Patrick wrote an article on Kotaku how he is obsessed by Bloodborne. Can be viewed here.

I think his article is kind of a miss. I agree with him that Bloodborne is great, but his trying to speak to the hardcore Souls player, sort of rubs me the wrong way. I realize this probably makes me come across with a superiority complex, but he just isn't a hardcore player. It doesn't seem like he understands what people get out of it.

Two quotes that mostly stand out to me, talking about hardcore players:

Hardcore Souls fans:Bloodborne is both familiar and fresh, a reimagining of the Soulsformula as creative and boldly designed as Dark Souls. If you were disappointed by Dark Souls II, there's a good chance that this is the game you wanted.

This just doesn't make any sense to me. Yes, Dark Souls II felt like more of the same, but that is usually precisely what hardcore players yearn for. I get that he was disappointed in Dark Souls II himself, but that doesn't mean the active community, hardcore, were. There are very few people that still play Dark Souls online, while DSII is vastly populated even today, and for good reason. The actual hardcore crowd plays these games to master them, not to play them once like Patrick does. They're playing it nearly a hundred times with different builds, different gear and different strategies to approach the world. The actual hardcore community is concerned with Bloodborne, since it seems like it doesn't have the longevity that Dark Souls II has. Not so much because it is a shorter game, but because it appears the number of possible builds and creativity thereof, seems dramatically decreased. Even compared to the first Dark Souls, this seems to have less diversity in that respect. Of course it is still early to tell for certain though so I could be wrong about this.

His other comment about there being no shields:

This dismantles the heart of old school defensive Souls strategies that relied on backing off from whatever's attacking, healing, and moving back in. Now, it makes more sense to dodge the attack, get in close, and dish out a few strikes.

He established to talk to both hardcore and regular players first, yet he leaves that out here. The core community has vastly dropped using the shield since Demon's Souls even, and it became the standard in Dark Souls. It always made more sense to dodge (or parry) the attack and retaliate. That was old school. I get that he has played all three games the exact same way, but to someone like me, Bloodborne felt instantly familiar. I didn't miss the shield at any point. In fact, the much more generous visceral attack set ups has made it easier in that regard.

I am missing any criticism from him regarding the bosses. I distinctly remember him saying he thought Dark Souls II bosses' were too easy and a couple of sentences after that stated he couldn't beat a couple of them without summoning. From what I gather he said he has died 20+ times on some bosses in Bloodborne, but have read nothing but praise so far. I am confused by this. Apparently some bosses in DSII gave him so much trouble he had to summon, but his conclusion was that they were too easy. Yet here it is a good thing somehow?

Maybe I am hinging too much on what he says, and again I realize this makes me come across as a dick, but as an actual hardcore player, I feel disconnected from this written piece; while I do agree Bloodborne is a great game thus far. The bosses just aren't doing it for me. They don't seem very interestingly designed and I have beaten all but one of them on the first try (I'm 4 bosses in). Visceral attacks are just too powerful on them. Coupled with the well designed, but incredibly monotonous world and the prospect of little diversity for different builds, I tend to think this might be the lesser of all the Souls games thus far. It's great my first time through, but I'm not having ideas for subsequent playthroughs while playing through it my first time that I normally have with these types of games.

You were right. This post does make you seem like an obnoxious snob.

You don't agree with what someone else says about something? Weird. It's like people have different opinions or something.

Arguing the fact that he isn't speaking to the "hardcore" is a nebulous argument. What is "hardcore"? He's played all the Souls game. Is that not "hardcore" enough? He might not have 400 hours in each game, but he has a job and a wife. Is that his fault? He enjoys the Souls series and takes them seriously when he does play them, is that not "hardcore"?

You are just getting pissy about him using the term hardcore. Dark Souls 2 wasn't a patch on the first either, don't @ me.

@lukeweizer I'd say the active community is the core crowd. The ones who actively play the game, not just once. The first time through is incredibly different from subsequent playthroughs. I'm not saying anything is his fault? Not sure where you got that from.

