Support NeoGAF

[Crayon]

My dude, that is a core pillar of any video game-ass-video game.

If you don't like it, that's cool though. I bet you could find something you like better if you deviate from the blockbusters. You'll have to give up some graphics and a lot of hype but I'm sure something is out there!

 

[Roman Empire]

I don't have a thing against memorizing types of attacks and their patterns. What does bothers me is when the boss is constrained into doing the same thing until you hit a certain health threshold. Take for example super bosses that suffice my itch for hard and challenging bosses are Lingering Will from KH2 and Yozora from KH3, these two can simply do all their "fuck you" and desperation moves from the get-go of the fight, so never actually have the fight playing the same every retry you have to do. You are forced to learn the fight or get VERY lucky on not running into their worst attacks early in the boss fight.

Here:

Lingering Will:



Gonna leave a few timestamps to:

• 02:50 breakdown of the fight's mechanics
• 05:50 Near Unreactable Moves that can be performed by the boss at most any time of the fight; Even at the start after the initial cutscene (06:20 - literal unreactable punch as an opener)
• 07:05 - PATTERNS ISSUE
• 08:10 - Looping Cheese - how to bait revenge values/retaliations

Even with a few cheese strats the fight still holds pretty well as one HARD AS HELL of a boss fight.

Yozora:



Gladly the video already has timestamps.

Yozora's fight is overall even harder than Lingering Will because it's longer due to new mechanics and he has too many attack patterns with fake-outs mixed within it. Plus, his desperation move is fucking long, and he has a few cheat mechanics like being able to steal the player's weapon, leaving you with a whole phase of evading without the guard option (which is a lot harder because you need to react better to attacks), and he can steal your revival item, meaning you'll have to deal with him reviving at half health after dealing the final blow.

I like these types of fights as the ultimate challenge of said games because they have everything the game already has thrown at you and more. They are the ultimate challenge to test the player's abilities and knowledge of the game's core mechanics and combat intricacies.

 

[_Justinian_]

Expand your horizons and play different genres of games.

 

[JOEVIAL]

I actually just want to see things improve.

I know you single player gamers love movies. Imagine watching The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe. The main characters step through the closet and all the dangerous enemies in Narnia just stay stationary, wait for the main characters to run up to them, and then engage Roomba mode. It would be the worlds worst movie.

Why isn't this acceptable in film, but it's acceptable in games? Riddle me that, Danjin44!

Eh... not a good argument. Most movies are filled with incredibly unrealistic combat where the enemies are pretty much roombas waiting to be killed by the "heroes" and vice versa. This is apparent in the Narnia movies, Lord of the Rings movies, and most especially in Star Wars movies.

I'll use Phantom Menace for example:

Kenobi killed Maul with a convenient plot device... he did not best him. This scene is completely unrealistic to actual skill, tactics, and strategy.

I partially agree with your original assessment though OP. Many games are filled with braindead enemies or bad game design.

The Halo games have the closest thing to dynamic Ai that I can recollect right now; reactionary Ai that respond to your inputs in very smart ways. Some of the stuff in Halo games has yet to be topped IMO. Especially Elites and Bruits in Halo 2 and Halo 3.

 

[Valonquar]

Team jump rope is all there is in MMOs now.

 

[Fbh]

People actually aren't saying this.

There is a lot of space between Roomba level AI and IBM's Deep Blue.

What we're saying is maybe there's more interesting, unique, and fun AI behavior than the Roomba/SIMON toy we see in the video's in the OP.

Maybe, but so far I've yet to come across a game with combat, enemies and specially bosses that I enjoy more than the ones in Souls/Sekiro.

Fear back in the day was doing some interesting stuff with enemy AI that I do wish they had continued developing, but maybe there's a reason they didn't. While I would like to see more progress made in the realm of gaming AI, I've always had the suspicion that a certain degree of dumb robotic behavior from enemies is ultimately more fun for the player.

 

[Shake Your Rump]

Let the boss use my own attacks against me. Let him memorize *my* attacks. Let him adapt to *my* moves. No more "weak points". Let me just damage it naturally, enough patterns.

Let the boss adapt to my moves mid-battle. Utilize A.I in unique ways.

If it takes me 20 tries to beat a boss, it shouldn't be the same fight each time.

I strongly suspect that this is one of those things that players think they want, but when actually implemented, they hate it.

 

[Spaceman292]

Facts. And look at the responses in this thread.

People have become so used to it, brainwashed into thinking this is the only way to design a boss battle.

Strafe. Dodge. Hit. Repeat. Since the days of the fucking NES. Give me a break. You mean to tell me gen after gen, with all that technology advancement, you can't think of a single other design element for your boss encounters?

