Rewards for fighting the Putrescent Knight - Rememberance which can be used to make unique weapons - Runes - Access to Saint Trina and as a result continue a questline - Lore - The fight itself - Cookbook For people who call their detractors manchildren it really seems like critics expect constant affirmation and rewards, even for defeating one of the easier bosses in the DLC.
Honestly, i find the whole "fromsoft fans are toxic" thing to be a myth. Go onto the elden ring subreddit with questions or some issue and you'll have fuckloads of people giving you advice on how to overcome whatever has you stuck. I see far more toxicity coming from people criticizing us for liking the games difficulty and complaining that its not like DS1. But here's the thing, you can always go back and play DS1 if thats what you prefer, and not a single elden ring fan will say you're wrong for liking that game more. I also dont understand why people have to be good at a game for them to like it. I put like 30 hrs into sekiro and was so trash that i couldnt even beat Genichiro after all that time. And if someone at the time had asked me if the game was good, and if i would prefer it to have an easy mode, my answers to those questions would have been "yes" and then "no"
If anderson&feeble's braindead takes were what it took to get this video, then all the aneurysms that they gave me was worth it. Beautiful work that made me love the game even more, and as all great works of art it says somethig more about real life, hardships and perservirance.
I could never put my thoughts about Joseph Anderson in particular into words. This video has the closest I think I can get to really interpreting those thoughts. I kind of liked his content, but something was always… off about how I perceived him, like there was something either not genuine or *too* genuine about his content. Now I realize it wasn’t about being genuine; it was about being highly opinionated and wanting validation for those opinions. Can’t say I knew much about the other content creators in this video before I watched, though, but I get the idea I would have felt similarly towards them. Great deconstruction, great critique.
Very thought out and well said. Finally, someone who understands what a legitimate Critique actually is. The two main content creators referenced in this video have both abused subjective opinions as though they are objective facts so much, the community more and more are pushing back on their ideals. JA was exposed the most with the ER video. He's always had a skill issue, got called out on it, had his lack of skill exposed in a variety of ways and just hasn't accepted that a lot of his points are subjectively personal and not objectively true. On the whole, long form video "Critiques" have mostly just been long form opinions/reviews. Hopefully, your video will become viral and help remind content creators what exactly objective means (and no, they don't get to refine the word either.) Well done!👍
oh thank god someone is finally pointing out how fucking toxic all the anti "git gud" people are, never been a "git gud" guy but the way everyone talks about them is 100x more toxic than telling someone to git gud
1:14:41 Edge of Tommorow is 100% Dark Souls 😂 The protagonists character arc is very similar to that of a Darksouls / Elden Ring player starting off weak and clueless and ending with perfect knowledge of the enemies and "game" mechanics.
Let me first get some criticism out the way: This video is too long, needlessly long I have watched it fully, though I nearly would not have. And I honestly feel the absurd length of this has been a detriment to my day. I started watching this like 3 hours ago and I genuinely believe this could've been half an hour. Though if it were half an hour, I must say it'd be insanely well condensed and you'd have completed gods work. I also am recently pretty harsh on video length because there's just SO MUCH videos that go an insane length. And often they seem barely scripted. It's one of my greatest dislikes of the critiques you mentioned. Every time I jump in to get a little taste of the video or watch it entirely it is a barely consistent rant that has the editing quality of a tiktok video. Your video is better than that and while you stretch out some arguments across paragraphs that could've been sentences, I never felt you put no effort into the video. I didn't focus on the editing too much, as I was working on a game while watching it (if the video were shorter I wouldn't have done that). But the editing seemed decent. Not fabolous, but very much serviceable, especially as you show you know what you're talking about with citations. The video size also has the issue that if I were to jump into a random time of the video I could very well see the ramblings you yourself do without their context. there's very much a possibility that someone just clicks somewhere randomly and listens to 5 minutes of you being rather angry at another person, which is ALWAYS a bad look. That out of the way: I REALLY LIKE YOUR GAMEPLAY It's fantastic Within my Eldenring and DS2 playthroughs I've started learning more of the weapon variety Fromsoft puts into their