Bloodborne - types of death for careless players

Yeah, Bloodborne is here and while a lot of people is just mesmerized by it and have been playing for countless hours (myself included), others are still struggling and counting themselves out of the experience just because the game seems to be "too hard". The reality about this is that Bloodborne while challenging, is not as difficult as previous related titles like the Demon Souls/Dark Souls games. The base difficulty is kind of the same, but the game mechanics differ so much in style that this time players can feel a lot more comfortable while hacking through the hellish creatures that inhabit the nightmarish places that they will go through.

Why do I write an article such as this without tangible tips?

Well, while others can tell you a lot of technical stuff like how to get insight or where to grind for blood or what pattern to use against a boss, your real enemy in any game like Bloodborne is yourself. The reason for this is that we have a few attitudes that work against us and that are very apparent in a game like this, so today we will see some of them so you can spot them and make your own adjustments, unless you want to keep dying and dying, ad nauseam without an apparent logical reason. Now without any more introduction let's begin the list.

Expecting a land-slide "photo finish" victory  = discouraging death.
I personally had this problem and while it is sometimes kind of obvious, it is quite hard to neutralize. We sometimes just expect to land a lucky combo and just rally to the finish. It is like playing a baseball game, scoring 15 runs early and just continue on cruise control until the end of the game. The truth is that this will almost never happen in Bloodborne (or any souls game), so you have to accept this or else you will get very discouraged each time a boss lands a hit on you basically letting yourself die because you didn't thought that you could fight back and win. Most of the time it takes some Rocky style "go the distance" struggle before you can fell a beast and survive. It will not always be pretty or easy, but it is very satisfying.

Thinking that grinding will make bosses a breeze = deserved death.
This one may be an attitude that newcomers could find themselves with. The grinding and leveling in Bloodborne is faster than any of the other related games, but that doesn't mean that adding up stat points will make it a breeze. The game is mostly based on dodge and attack mechanics, so even if your stats are high, if you are not fast enough when playing a boss you are going to get hit a lot and die regardless of how much you "enhanced" your character. Don't get carried away in a grind fest for too long and focus on your strategy.

Not playing with a healthy dose of confidence = unexpected death.
For both newcomers and those who have a history with the Soul games, it must had been pretty weird to keep taking damage while you were playing as careful as possible. This is because the game is designed in a way that it rewards you for been aggressive, but penalizes you if you are too shy when attacking. For example, I began my game with the Cane weapon. At first I was having problems with normal enemies because the cane has less attack power than the other weapons, but after a while a discovered that the real problem was that I wasn't attacking with authority, instead I was just trying to poke the monster to death (which doesn't work that well with crowds), so now I play Bloodborne just like I would play Castlevania and the change in my survival rate was impressive. Your #1 rule when fighting an enemy in Bloodborne should be that if the creature hesitates then you hack and slash it to oblivion.

Ignoring the potential of items = unnecessary death.
This one goes for those of you out there that are just ignoring the good assortment of items that you have in Bloodborne. Survival isn't always limited to attacking and dodging as sometimes a well placed item can be a lifesaver or just make a fight a lot easier (for example try some simple stuff like throwing an oil pot on a monster and then using a Molotov to set the thing on fire). Later on you will find a lot of good items that will serve you well in your fight against the hellish hordes and some of these items even have a logical connection to the big bad boss itself (like a certain music box).

Seen armor as a simple fashion statement = fabulous death.
Armor sets in Bloodborne are quite cool, but they have stats and some of them go a little further than just a cool looking set. If you simply change sets for their visual appearance then you must surely be a dodging master or at least finish boss fights really fast, because the type of attributes your armor has sometimes play a significant role in whether you live or die and it also applies to some normal enemies in the game. For example that church gear that doesn't look as badass as you would had liked is really good at resisting poison and that my friends is quite useful against some annoying beast that lurks around Old Yharnam.

Wrapping it up:
I know that the things mentioned as tips on this article can look kind of obvious to some of you, but I know that others may be going like "damn it, I do that all the time". The cool thing is that changing those attitudes can really take your skills up a couple notches not only on Bloodborne, but on any game that requires skill and quick thinking.

Will Sony really bring a new PS2 era?

Right now, the PS4 is the industry leader everywhere in the world except for Japan, where the Wii U is still beating Sony's machine. At first, one of the initial promises that Sony had with the PS4 was that they were going to bring a new PS2-like era in gaming and that was one of the things that attracted many gamers to their side right at the beginning of this generation. Because of this, expectations have always been high with the platform and almost every PS4 owner is eagerly waiting for Sony to drop or at least mention their intention to drop some of the big bombs of that "new PS2 era" or at least something that resembles it. Up until now there are no signs of that happening in the near future and it is almost certain that many of the first adopters are starting to wonder if this is ever going to happen.