Noted. But that's what he does, and I'm responding to what he wrote. Sort of unavoidable given the context.

one of the most condescending tirades I've read in a while

I agree with your sentiment in general, but at the same time (regardless of how well or poorly the OP was written) Patrick never did fully get a grasp of any given hardcore community he has written about. No one's perfect I guess.

You're ragging on Klepekk so youre destined to be shot down in this thread. Sorry, but that's the breaks

This isn't directed at anyone, but I hate the "hardcore" distinction because it's like telling someone there's a right and wrong way to play something. I agree with you though, I think the wording in the article is off putting, and I hate how so many people are focusing on this DS2 vs BB thing. I don't think it matters whether you thought one game was hard or another wasn't, because these games hold different challenges for everyone. I'm that guy who killed the first couple bosses in DS without any issue, but fell to the Last Giant like 10 times for some reason. I personally have really enjoyed Dan Tack's coverage at Game Informer. He really loves these games and finds a way to make them appealing to both returning and new players.

as a hardcore souls series player,i completely agree with everything you said.dont listen to the people above me.you dont sound like a dick at all and what you said makes complete sense.

The distinction I'm making is the people who actively play the Souls games and continue to play them after they finished them once, versus the people who play it just the one time. I get you're not talking to me directly, just clearing up I'm not claiming anyone is playing 'right' or 'wrong'.

+1 to this making you sound like a dick. You're doing exactly what you criticize Patrick for doing.

Don't let a word like hardcore get to you like that. That word lost all meaning a long time ago. Don't pretend to speak for everyone that played those games more than once either. By that hardcore definition i'm a hardcore Dark Souls player, having beat it multiple time. But then i apparently played it wrong or not hardcore enough since i used a shield most of the time?

@flstyle: @zevvion: I'm not saying Patrick is free of blame. I'm sure there's plenty in that article that could be picked apart, but I don't think it should be in the form of a self-appointed representative of the "hardcore" community, nor should anyone try to personally define what a "hardcore" player is using arbitrary measures like shield usage.

If you disagree with his thoughts on this game then feel free to voice that from your own perspective. Don't try to be the voice of a whole community just because you feel you are part of it.

If you want to say that Patrick has always been a little presumptive about the "hardcore" communities of any given game he's written or talked about, sure, I'll buy that. But that doesn't mean your post doesn't come off as unnecessarily condescending.

@gaminghooligan: i see this alot,so i just want to say that when i or anyone i know talk about"hardcore players",we are not talking about playing it right or wrong,its just a way of telling the difference on how much people get into a game.there is a big difference between someone playing dark souls once and someone beating it 10 times{which ive done).there is nothing wrong with playing a game once and stopping,but there is a group of people in every game community that gets really into it,thats a hardcore player to me.

Gotta second this, I'm reminded of when he wanted to get his feet wet in EVE but called it after getting a single toe in the water. Did some interviews, attended the fanfest in Iceland, basically did everything but try to actually play the game at any respectable level or for any appropriate period of time

This is a symptom of most people who write about games it's just more apparent when it comes to more technical games like the Souls franchise. You are correct however, despite being a fantastic game Bloodborne is incredibly limited especially when it comes to PVP systems.

Best thing to do is just simply ignore Patrick when he is trying to cater to a group that he's not apart of nor does not entirely understand.

Yeah pretty fair criticism I agree with you on the sword and shield thing I haven't used a shield build in ages. And the word hardcore is thrown around way to much with the souls games often by people who are only passively interested in the series. Hardcore for me are the people who do no heal boss runs or something not just someone who enjoys the games like me. And I never understood the critical negativity around DS2 it was a good game, more of the same with a few small changes. And to be fair to Patrick that's just how he felt about the game, nothing to really take apart there. His experience can never encompass everyone's opinions and lets be fair if you are really in to the souls games you don't go to kotaku for info, you go to Epicnamebro or Vaati on youtube. So Partick's article is fine because its aimed at people who are way less crazy for the souls games than you are.

Don't create threads designed only to belittle someone else's article. Especially don't just pick on Patrick just because he's a former staff member here.