Parry-based gameplay is feminine and I hate it

[Stack of Turtles]

I know people here lack imagination but Elden Ring can be easily done without parrying. In no way does the game require you to use it. Go dex build and roll like an armadillo, use shield aka block and good weapon ashes. DS3 is the same, maybe vs Pontiff you should do it but light attack builds, greatsword builds etc all can finish the game easily. Learning strafing and movement is wiser, parrying only matters in pvp. Aka learn to play the game based way and stop being a homosexual ****** because japanese goys told you to.

"you don't have to parry, you can *** out of taking hits other ways"

[Rumbles]

"you don't have to parry, you can *** out of taking hits other ways"

If there's no sense of danger and I can just slash and bruteforce my way through the game, it lacks sophistication, a la Warframe. You probably enjoy brain-off games like Diablo or PoE based on this comment. Even in World of Warcraft raids 2006 you had to have some survival instinct, and that's essentially a coloring book for adults. But as for a further comment, you can also beat Elden Ring without rolling, have done it in a NG+ myself.

[Val the Moofia Boss]

or because it's simply an attrition race as defensive actions mostly just drag things out without the benefit of finishing faster.

The way to resolve this is to make most combat gameplay not revolve around simply eliminating all enemies, but into missions where you have other factors to consider, ie having to hold a location or protect an NPC for a set amount of time against overwhelming forces, or having to break through an overwhelming number of difficult enemies to reach an objective, etc. In that case, defensive abilities become useful because you don't win the mission for simply maximizing DPS.

[Eyestabber]

Yes, Suckiro is a **** game and its fans deserve to be raped with a rake.

[Norfleet]

The way to resolve this is to make most combat gameplay not revolve around simply eliminating all enemies, but into missions where you have other factors to consider, ie having to hold a location or protect an NPC for a set amount of time against overwhelming forces, or having to break through an overwhelming number of difficult enemies to reach an objective, etc. In that case, defensive abilities become useful because you don't win the mission for simply maximizing DPS.

Nope, unfortunately, adding side objectives (or the ever-cursed idiot NPC) still boils down to an "eliminate enemies". It's not the objectives that change the combat dynamic, it's enemy behavior. If the enemy forces are overwhelming, then only overwhelming DPS can hope to take them out. You can't defend an enemy to death, especially when you're dealing with an NPC that likely has a deathwish and therefore insists on trying to tank every shot despite not being built for it. Everything you propose FURTHER incentivizes MAXDEEPS. Consider the simple math: You are fighting an enemy that deals D damage, that you can kill in T time. You will therefore sustain D*T damage in the exchange. If you halve your damage output so it takes twice as long to kill and double your defense so you take half as much damage, you will take...exactly the same amount of damage. If more enemies are also continuing to spawn in at the same time, your situation gets WORSE because those enemies are now accumulating because you aren't killing them fast enough. Defense was USELESS., The opposite does not necessarily apply, though: If you deal ENOUGH damage, such that T falls below the value at which the enemy can even complete an attack, he instantly DIES and you take NO damage, and will never face foe pile-up because you are able to destroy them faster than they can spawn. DPS is king, and everything else is just a stalling tactic when you don't have enough DPS to hit the next DPS breakpoint. The moment you can reach the next DPS breakpoint, you always switch to that build.

No, only changing enemy behaviors can shift the needle away from DPS. So long as the goal of enemies is to aggressively fight you to the death, DPS will always dominate. It doesn't matter what the mission objectives are (unless it's still "kill all enemies"), it matters how the enemies conduct themselves. If the enemies were less interested in trying to fight you to the death, and more interested in not taking any damage at all, then DPS wouldn't be so important. In real life, people aren't trying to avoid being shot too many times, they're trying to avoid being shot at ALL. In a vidya game, though, enemies don't seem to care that being shot hurts and their commanders are apparently Russian and don't care how many of their men they must sacrifice to cause you a minor inconvenience.