People can't possibly have a different opinion to me! They must be brainwashed!

 

[simpatico]

Like anything (aside from looter games), it's fun if done well.

 

[nkarafo]

At least it's not as bad as quick time events.

 

[Represent.]

I strongly suspect that this is one of those things that players think they want, but when actually implemented, they hate it.

For some maybe, absolutely not me. All of that would blow my goddamn mind.

 

[MagnesD3]

I strongly suspect that this is one of those things that players think they want, but when actually implemented, they hate it.

If I ever get to work on games I would like to implement adaptive AI to varying degrees based on how smart the thing your fighting is supposed to be if thats possible. But I do agree that how most people say they would want it probably wouldnt in practice.

 

[nkarafo]

The AI alternative is literally bosses that act like oppose players in a multiplayer game...

 

[docchicken]

This thing you're commenting on is the reason why these games are good. If the attack patterns are relatively interesting, fun to play/memorize and execute, then you have a formula for a good single-player action game.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Eh... not a good argument. Most movies are filled with incredibly unrealistic combat where the enemies are pretty much roombas waiting to be killed by the "heroes" and vice versa. This is apparent in the Narnia movies, Lord of the Rings movies, and most especially in Star Wars movies.

I'll use Phantom Menace for example:

Kenobi killed Maul with a convenient plot device... he did not best him. This scene is completely unrealistic to actual skill, tactics, and strategy.

I partially agree with your original assessment though OP. Many games are filled with braindead enemies or bad game design.

The Halo games have the closest thing to dynamic Ai that I can recollect right now; reactionary Ai that respond to your inputs in very smart ways. Some of the stuff in Halo games has yet to be topped IMO. Especially Elites and Bruits in Halo 2 and Halo 3.

I'm no expert in Star Wars, but didn't the antagonists in those films have plans and move separate from the heroes?

Those movies felt like you were peaking into a real universe.

In the 3 games referenced in the OP it's like they're toys from Toy Story. They all line up in the same spot and stand their in perpetuity until the player "wakes" them up.

"Everyone! Back to your places! Andy is coming!"

Toy Story is fun because the Toys are made real in that universe. In Elden Ring, they're not.

 

[Loomy]

We've been memorizing attack patterns since Megaman, Contra, etc.

None of this is new

 

[the_master]

It should not be only about memorization and it is not just that. But learning the enemy has been a thing since the beginning of single player games, even more obvious in the arcade era.

(Also I can’t vote cause I have no lord!)

 

[A.Romero]

I don't know... I know what you are saying and it sounds good in theory but I'd say games without patterns would rely more heavily into reaction times. What scratches that itch for me are fighting games.

I like action adventure games as they are right now. I'm all up for more complex patterns if you will but I can't imagine enjoying complete unpredactibility.

 

[BbMajor7th]

Depends on how heavy intense they go. If I have to study a boss a few times to get a feel for what they're about (most Souls games) then no biggy. If I literally have to learn the animation tells for the majority of moves across a three-phase fight (Sekiro, Cuphead, Hollow Knight), then yeah, that's kind of exhausting.

 

[The artful mincer]

Remember this thing? It came out in 1978.

Now look at the enemy behavior in these games...(time stamped for quickness)

There are soooo many single player games with core combat design that follow this formula. Circle strafe enemy, memorize attack patterns, wait for opening, attack. We've been doing this same pattern since the NES with Contra, Mario, Mega Man etc... It was everywhere on the SNES/Genesis. It didn't stop on the PS/N64. Filled to the brim on the PS2/XB/GC. Stuffed out the gills on the 360/PS3. When will the people rise up and say "Enough is enough!" Damn it people, memorization is not the pinnacle of game design! Enemy combatants should emulate intelligent enemies who can think, strategize, and react to you. They shouldn't all be Roombas with preset patterns that flail regardless of the situation. Are we all suffering from Stockholm syndrome? Why do we put up with this?!

What do you think of Horizons machine enemies? I thought removing there parts was interesting in how it changed there a.i. removed attacks etc.

I don't think they reacted to the player though.

 

[The artful mincer]

I don't know... I know what you are saying and it sounds good in theory but I'd say games without patterns would rely more heavily into reaction times. What scratches that itch for me are fighting games.

I like action adventure games as they are right now. I'm all up for more complex patterns if you will but I can't imagine enjoying complete unpredactibility.

Yeah I remember Sucker punch chatting about this when designing ghost. If we don't know what's coming we rely on pure reaction time and most people can't react that fast.

If we know what's coming I guess it's more about timing and pressing buttons quickly which we can do far quicker I guess.