games. I sadly only got to experimenting around with spells. But it was certainly fun, and Eldenring was basically screaming at me with its insane weapon variety. I only recently after finishing the DLC started actually trying out different build, AND OH MY GOSH IT IS FANTASTIC Eldenring has such an insane weapon variety and the boses play so well with it. The attack speed along can allow for so much variety because the Boss comboes are made so you can attack them during the combos, making quick weapons feel far quicker and dynamic than anything I tried in DS3. My perception of how much variety fromsoft puts into their games essentially exploded, especially after I started helping some people via summon. Just seeing all those builds is insane. I never thought I'd see such an insane variety out there, I didn't think it was possible. I made a build which allows me too punish any and all timings with a dagger on my left, while wielding a cool greatsword on my right. And your build-explanation of Mohg just made my brain explode again with how much build variety Fromsoft has put into this game. I also must say I do dislike these videos because they say mean things about a game I like. Because I just don't like hearing that. And in these videos it overflows into absolute insanity. What do you MEAN Eldenring is a bad game, because of this minor inconvenience? Have you ever played games? Have you ever felt joy while playing these when THAT little 2min thing makes you not enjoy 100 hours of gameplay? Do you seriously dislike games that much? Maybe just don't play games then. Do something else, read a book, listen to music, go take a walk. (Walks are certified greatness by the way, will do one myself soon) From what I've seen Joseph anderson really doesn't seem to be the type of person for this game His reviews don't to be absent from any piece of value, but when I jump into one somewhere it just feels like he's playing the wrong game or doesn't really enjoy games at all. Not that he hates them, just that he doesn't enjoy them. He talks about these games the same way I talk about some REALLY bad itchio games. Though even then I don't think I've ever said anything BAD about them, no matter how broken they are, when they aren't good I am just less excited about how good they are. About as excited as Joseph Anderson is about the things he likes in games he really likes. When I do actually like a game, I go on a rant of how a 10 minute game can shape ones perception of reality and made me feel that live is worth living.
1:48:33 Coming back to say that he's using the Milady with Sacred affinity and the AotC Wing ash of war. That ash is flashy but not particularly good, Holy damage isn't good against Bayle, and he's splitting his scaling 3 ways between Strength, Dex and Faith. If he wants to get more damage without changing his weapon he should switch to a Blood affinity for better Dex scaling and bleed build up that scales with Arcane. He can also swap the ash to something that's more useable in the fight, like Braggart's Roar for an attack and defence buff, or Cragblade for more stance pressure, or Wing Stance if he wants a flashy combo. Then he can swap out his talismans for whichever ones suit his weapon and playstyle. He's currently using the Two-Handed Sword and Axe talismans, so he should be going for charged heavy attacks, although he's also using the Winged Sword insignia which is better for light attacks. I can't tell if he's using a Crimson Amber Medallion or an INT boosting talisman, but he shouldn't be using either this late in the game. Then there's the physick flask which is another source of buffs, and consumables which are available to every build. So it's not even that he needs to change his weapon to a different one that does more damage, he's not even optimising the weapon he's currently using.
I would love it if you put the role of the critic section of this video in its completely own video. I think it would really help understanding of constructive criticism and critique if that was all I had to think about.
With regards to difficulty and the feeling of accomplishment I would say, that there are different ways this can go and they are really subjective. For me it really depends on wether a fight or section is fun or not. I have no issue with bosses beeing really difficult, if the fight is actually fun and fair. I however experienced a lot of bosses as well that are difficult, but were not fun at all, have bullshit attacks and after beating them I was just glad it was over. This actually then loops back to the whole toxic discussion thing, which Joe ranted about. You fight a boss and you don't like the fight, because of whatever reason and then say as much on whatever platform. If your comment is "this fight sucks!" and thats it, then there really is nothing to talk about. However if you lay out arguments and stay civil, most comments will still be "git gud" or "skill issue" in the context of Fromsoft games. Yes, part of it is a meme, but also quite alot of people actually think that nowadays and it kills all discussion before it even begins. That was the main point I took away from Joes rant and I actually agree with that.