[Val the Moofia Boss]

hen only overwhelming DPS can hope to take them out

I am envisioning a scenario where you realistically cannot take all of the enemies out before the overwhelm your glass cannons, but you don't need to take out all of the enemies in the first place, hence why other options like defense or evasion or crowd control become relevant.

[methoxetamine]

Yes, Suckiro is a **** game and its fans deserve to be raped with a rake.

Which boss filtered you? The chained ogre?

[Norfleet]

I am envisioning a scenario where you realistically cannot take all of the enemies out before the overwhelm your glass cannons, but you don't need to take out all of the enemies in the first place, hence why other options like defense or evasion or crowd control become relevant.

Scenarios like that fall into two types: Infinite Wave Defense/Breakthrough, and Annoying Gimmick Puzzle Battles. In the infinite wave defense scenario, DPS remains king: Your goal is to apply your MaxDeeps to spawnlock or break through the enemy and then **** or wait them out. Nobody likes the Annoying Gimmick Puzzle Battle because nobody enjoys rebuilding their entire character to beat one gimmick mission that doesn't exist anywhere else, and there aren't a lot of games where pretty much the entire game is designed around being a stalling tactic against invincible enemies or enemies that simply become worse if you kill them such that you resort to gimmick tactics like "permanent immobilization to prevent respawning". These situations are even more terribly contrived and gamey than the "mass of zergs" scenarios we typically see: Rather than reacting naturally to what is presented to you, you quickly fall into metagaming the scenario-specific rules.

[Stack of Turtles]

"you don't have to parry, you can *** out of taking hits other ways"

If there's no sense of danger and I can just slash and bruteforce my way through the game, it lacks sophistication, a la Warframe. You probably enjoy brain-off games like Diablo or PoE based on this comment. Even in World of Warcraft raids 2006 you had to have some survival instinct, and that's essentially a coloring book for adults. But as for a further comment, you can also beat Elden Ring without rolling, have done it in a NG+ myself.

On the contrary, I don't play video games at all.

[TheCumGuzzler]

I know people here lack imagination but Elden Ring can be easily done without parrying. In no way does the game require you to use it. Go dex build and roll like an armadillo, use shield aka block and good weapon ashes. DS3 is the same, maybe vs Pontiff you should do it but light attack builds, greatsword builds etc all can finish the game easily. Learning strafing and movement is wiser, parrying only matters in pvp. Aka learn to play the game based way and stop being a homosexual ****** because japanese goys told you to.

I played 300 hours of Elden Ring and never parried one time

Parrying is only worth it if the game forces you to do it because it's not reliable and the entire game has to be designed around it.
Personally finished the entire game including the DLC using the good old heaviest armor + big *** shield + Spear

[asf]

kill whoever made radial menus

[Tangerine]

Parrying is only worth it if the game forces you to do it because it's not reliable and the entire game has to be designed around it.

That doesn't make parrying worth it. That makes the game not worth playing.

[TheCumGuzzler]

Parrying is only worth it if the game forces you to do it because it's not reliable and the entire game has to be designed around it.

That doesn't make parrying worth it. That makes the game not worth playing.

Maybe if you're Gen Z like me you can enjoy very high speed gameplay because your brain is fried

[DemoGraph]

Sitting and waiting for the enemy to attack so you can dodge/parry and react is feminine.

[asf]

medieval people were irresponsible, they shouldnt let women anywhere near swords

[A Chinese opium den]

"Woah this guy blocked .1 seconds before my attack hit him, now I am stunned for 25x as long as if he blocked 1 second before my attack hit him." This is deranged and ********, its just blocking with free handouts for being a little ***.

[ArcaneLurker]

This is what the post-battle replay looks like.

[NotAI]

One of you guys is Synthetic Man?
Just saw his video on the joys of parrying.

[Tweed]

Parrying combat is only permissible in a game like Soulcalibur.