The first "PS2 era" aspect that hasn't happened with the PS4 is the inclusion of a definitive JRPG on the console. If we remember back at the PS2 days, one of the games that even came with the console's demo disc was Final Fantasy X and that was a very big deal at the time. Nowadays with the PS4 we have some rpg games on the way for the near future like Natural Doctrine and Hyper Dimension Neptunia VII, but both of them are basically dedicated for a niche within the JRPG niche, which are tactic rpgs and fan service rpgs. Up until this moment there are no indications of a role playing release of giant proportions like a Nino Kuni sequel or even the revival of slumbering franchises like Wild Arms, Suikoden, Shadow Hearts or any of those that had very good offerings for the PS2.


Another aspect that is not there yet is the appearance of a PS2 era heavy hitter. Jack and Daxter is still out of the picture since the last days of the PS2 lifespan, Dark Cloud are two words that wont even appear on a Ouija board, The Last Guardian is starting to become like the Sony's Shenmue (a game that pulls a sad sigh out of developers every time it is mentioned), Tekken ended up stranded on the Wii U, Twisted Metal has been missing in action for years and action adventure games like Maximo, Medievil and Ape Escape are not even close. To be fair, they don't necessarily have to make direct sequels or reboots. They can come with new things that cater to those experiences, it should not be that hard considering all they have to gain from it.


Last but not least, if we have something to acknowledge about the PS2 is that it was the powerhouse of horror. Not only did it snatched Resident Evil from Nintendo's hands and had the best Silent Hill games around, but also had Siren (which had a pretty good chapter based game on the PS3), Fatal Frame which seems to be the horror franchise nobody (except for Nintendo) wants any more, The Suffering, Haunting Grounds, Clock Tower,  Rule of Rose, Trapt, Manhunt, Run Like Hell and others. Right now the only horror titles roaming the PS4 are Outlast, The Evil Within and The Order 1886 which is the only horror exclusive.

Wrapping it up

Instead of all those things that would had made for a promise in the process of been fulfilled, we are getting sort of a "PS3 Plus" deal here with all those types of games heading to the older console instead of the PS4, which is a mistake if they really want to widen the gap between them and the competition. With the Wii U and Xbox One beginning to solidify their game libraries, Sony should keep firing shots at them by giving the players a definite reason to hang on to their platform and the best bet they have right now is to rally the troops with their long time fans by giving them something to really hype for, other than The Order 1886, Bloodborne and No Mans Sky. Still, is it needed to say to all those gamers out there to NOT become pessimistic as the promised new PS2 era can still happen, let's just hope that Sony realizes that they have more to gain than the risk involved in that kind of strategy.

Are we complaining too much about this generation of consoles?

Any gamer that surfs the web often, has to be familiar with the intense criticism that the new generation of consoles (PlayStation 4, Xbox One, Wii U) has received. There are many supposed arguments that seem to support the idea that this generation of consoles is not as good as the companies want you to believe. From my point of view and after reading a lot of these comments and rants I can say that we are not been realistic enough into what new consoles are and the things that consoles in the past have showed us. In order to prove it, I am going to take the most heard/read complaints out there and throw some light at them with facts.

Poor guy... His game was one of the most praised games of 2013, yet "Wii U doesn't have good games".

1) The new consoles have no good games.

This is basically the strongest complaint about the current generation, but at the same time is the weirdest one. This is because on the surface it looks like there is a "lack of games" while in reality we have more games since the launch of each new console than we had on previous generations by the same amount of time. First of all we are failing to consider "indie" games as part of the console library. I know many of these games can be found on networks like Steam or Origin, but guess what? Not everybody has a gaming PC and some gaming setups are still not based on the living room where a setup for full gaming is more convenient than an hybrid console-PC one.

Also for all 3 of the current generation consoles, we have seen games from different genres (counting indie and not indie). There's action, horror, puzzle, adventure, first person shooters, platformers, survival horror, action-rpg and even combination of genres into one. If things are like this, then how can people say there are no games when there is clearly stuff to play? If we go back 2 generations to the past, there was no digital game thing and we basically had to make ends meet very few retail games (often one of them was a killer app, while most of the otthers were not that great). So now we have more choices, but it seems that we have become so spoiled that if it isn't a AAA super-hyped cutting edge game apparently it doesn't count. Well, I leave that for you to judge, but talking about spoiled brings us to our next complaint to break.

If you sold your old console and went straight for the new ones, I have news for you...

2) The new consoles are been dragged down by the old ones.

Once again another thing from the past we seem to have forgotten. Throughout almost every generation the passing platform sticks around for a while before the new one sets in (except in the case of consoles that have died too soon like the transition from Sega Saturn to the Dreamcast). On this generation we have 2 consoles whose hearts are till beating and those are the Playstation 3 and Xbox 360. These ones are still receiving love from the game companies for one reason and that reason is that they have a BIGGER established fan-base.

