>>58445630
>Souls games invented dodging
The Souls connection around all of the dodge roll/parry slop hate is a red herring.
The reason dodge and parry have become reviled is because they:
>Homogenize game design
>More specifically, preclude many interactions
New games try to build original systems, but often end up shitting on their attempts by including dodges and parries. The capacity to freely avoid damage is well and good in reaction-heavy games, but likewise renders trade-off mechanics DOA. Imagine how absurd this uniform tendency to damageless game design would be if extended to chess or RTSes.
The most recent nadir for this philosophy is Expedition 33. That game asks the player to negotiate basic reaction tests with an assortment of turn-based mechanics. It's a very naive execution. To harmonize these elements, its sequel could, for example, try to leverage the series' emphasis on finesse and rhythm to have more methodical fencing battles, maybe closer to something like Worldless (which has its own parry slop problems, but is also more mindful about them).
If one wanted to extract a general rule from this dodge/parry slop epidemic, it'd be something like:
>Don't integrate mechanics in a way that makes them run orthogonally
You can also extrapolate this rule to other clashing systems. For example, RPGs that have a single currency for convenience and unique items, which conditions players to hoard. Or WRPGs that allow save-scumming, but also have charisma rolls.