Just finished. Will spread this to other people I know. I already had a low opinion on these 3 guys. But I learned things I didn't know before. And yeah. Good thing I never watched them much. And props for your last words saying these are in the end low stakes. We are talking about games. We are passionate about them. But there are bigger issues in our lifes. But overall pushback against them is needed
the one thing that absolutely irks me about fromsoft is their optimization. Rauh ruins and Castle ensis + those furnace golems are so badly optimized and all they say is that its RT being on or third party mouse applications like MAN fix the frame drops!
I have one critical comment that I think is important enough to bring attention to, especially since I saw another person in the comment section talk about this. I do not believe that MatthewMatosis lied when he misquoted Miyazaki. Lies require intent and I sincerely doubt that Matthew intended to deceive his viewers. It is not kind to unjustifiably call someone a liar (despite the fact that everyone lies) because that ruins reputations and whilst I do believe that his reputation ought to be ruined it should be so for the right reasons and not the wrong reasons. I believe that it is much more likely that Matthew misremembered the quote, remembered how it made him feel, never bothered to check if his interpretation was correct, never bothered to fact check himself when he made the video and never bothered to check whether or not it was that one interview or more than that one but assumed the latter. This does make Matthew a lazy, untrustworthy and points towards him being a bad critic. It also falls in line with everything else he says that is just wrong (but can feel right) in his videos that I know of, which happen to be every single one of his videos where I myself have knowledge on the subject matter and don't just trust him blindly. Which all in all shows that he is a bad critic because I can neither trust that what he communicates is what he actually thinks or feels, nor can I trust his words as is because he isn't all that concerned with facts. But it does not mean that he is a liar. Liars make knowingly false statements to deceive others, for example Feeble King's various attempts at gaslighting his viewers. I may, of course, be wrong. Maybe he is a liar, but I have yet to see proof that he is one. And the distinction is an important one to make because liars who are willing to lie in public to many viewers about something as inconsequential as video games are definitively people to keep far, far away from when it comes to actually important topics especially when you happen to agree with said liar. Lazy people, however, might improve and shape up when it comes to important topics. Especially people who are willing to misrepresent the other side of the argument are the ones that are the most dangerous because they actively try to get people to never partake in the whole discussion and subject. That is the main reason for strawmans, to get the public to dismiss the opposing side outright because they've already "heard" what they "believe".
I don't think it was malicious. But saying that Miyazaki has said that statement "over and over" again in "practically every interview that he's ever taken" is a lie. If he'd read practically every interview Miyazaki ever took, he'd know that isn't true, which is a lie. And if he hadn't read practically every interview Miyazaki ever took, then it's still a lie, because he's made a statement saying what Miyazaki said in them, despite not reading them. It's a lie either way imo.
I kinda think you fell into the common trap of thinking Joseph hates the thing he is talking about because he is so overtly negative all the time. When talking about anor londo, I think he is saying ”I don’t like anor londo half as much as I could have liked it, if more time was spent on it.” I do think it is easy to interpret many of his takes your way though, so I could be wrong. It’s not like I know Joseph Anderson.
@@SpikingDragon heyo i think what he meant is that joseph fell in the trap of making mostly negative content to give "gifts" to devs, or because its good for the algorithm (or both). Joseph and feeble admit to both tbh. Thats the whole thing about the comparaison between mathew ds2 vid and joseph template that he explains.
I definitely don't think he hates everything or that he is a pessimist. I just don't think his style of critique is accurate to how he actually feels. He thinks Elden Ring is a masterpiece but that review is scathing. He thinks The Witness is a great game you shouldn't play, which I'm still salty about because everyone should play The Witness. It's a great game... Joe thinks so himself.
Also you're wrong about Nietszche, he wasn't a nihilist, he hated nihilism, his great life-long project was articulating the catastrophe that was nihilism in 19th Century Europe. He believed profoundly that life was and is meaningful, and that we have almost a moral duty to ourselves to be true to ourselves, so that our loves could be meaningful. Your whole idea about him believing life was innately meaningless and that it becomes meaningful in self-overcoming is totally anathema, really, to what nietszche articulated throughout his works. I recommend reading anything from his middle period, eg the gay science, to get a better idea of what he really believed. You're sort of correct when you say that Nietszche said that suffering creates meaning, but what he tended to say was actually that it made us more *interesting*. Nietszche believed that self-inflicted suffering was a major phase in the history of our psychological development, and associated it with Christianity. The geneaology of morality expounds on this. Fun video, I'm glad you made it, it certainly made my chores more enjoyable. Sorry to jump down your throat, but i gotta protect my dude against misrepresentation.
