Bloodborne | Chalice Dungeons - Explained!

[mjk45]

IFireflyl said:

mjk45 said:

Then you shouldn't have back tracked later on by coming up with definitions from wikipidea.

I came up with the definitions from wikipedia first. Go back and re-read the thread from the beginning. Also, you said this:

mjk45 said:

IFireflyl said:

It could be a dungeon crawler as well. The funny thing about video games is that they can fit into multiple genres. Either way, I want to play it. I just want to know more about how the multiplayer is going to work.

At the bolded, that's not what you where saying earlier when you where you wikipidea to define the genre.

That was 46 posts after I'd already said that games can fit into multiple genres. I'm not sure why you keep trying to derail the thread by arguing with me, especially when the point you are trying to make is weak. I gave the definition of hack-and-slash first. I didn't realize I was arguing with people that didn't realize games can fit into more than one genre. I never changed my argument. I still feel that this is a hack-and-slash game. My stance never changed. I am not saying that it is only a hack-and-slash genre. I never once said that. My argument (quoted above) was firmly that it could belong in multiple genres. I did say that dungeon crawler isn't a genre. Maybe that is incorrect, and if it is I apologize. I feel that dungeon crawler is just about "are there dungeons" or not. I don't see that as a genre.

Anywho. This thread can't be used for talking about the actual game anymore it seems. If you actually want to stop arguing and discuss the game there is an updated Bloodborne thread here.

You talk about me derailing the thread , I wasn't the one who bought up the genre arguement or kept arguing with the others over whether it belong to hack n slash /dungeon crawler or crossed genres.
My point was all about definitions ,  you brought up wikipedia not me,  my reply was if you use that to define a games genre bloodborne would be classified as a dungeon crawler , so my reply was aimed at that nothing else.
what was said earlier would  have been fine with no comment from me , but that became irrelevant because you decided to bring up definitions  you can't have your cake and eat it to , if you had stuck to your original point  there wouldn't have been a wikipedia arguement to begin with .