 

[Mossybrew]

Yeah I agree OP it's tired and outdated to have such robotic enemies in games, but I sure don't know the answer why it's still this way or when it will change. I guess gamers just accept this kind of thing as a given so there's not much pressure to change.

 

[ConcealedBlaze]

I fucking love learning combat patterns and learning how to take an enemy apart. It’s one one of my favorite mechanisms in games and I’m glad it’s stayed around.

That said, there’s plenty of alternatives so I’m not sure why anyone is complaining some games still use this mechanism. If you don’t like it, that’s fine. Those games just aren’t for you. Plenty more to pick from.

 

[Neff]

When will the people rise up and say "Enough is enough!"

Think about it.

 

[A.Romero]

Yeah I remember Sucker punch chatting about this when designing ghost. If we don't know what's coming we rely on pure reaction time and most people can't react that fast.

If we know what's coming I guess it's more about timing and pressing buttons quickly which we can do far quicker I guess.

Exactly. It's just about accessibility, not about lack of creativity to change things up.

I mean, most of the top sold SP games in the last few decades have had QTE's in some form or fashion and the public eats that up despite the more involved gamers criticizing them pretty much since their inception. The market likes the things staying mostly like their are with a few minor innovations every now and then. It's more like evolution than revolution.

 

[Three]

Let the boss use my own attacks against me. Let him memorize *my* attacks. Let him adapt to *my* moves. No more "weak points". Let me just damage it naturally, enough patterns.


Study the art of Dragon Ball:

Let the boss adapt to my moves mid-battle. Utilize A.I in unique ways.

If it takes me 20 tries to beat a boss, it shouldn't be the same fight each time.


Show more battle damage. In real time.
Enough strafing.

We need a game that comes along and fucking revolutionizes boss battles. But nope, everyone just copying the same old formula. Zero ambition.

Be careful what you wish for. People don't like to be outsmarted in games and pummelled. It becomes frustrating for the player. A lot of games turn down the AI to make the game more fun. A 20 on 1 gunfight with good AI would be a nightmare. you would not be having a good time with. Games have some enemies purposely stand back and do nothing so as to not frustrate players. A good boss fight that can fake moves and outsmart you is easy to do but it's not fun for the player unless they are true masochists. I even get frustrated by enemies in HFW sometimes because some seem too good at predicting where you will be in future dodges with their projectiles. One that is learning my moves and adapting would be even more rage inducing.

 

[Pimpbaa]

Some of the bosses in SNK fighters are real assholes. They’ll never let you beat them (unless you are good). A boss with good AI would be worse. A giant wall for gamers, you suck and thus cannot continue.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Yeah I agree OP it's tired and outdated to have such robotic enemies in games, but I sure don't know the answer why it's still this way or when it will change. I guess gamers just accept this kind of thing as a given so there's not much pressure to change.

I think gamers have traditionally liked it and it's cheap and relatively easy to do for developers.

What do you think of Horizons machine enemies? I thought removing there parts was interesting in how it changed there a.i. removed attacks etc.

I don't think they reacted to the player though.

I'd classify them as Roomba bots with a slight, mostly meaningless variation. They're still wickedly dumb and fighting them is still based on SIMON toy pattern recognition. Thinking more about them angers me slightly.

 

[Generic]

Yeah I remember Sucker punch chatting about this when designing ghost. If we don't know what's coming we rely on pure reaction time and most people can't react that fast.

If we know what's coming I guess it's more about timing and pressing buttons quickly which we can do far quicker I guess.

If you don't know what's coming you judge the animations. Sadly most developers can't do intuitive animations.

 

[existensmaximum]

Yeah, I don't agree. I love this stuff

 

[Heaven Angel]

No. It was fun 30 years ago and it will be fun 30 years from now!​

​

​

​

 

[bitbydeath]

Have you played The Last of Us?
That game is about the enemy learning your attack patterns and adapting to it.

Not all SP games are the same.

 

[Filben]

I'm a cripple when it comes to timing in these games. Always too early because enemies fucking delay their attacks or too late because they still then strike ultra quickly. I'm more down for slow and tactical combat, like setting up traps, using DoT damage and skills/perks with synergies.

 

[SHA]

Google is spoiling intentionally.

 

[YeulEmeralda]

I tried to play Prey Mooncrash last night and couldn't do it. I'm someone who gets easily bored with repetitive content.

But obviously most gamers love that shit. Die and die again until you've memorised what the game is going to do.

 

[DelireMan7]

Memorization is a pretty basic approach but very efficient for me. Love it.

I'm gladly be surprised by some AI if done interestingly. But I don't want an AI mimicking human behavior. There is MP for that.
I kind of like when enemies are a bit dumb.