It seems you're absolutely correct and I've fallen prey to what looks like a pretty common misconception about the man. I was basing my argument on an interpretation that is very likely flawed. That being said, I still think my point in this section stands because: a) Feeble still misquoted the man and didn't provide his sources. b) My interpretation (while shallow and likely inaccurate to Nietzsche's authorial intent) is still a good analogy for the game. I do appreciate you bringing it to my attention. I'll do more reading on Nietzsche. He's an interesting dude.
This video is the Elden Ring of Critique videos, a truly masterpiece (oh no now feeble will think that im toxic) jokes aside. I listened yhe whole video in one sitting, i could not agree more with you. I loved and love everything about the souls series, dispite its flaws. Its not my job to correct them, im here to appreciate their job as game directors. And if theres one thing or another that i didn't like, ok. Theres hundreds of others that i liked.
Brief comment on the Sisyphus point brought up around 1 hour in, i dont believe sisyphus would be happy because of the merit of his work, and his ability to perfect/improve pushing the boulder eternally. His happiness derives from the fact that he could stop at any time, but that would let the Gods win. He has deadlocked himself to an eternity of monotony and repetition all on his own. As long as sisyphus rolls the boulder, the gods are wrong, and that means he wins. The second he gives up, they win. Sisyphus enables his own hell, and he is content with that.
Hey about sisyphus, while i do agree that Camus brings up the concept of "revolt" a lot, the point Camus makes isn't that Sisyphus is happy because he could stop at any time, it's not a revolt against the gods that casted him in this hell. It's a revolt against the absurdity of existence itself. So Sisyphus doesn't become happy throught conflict and confrontation, he becomes happy through creativity ; by finding meaning where there is none and for exemple by "leaving a trace" behind the boulder he pushes, each time the trace is different. Then, he transcend his condition, he isn't bound by the punishment of the gods, he doesn't create in spite of them.
I'm glad you acknowledge the gaslighting, beacuse just like all gaslighting - many fail to notice it. Not just in games, but in all kinds of modern media, especailly alternative media. You can speak contradictory things, or say insulting, vitriolic garbage veiled in a civilized tones and big words, and people will defend you and attack those who call you an ignorant clown for being vitriolic. Joseph Anderson literally said Dark Souls has no story, when Miyazaki's reason to get into making games is to tell stories through the medium of gaming. Stories that only games can tell. Joseph will thrash the developers for making the game wrong, when he's refusing to engage with basic mechanics. They will authoritatively spew ignorance, poison all discussion, and then attack their own fans for trying to course correct them. When someone tells you to "get good", they mean "learn the game". In their critique, both Joseph and Feeble displayed astonishing ignorance of the games' designs. This is why people made fun of them. Because they were more or less on the same level as Quantum TV, it's just that their tone and aesthetics were more intellectual. Have you seen that infuriating video of DSP playing Dark Souls? Yeah, that's how it feels watching these people trying to criticize Elden Ring. It's not a criticism and it's not analysis if all the video does is display ignorance of the game's mechanics and complete disinterest with engaging with them and exploring what the game has to offer. Just because ignorance is using Marika's mischief to pass itself as intellectual content doesn't mean it is that. And in the face of such ignorance... mockery is an adequate response.
