I preferred the level design in Nioh but forgot to put that. I like how it is structured by missions.Level design is part of the gameplay and I think the encounter design is nowehere near as good as Soulsborne games. Enemies are repetitive and boss fights are nowehere near as good. It has good mechanics but I don't think it builds that good a game around them. It's not bad by any means, but Bloodborne wipes the floor with it.
So much love for NiOh.
Isn't the game recycling a lot of assets and repetitive?
I swear I thought it was one common complain.
I preferred the level design in Nioh but forgot to put that. I like how it is structured by missions.
Also, the bosses are way more engaging with inputs -- even if they don't look as cool.
Momodora: Reverie Under the Moonlight
...
To me, Souls is not just combat and control mechanics or leveling mechanics. It is also the atmosphere, the over all darkness within the world create. Both Momodora and Hollow Knight felt like it had a great sense of place. The world was sick and we were trying to cure it. The inhabitants often don't know the full story either and they are not always friendly nor direct enemies. If you feel that these aspects of the souls game are also important then I think these games (Momodora and Hollow Knight) are worth considering.
I was not a huge fan of Salt and Sanctuary. I'm not entirely sure why either.
Did it?
*note* these are games NOT made by From Software, but inspired/influenced by them.
Oh, my bad. Didn't see that :(
Bosses like the giant evil centipede were pretty sweet in design and execution though. But many/most of them just required you to get a grip of their attack patterns, maybe equip protection against their particular element/status (often if you fully explored the levels you could find hidden gear just for that purpose, that was neat), and then you could defeat them in a short while after a few retries at most. There were no prolonged epic long struggles. The game's still cool in its own way and would even fit a handheld easier than the Souls games thanks to the mission structure. But yeah, I don't consider it a Souls-like (or I'd have voted for that here, I was actually turned off by it initially since I did expect a Souls-like based on what other people said about it yet I got something completely different that I grew to enjoy too), it is its own beast. The mission structure would fit a portable version too. Not that you'd fully explore and finish a given area on a short subway ride since they can be quite long and complex with their own shortcuts to open and secrets to find (although you could run straight to the goal/boss), but even if you turned it off after a checkpoint shrine there is no overarching labyrinthine environment or plot to need a refresher of by the next session.I much prefer a cohesive, intertwined world and to me the bosses in Nioh were not very interesting in terms of challenge, look and attack patterns. In fact, I can't even remember most of the bosses. Nothing that comes close to Ludwig, Ebrietas or Orphan of Kos for me. To each his own of course.
I dunno. I appreciate Nioh, but all in all it was much blander and less memorable than I hoped it would be.
I hope the answer to the OP's question can be updated to Death's Gambit next year.
All main missions are quite unique, it's the numerous side missions that have you retread the same areas with altered goals and enemies. You could ignore them but most do them cos the game is fun as hell.So much love for NiOh.
Isn't the game recycling a lot of assets and repetitive?
I swear I thought it was one common complain.
Nioh is great because it's a totally other new thing with very good (maybe the best) Souls combat.