It’s funny cuz you think it’s easy and i think it’s hard for the same reason haha. Dark souls games being what they are, I could never decide if i should move on or keep trying to git gud. A few times i gave up on a challenge only to find another challenge just as difficult, causing me to wonder if i could have given up on that first challenge, etc.
The comparitive lack of options in DS1 for example made it easier for me to decide how to move forward.
Anyway, just two ways of looking at the same thing. :D
I hate all online competitive games. Yup, all of em. I can’t relax! I can’t learn at my own pace! I can’t explore! The challenge is unknown! I don’t want to get better than strangers, i don’t care about them!
i like beating systems not people. Watching my BIL play CoD and that car soccer game, I’ve seen and heard some nasty shit. I guess it’s not unusual that people get competitive (ive seen people lose their composure over drunken kickball, i get its not just online) but considering how toxic people can be i just don’t get why people would invite that into their house.
Maybe im just not competitive. Yo, any ranked or generally competitive players, what makes you come back?
Elden ring is the hardest of the soulslikes imo. A company that treasures not telling you shit and loves to kill you for mistakes also giving you too much freedom to make them imo.
Not really a critique on it, just ruminating on why i think it’s the toughest one of the souls games I’ve played.
There is still item durability BUT! it is “fixed” by the addition of a weapon creation system. Now monster parts that drop can be slapped onto whatever weapon you find on the ground, making every (still breakeable, disposable) weapon less important than the monster part. You can even (a bit later) save your badass monster parts from breakage and reuse them. Furthermore your can immediately see what monster part will drop (its on their heads) which saves unnecessary farming and serves to show the enemies strength at a glance.
Im not a lawyer, but I’ve looked into this misunderstanding before and it stems from what constitutes "breaking one’s fiduciary duty to investors. While deliberately acting against the interests of investors is illegal, ive yet to hear of a lawsuit, let alone a successful one, brought by an investor for not making all of the money. Id be interested in hearing an investment oriented lawyers perspective since from what i understand, the full extent of fiduciary duty has not been tested that way in court