While at it - Matthewmatosis' critique of Dark Souls 2 stinks as well. I do think Dark Souls 2 has a lot to be criticized for - mainly in the way combat and animations are handled and how the combat feels sluggish. The game doesn't seem to use deferred rendering, which strips it from the interesting interplay of light and dark spots that Dark Souls, Bloodborne and Dark Souls 3 have. Porting Dark Souls 2's levels and enemies to Dark Souls 3's engine, really goes to show how many flaws Dark Souls 2 has... and how few of those are explained in Matthew's videos. Where Joseph's criticism of Elden Ring is often wrong and targeted at a game that doesn't deserve such criticism... Matthew's is targeted at a game that deserves a whole lot of criticism, but everything he offers is wrong. So even if I disagree with him deeply about pretty much everything he says, that doesn't mean I think Dark Souls 2 is beyond criticism. I just think he poisoned the conversation around that game entirely. He is the Earthen Peak of videogame criticism.
I've said before that I don't like the get good discourse and stand by it. I don't believe the game is a test of skill. It requires patience and not mechanical ability. So, my main criticism for people like that is they're not approaching it with the right mindset and not because it's a "skill issue".
I'm hesitant to comment because I don't have time to finish the video right this moment, and haven't had time to let my thoughts settle. However, if I don't leave something now, I likely never will, I'm pretty bad about never commenting on any videos. I wanna open by saying that Joseph Anderson is probably my favorite creator. Both Stream Joe and RU-vid Joe I enjoy an exceptional amount. So naturally, I disagree with a lot of your takes here. That being said, I often disagree with Joe, and think he's wrong plenty. One of the things I really enjoy about him is his tendency to "show his work", so to speak. When he's giving opinions about a game, he will often show the evidence on screen as he's talking, and in my experience, he really goes the extra mile to convey why he feels the way he does. That really makes it easy for me to see where my opinion conflicts with his, even if it's a game he didn't play. Anyway, you clearly put a lot of work into this video. I like your style, I like your sourcing, and if this video is any indication, you deserve to have more eyes on you work, which is why I'm rushing this comment. Gotta give some extra engagement while it's on my mind. I may revisit this later after finishing the video to discuss some things. Though I suppose I should throw a tiny bit of substance in here, in case I don't come back. I've seen you chatting with several other commenters about the rune arc / great rune thing, so I apologize if someone else has brought this specific part up. I know your point is to show he is calling something objective, and it's not objectively bugged, but in the clip *you* show, he goes on to say "OR, far worse, they were never supposed to, and they just can't be bothered fixing a single sentence in a tutorial". A bit dramatic, but I'm not here to discuss that part, just to mention that his statement is clearly "It's either bugged or the tutorial text is wrong.", which is just true. Really wish I had time to grab the quotes and timestamps on this one, but you are portraying all of their videos as though they only say negative things, saying that they shouldn't be using the word critique if they don't mention anything positive. You also mention that Feeble King's reaction reaction about SotE probably scaled back because Joe's video was much more positive on SotE than his original. These two things are a bit incongruous, don't you think? If Joe never says anything positive because it goes against his style, then how could you possibly interpret his video as being positive on the DLC? Sorry if any of this was rough, not able to proofread at the moment. I'll be back, and after finishing this video I'll check a few other things on your channel and probably find myself subbing. Despite my many problems with things you've said here, the effort and quality would likely bring me back even if I disagreed with everything you said (which I don't).
Appreciate you giving me the time of day as a Joe fan. That's really encouraging. My point about the great rune is the wording and not the intent. It's all well and good for us to see that and think "well, it's clearly not objective, he's providing options", but some people won't. Some people will hear "the rune arc is objectively bugged" and take that at face value. Wording is really important. It's very confusing to say "x is objectively y, or it could be w." It's an oxymoron. But the great rune discussion for me was a fairly minor point in the grand scheme of things. I'm honestly surprised it's the thing people have taken the most issue with. One commenter suggested that I was dying on that hill. Definitely not. I only brought it up to point out the hypocrisy in him spending so much time in the video saying he doesn't make objective statements to then... making one. I didn't intend it to be a big gotcha moment. Agree with you that Joe is positive at times. It's tough when dealing with multiple subjects and it's possible that I might not have been clear at times who I was speaking to or about. Joe is positive occasionally and he is positive in his DLC review. I just think he speaks overwhelmingly more about the things he doesn't like. That's something that he himself admits. He says he had an amazing time in the DLC but I didn't really get a firm grasp of why. I mostly got criticisms from him which was my main point. But Feeble, yeah, he only said negative things. Maybe thats the confusion. Really appreciate you saying those nice words despite disagreeing with many of my points. That means a lot.