Lets be honest folks. The PS3 and Xbox 360 have an established user base that is still gigantic, while none of the newer consoles has touched the 10 million mark by themselves yet. If you have a game company, you will most likely target the biggest market around and up until now and it isn't the new generation. We all know that the previous generation will eventually get cold and die, but they still have at least one more year on their lifespan and because the Wii U is the only console with a solid backward compatibility feature, the PS3 and Xbox 360 will live on for a little while longer.

Do the math! Now not with bits but frames per second and resolution numbers.

3) The game is not 60fps and 1080p or does not feature a breakthrough on graphics? Well it's not next-gen then!

If this generation has something in common with the one from the early 90's, is the obsession with numbers. Back in the day it used to be all about bits. 8 bits, 16 bits, 64 bits, OH MY GOD 128 bits! Now it's more like the frame rate and resolution of games. It is understandable to ask for the highest resolution possible because nobody ever buys a good HDTV or monitor to see a game that looks like Bubsy 3D on enhance mode, but at the same time asking for the full maximum quality AND frame rate on every game regardless of how the game itself is, looks kind of selfish and unrealistic.

Not all games are the same, and while linear adventures are easier to develop and easier to make them look pretty, sandbox games for example, force developers to use their resources as efficient as possible to create giant worlds in the best way they can. Not also this is very taxing on the developers, but also on the consoles themselves which were not meant to be competing with high end PCs in terms of power (unless you wanted to spend 800+ dollars on a game console (for an example check the price tags for all the Steam box machines). Also the graphical jump on this generation will not be as big as we believed like the jump from SNES and Sega Genesis to the PS ONE, Nintendo 64 and Saturn. It is something a little more subtle which will get better with time, but not as a giant leap as some people expect. Some games may look a little "photo-realistic", but it will not be that much and it will be based mostly on graphical tricks just like Nintendo did with Mario 64 to amaze us back in the day.

Do these games deserve to be called "AA"? 

4) Huh? That is not a AAA game!

This one is caused by the debate on how a AAA game should be. On this generation of consoles, games like Infamous: Second Son and Titanfall, took the heat for not been "AAA enough". Now here is the thing. Both games featured advanced graphics graphics, good gameplay and an enjoyable interaction between player and game. Now that we looked as those characteristics then what else do they need to be considered AAA? I've even read people classifying those games as AA and I just had to laugh. AA? Wow, what's next then, A and a half? Whatever happened with games just been games and not classified by how much money the company spent on them.

This kind of thinking may happen because we got too accustomed to cinematic showcases in games rather than the gameplay itself. It is like we are asking the developers to drop content in favor of exposition. So what if the game doesn't have a thousand cutscenes and cinematic style parts showing off how much the company spent on it? What we should worry about is what happens when we are finally able to use our game pads and move the character around. Of course this doesn't mean that games should be blank and devoid of any type of exposure, but that should NOT be what sets the bar on quality over a videogame.

The elephant in the room that nobody seems to care about...

5) I wont support any new console until I see it flourish!

This one can be pretty much considered a fallacy of thought. It is a vicious spiral that can severely damage any platform (think of the PS VITA and Wii U). Let's see, you won't support the platform because it doesn't have any games (see complaint #1), but the gaming companies will not release their games on the platform until enough people buy it. So if neither of the two parties involved yield, the console suffers as the result.

The case of the PS VITA and Wii U shows this perfectly. When both systems launched, everybody was like "wow, it is a cool machine, but I wont support it until they show the heavy hitters". That alone was a set back to the consoles themselves as they had horrible sale numbers and third party companies were like "huh... How about no?" Right now, the PS VITA is slowly gaining speed, but it is because Japanese companies yielded first, released good games and got good profits. Now these games are been released on other countries and we will get to enjoy them, but not because of ourselves, so thank the Japanese people for that. As for the Wii U, they are trying to bring interest to their console with the games they are and will be announcing before and during this year E3 event, but third party companies are still not convinced that the console will make a comeback. If regardless of all their effort the console fails, it will be a shame because it is a good machine and there ARE games for it, you just have to look, just like with the Wii.

Hype and more hype, but if the companies deliver, our wallets will cry...

To wrap things up:

At the end of this argument we need to get a few things into our heads:

• New consoles start with limited libraries that pick up as time passes and the console defines its place in the market. 
• Most previous consoles will not magically die off (because of the lack of backward compatibility) so they will still get support and games for them that will not necessarily be released on the newer ones.
• Superb frame rate and resolution is something awesome to have, but it does not define the full quality of a game.
• AAA games are more than cinematic showcases so give those new games a chance.
• If you don't support a platform on it's infancy, you are creating a cycle that may damage the platform which could mean that you will never see the games you want on it, because the game companies see no profit on it.
• We need to learn to look for games like we used to in the past, with an open and unbiased mind. Doing that will makes us find good games that we would probably ignore or miss if we didn't searched enough.

So at the end of the road, this new generation is really next-gen, but it needs time to fully develop and we need to stop ranting and have some faith. E3 is coming soon and things look bright for all of the 3 competing platforms so sit tight, enjoy the ride...Just play and have fun.