's no more souls than a monkey is a human. it's really not fair to judge a game based on what it's not trying to be and therefore isn't. I mean, I GET That some people aren't going to like Sekiro (or souls or bloodborne), so I'm not trying to devalue your opinion on the matter, I just don't understand why these reasons in particular are why you aren't interested in the game. |
Indeed, Sekiro is not Souls, but it does have very similar DNA...you explore a level, you fight, you die and you go from the "bonfire" again ubtil you get to the Boss and defeat it.
The thing is, while Souls is dungeon crawler and is focused on combat, its combat is actually quite average...but I don't mind that one bit, some of my all time favourite games have average combat mechanisms. The reason I don't mind it is that for me combat in Souls is just a means to an end...to progress further and see what interesting thing is around the corner.
Sekiro on the other hand has better combat...it's just that what I found around the corner didn't really captivate me anywhere near as much as Souls have. Similar reason why I didn't bothered with Bloodborne (apart from few hours at my friends), I just didn't like the setting, or why I didn't care for Surge.
Not saying they are bad games by any stretch, just that they didn't do anything for me personally.