I think Gled point in simplified manner, "If the game is a flawed MASTERPIECE" and you really enjoy/love it, why does the criticism or destructive criticism outweight the things that makes it masterpiece (Such as the false fact of frame number), just simply a clickbait title? We don't know but why do constructive critique has to mostly focus on the negative? This video in my eyes is asking that to me
This video seems interesting but can someone tell me if he ignores the pvp? I cant watch a video about fromsoft community when it ignores that fundamental part of the game as so many unfortunately do...
I speak on it very briefly when talking about weapon variety. But no I don't have much experience with pvp tbh. This video isn't really about my critique of the game. More about a style of criticism.
This was a very well constructed video which I’m glad I watched. In particular I enjoyed your response to the MatthewMatosis criticism which I found very cathartic. Ironically, I actually think the shard bearers of Elden Ring do a very good job of having the variety Matthew yearns for. Rennala phase one is a cool gimmick where you have to listen and pay attention to your environment (with phase two being a bullet hell) ,Radhan is a raid boss you fight with a small army, Rykard has the player use a great gimmick weapon, Mohg forces the player to have very good positioning by keeping track of the blood fire on the floor, and lastly Malenia is built around having a very difficult super move the fight revolves around. Plus then you have Godrick and Morgott which are the great traditional souls duals. Good luck with your next video.
Again, thank you for releasing this video. Your display of well thought out arguments and observations is helping this community heal in ways nobody else has attempted to. Let me add here - Joseph Anderson is not the only toxic person to dip into the Souls community and stir us up, doing damage beyond his imagination and obviously not caring about what he's doing. He just happened to be the subject of this video. However, thank you for directly calling him toxic. Because that's what he is. A few weeks ago my brother actually stopped talking to me because I didn't share his opinion on Elden Ring with him. I pleaded to him for us to not talk about the game anymore because it's not healthy for our relationship and frankly, having a falling out over a video game in your 30s is very, VERY wrong. Yet here we are, he hasn't responded to any of my attempts to reach to him since June 30th. I've been very restless ever since. I hate that this happened and don't think it's justified we're not talking anymore. This also reminds me of that one special individual who is trying to sue From Soft. Discussion and critique of this game has got way out of hand and blown WAY out of proportion for what it is. Elden Ring is my favourite thing ever. Not just game. It's just my favourite pass time, no matter how I'm engaging with it. STILL, I'm self aware enough to recognize it's not worth hurting people over and as you presented at the end of your video, Anderson genuinely hurt someone over a video review. It is true the other person should not have taken it to heart that much since they don't know Anderson personally but still, it was very wrong. For anybody interested about the argument my brother and I had; he basically demanded an easy mode for the game. When I explained to him why I thought the game didn't need an easy mode he doubled down and out right demanded a god mode be implemented into the game. He then called me "emotionally cold" and "misanthropic" (not paraphrasing, his actual words) for not wanting a god mode in the game. I tried to stay calm and explain to him that it's not okay for him to call me names over a different opinion. At some point I told him to not get emotional over our debate (which always achieves the exact opposite, I know that but I was getting angry as well), after which he started yelling at me. I hung up on him when he screamed at me. We haven't talked since. tldr: Great video. Please make more like this. You're helping people emotionally.
I'm really sorry to hear that, dude. These games create strong emotions. That comes out in some weird ways. Hope you get to a good place again with your bro. Joseph definitely isn't the worst of the bunch. But he is the most popular and (I think) the originator of this particular style. That's why he's the subject Thanks again for the kind words. Hope things work out better for you.
11:00 to be fair, most of the souls community talks in terms of 30fps, so "38 frames" is 19 frames, the issue is that joseph did not specify if it is 30fps or 60fps
I consider myself part of the community and I disagree. People talk about Bloodborne like that because it runs at 30fps but not Elden Ring. Elden Ring runs at 60fps. Even so, if he counted the frames he would have seen they were 38 frames. If he didn't count the frames, that is the issue.
