spemanig said:
I'm done. I can't. If seven examples with definitive glaring similarities to each other, not at all present in Bloodborn isn't proof enough, nothing is. "This game also seems to have the Devil May Cry 4 feel to the battle system" No, it absolutely does not. They are completely different. Even Punch Out is a more apt example of the combat system in Bloodborn than Devil May Cry. The combat system in Devil May Cry's, and all of the hack-n-slash games I mentioned, is focused on chaining combos, flashy moves, and arcade-like gameplay. They have combat mechanics inspired by fighting games, and the entire purpose of those games is to make the combat feel as deep, complex, and cathardic as possible. NOTHING like that is in Bloodborne. The combat isn't the point; it's the tool. Your warped definition of "hack n slash" literally includes any game with combat in it. Hack n Slash games are akin to fighting games in function and execution, only it's focused on single player while fighting games focus on multiplayer. If Devil May Cry is Street Fighter 2's story mode, Bloodborne is Zelda 2. You're figuratively calling Bloodborne a fighting game. That's literally how completely innacurate calling Bloodborne a hack-n-slash is. Do you get that? It's not something you do or don't "agree" on. Catagorization isn't an opinion. There are objective functions at play here. I'm not being defensive. I just hate when people miscatagorize things. |
Dude Diablo is a point and click game.
"I've Underestimated the Horse Power from Mario Kart 8, I'll Never Doubt the WiiU's Engine Again"







