Forums - Gaming Discussion - Bloodbourne= poor mans Ninja Gaiden and Nioh, prove me wrong.

I can say I really didn't like the game, but well to each its own.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Around the Network

If you want to say "poor man's Ninja Gaiden", that's your opinion. But to say "poor man's Nioh" is ridiculous considering Nioh came out 3 years AFTER Bloodbourne.

Hell, I love both Bloodbourne and Nioh. But let's be honest here. For as good as Nioh is, a good amount of that content feels like it's padded to make the game longer.



It's a very overrated game but admittedly I've never gone far because it always felt like a big step down from Dark Souls in terms of quality.

I just wish that From Software would either stop making similar games all the time, or would make one that takes all the best elements of the Souls games and does the series better than any of them. As it is, they just seem to get mostly worse since Dark Souls.



I am in the camp that Souls is better than BB. Souls is just amazing, BB is very good. Sekiro was awful. From has gone downhill with Sekiro, at least for me.



LivingMetal said:
Bloodborne = a successful and respected title by Sony. Ronster316 = criticizes Sony at every turn. Yes, we've seen your posting history. Nothing new. I did buy into the Bloodborne board game on Kick starter. Looking forward to 2020.

I'm reformed, a new man, Microsoft are garbage now, both in and out of the gaming world, i'll be honest, i DESPISED sony for taking my beloved SEGA out of the console business. but times change, folks change, Sony are the bees  knees  now, microsoft are rotten to the core, pandering ball bags, no matter how hard western sony try fucking up our gaming fun, sony JAPAN will always be there to pick up the pieces. Microsoft went SOY...... good riddance...!!!!!



Around the Network
LurkerJ said:
Are these 2 games even comparable?

I think they are miss lewinsky yes

Last edited by Ronster316 - on 26 August 2019

Chrkeller said:
I am in the camp that Souls is better than BB. Souls is just amazing, BB is very good. Sekiro was awful. From has gone downhill with Sekiro, at least for me.

Dark souls 3 next for me, maybe i will see  the possible decline for myself........its of course subjective....... like Shenmue and Yakuza........ i'm a Shenmue man, maybe Yakuza has evolved story wise and MAYBE gameplay wise, but Yakuza will always be a PISS POOR Shenmue NEVER be to me.



Ronster316 said:

Well, i'm apparently nearing the last boss in Bloodbourne, and to be frank, its been a major let down, slow controls/gameplay, crappy online functions, bosses that are more tedious than technical, i could go on all day.....  the setting and graphics are top notch no doubt, but lets be real here, the gameplay is tiresome and dull, its one thing having a hard boss that you can beat with skill, and its another thing beating one with a lot of long term tedious will..... Nioh and Ninja Gaiden 1 & 2 destroy this shallow wannabe hack 'n' shash game. END OF...!!!!!

First it's not Bloodbourne, it's BLOODBORNE. How can you expect to appreciate this game if you don't even get the name right, my friend?

And second your opinion is purely subjective and therefore only valid to you and you should have the humility to admit it and make a title that goes"Bloodborne is bad in MY HUMBLE OPINION because this and that..."

Controls and game play are perfectly adapted to this kind of game, quickly dodging an attack and then counter attacking is king in this game, but only if you are capable of doing it and if you are not, it's not the game's fault, it's yours either cause it's not your kind of game or simply cause you are not good at it.

I absolutely suck at fighting games like Mortal Kombat or Street Fighter and that does not mean those games are intrinsically bad, they are just not for me.

As for Nioh, I have not begun playing it and when I do, I'll be able to make a better comparison and maybe get back to you should this thread still be alive.

Bottom line, I'm sorry you did not enjoy Bloodborne but that is far from sufficient data to infer that this game is objectively bad.



It looks and plays nothing like Ninja Gaiden, and NiOH came out after it. Weird statement.



0331 Happiness is a belt-fed weapon

Ronster316 said:
think-man said:

5 hours lol, my save had 127 hours on it. 3 different endings, pvp and chalice dungeons all add alot of value. You would have to be a speed runner to beat it in 5 hours 🤣

Someone beat bloodbourne 34 minutes, fastest Nioh time i saw was 1 hour 30....... its all about content.

Half of Niohs content is reused enemies, bosses and areas