Oh. My. God! The "Why Don't You Want Games To Be Good?" part of your video was the nail on the head for me, it's like a hammer hitting the nail in the most satisfying way, oh it was too good, you literally took the words out of my brain & spit it out to your Microphone into an editing software, into a video & finally uploaded it to RU-vid. So satisfying to hear that from another person. I was screaming "EXACTLY" I even clapped a couple of times. Absolutely phenomenal, thank you so much! Also "The EXPLOSION" part was also fantastic & hit the right notes while being respectful too. I just finished the video. Before I end my comment, there's one thing that Feeble said in his 1st video about SOTE & it was this point about game difficulty: “Hard doesn’t & has never equated to good game design.” He brought the “hard” concept in a vacuum, stripped out of its influence on game design intrinsically, OK if that’s the case, let’s bring a game that he adores (Sekiro), let’s make it a much easier & forgiving game, because hey, since the “hard” part of the game isn’t what made it good, let’s make enemy attacks slower, let’s make the player not die after 2-3 hits, let it be after 10 or 15 hits, let’s make Genichiro or Sword Saint Isshin have less complex combo strings, less weird timings, less delays, surely that’ll make it easier, but will that equate to a better designed game? Or a more “fun” game? No, it does not IMO & I for dang sure not in his opinion nor the majority, now the game doesn’t require enough understanding of its mechanics, there’s no reason to feel any threat or respect to its rules, there’s not much rewarding feeling afterwards, now combos are much more simpler & the rhythm has been decreased dramatically, so we stripped the “hard” part now and this is what we get, a much simpler game, surely “less than average” players will enjoy it without finding much hardships or frustration like with his Mario Lost Levels VS Mario Bros example, a lot of the “fun” that come from FromSoft's games is through their mechanics & recognizing patterns & using the player's mechanics in order to overcome those, both have to be congruent, you can't move really fast in Sekiro while every other enemy & boss are much slower than you or have very simple combos, this is what makes them fun & hard (whoa that sounded suggestive 😅), overcoming adversity & hardships is what makes you feel rewarded. And I like how he took the OG Mario Bros & said it’s better for the majority, he counted that as a positive, but From Software’s games have never been for the majority, in fact, the harder they get, the more people they brought, so this throws a big curveball to his argument fundamentally, just look at DS3, BB & Sekiro sales, they're higher & more popular than Demon's Souls, DS1 & DS2, and this supposed “hard” DLC sold 5 million units in a week, so people enjoy the difficulty & overcoming adversity? Or they shouldn't because that will make them "toxic" when they disagree with you, Feeble...🤣😭
You're dying on this weird hill of objectivity/subjectivity for the great runes when Joe doesn't just imply subjectivity, he offers it up to the viewer by providing them options to chose from. That they are spoken with objective language is specifically forgiven by the framing. I don't get it man. Cherrypicking like this only reduces the quality of your arguments as a whole imo.
Joe literally says "the great rune is objectively bugged" and then offers a different interpretation which renders his own statement of objectivity useless. The issue isn't that he's not providing options. It's that he's using the word "objectively" when it's clearly not an objective statement. If I said "that fruit is objectively a banana, but it could also be an apple", I have just said a very silly sentence. (and yes, that is a straw man argument.)
What he should have said is "I think the tutorial message for Great Runes could have been worded more clearly", which doesn't sound nearly as apocalyptic. If you want to know the details of a mechanic you can look it up, or ask someone, or experiment. You can also just SEE your stats directly to see how the GR affects you.
It's so strange that you're arguing for an objective interpretation of his wording in the comments using absurd and poor analogies, while in the video you argue that he's wrong because his subjective interpretation of the wording of the item is 'wrong or at least odd because most didn't read it that way' (even if you could substantiate this claim, it doesnt really mean anything) when the whole point Joe was making in the first place was (as I have interpreted it) that the wording is ambiguous enough to warrant absurd interpretations. It's almost like this very comment chain serves to validate him.
Great video, very nice. But at 51:53 the on-screen text says "fair better" when it should be "fare better." Therefore you are objectively wrong. I'm sorry.
Whenever i think of Joseph Anderson responding to criticism, i remember how DangitJM made a fairly tame response to Joe's comments about unfair boss design of Margit, and Joe commented in the video before even watching; a bunch of arguments that werent being made, and then ended up saying "well i guess i just dont have a very good build" as a response in the comment chain to people summarizing the video as a response to the comment, as if that is somehow Fromsoftware's fault. Then i watched his Lies of P review where he praised the game for "listening to its fans" when they made a bunch of changes, then childishly said that thats how he knows it wasnt made by Fromsoftware, and i was like "oh. thats what this video is going to be about" and yeah
Omg I saw that comment and almost brought it up. That idea of "I haven't watched this yet but this is what I think it's about" is so weird. Just watch it lol. I hope this isn't how he plays games.
@@GredGlintstone some joe lore that i think humanizes him more in my eyes is how he has talked on his stream about how him and a bunch of other unpublished/selfpublished authors would write stories and post them to places like reddit to try and get feedback from each other. i think that thats how he's approaching his "critiques" and its very improv classroom, where you and your peers are trying to make a good joke to use at a standup setting or when writing for a sketch comedy group. There are so many differences between that and what he's doing from the fact that peer to peer critique is more personal and private and helps mainly because after you build some good rapport with your peers, they try to understand and work with you rather than just say what they dont like about your set.
@@AnInvalidEgg 100%, "Joe" very much sees saying that sort of stuff in that way as something very casual and very unproblematic, maybe due to how he used to talk a lot on writing forums like you said, and that kind of shaping how he goes about his casual criticisms on things.
We talking Feeble? It's not the title so much as it is literally everything he says in the video. There's no possible way to interpret that he thinks the game is good if he doesn't say any good things about it in a 40 minute video. How is that so hard to get?
I think it's that whole "I'm refusing to learn so clearly the game wasn't trying to teach me" that really gets to me. So much of the attitude and misinformation seems to stem from that alone, no matter if it's weapons or bosses or exploration. And it's so sad because what I love about FromSoft's games is that they teach you constantly. Even that "gotcha" game design is all teaching. I refer to it jokingly as "FromSoft gave me trust issues" but once you LEARN that they will always try to trick you and trap you and scare the shit out of you, you will ALSO learn to predict it. I had a moment in Sekiro where I went "I just know a guy is hiding behind that corner", and guessing correctly and being able to sneak up on that guy instead of him jumpscaring me was almost as satisfying as taking Sword Saint down for the first time. Maybe you don't like that kind of design, that's fair, but saying it's not teaching you anything just because you refuse to learn from it is so disingenuous to me.
There's a lot that I could say, but I'll keep it brief; this was incredibly cathartic to watch, because we've needed a video like this for a while now. We need more videos like this, in fact. Thank you. I truly believe you are doing this community a great service, in response to these critics doing it a great disservice.
I have disagreements with this video (like the great runes, come on man they are a shitty translation), but I feel VERY vindicated about the St Trina part and 'rewards' not being only an in game trinket, that a well made environment that tells a story, a revealing piece of dialogue or an npc interaction ARE rewards, intrinsic rewards, they don't make the computer numbers go up, but an artistic experience is a prize you need to give meaning to yourself. That statement alone made me realize that feeble is not someone worth listening to, the reward for beating the putrescent knight is clarification on a two year old mystery surrounding the relationship between miquella and st trina and how sleep works as an 'element', pretty hefty if you ask me.
It's absolutely a weird translation. It's just not "objectively bugged." But the main reason I brought it up was because Joe said he doesn't make objective statements but he does pretty often do exactly that. And, yeah, hard agree on intrinsic reward. The St Trina stuff was a big highlight for me. That whole sequence was amazing. Feeble has also previously said that he's a lore guy.. so... I dunno...
The other rewards are 220K runes, a choice of the boss's weapon or a new spell, and you progress Thiollier's questline which allows you to get his armour, a new talisman and a new weapon; and St. Trina's questline which results in a hat (fashion souls). So 5 unique armour pieces, 2 unique weapons, a talisman, a spell and 220K runes... which apparently is not enough of a reward.
