This is a followup to @SorosFootSoldier@hexbear.net 's recent thread for completeness' sake.
I'll state an old classic that is seen as a genre defining game because it is: Myst. Yes, it redefined the genre... in ways I fucking hated and that the adventure game genre took decades to fully recover from. It was a pompous mess in its presentation and was the worst kind of "doing action does vague thing or nothing at all, where is your hint book" puzzle gameplay wrapped in graphical hype which ages pretty poorly as far as appeal qualities go.
So many adventure games tried to be Myst afterward that the sheer budgetary costs and redundancy of the also-rans crashed the adventure game genre for years.
People who like DS also hate that slogan, especially the way it was used in DS2. Completely warps the tone of the games. I think DS2 has cool stuff here and there but it ultimately does suffer immensely from the good director being too busy with other things.
I actually enjoyed the DS series somewhat, but because I made a non-worshipful reference to that marketing slogan, I got shit for it.
I'm not gonna hitch myself to that other guy's wagon, but you sound a little silly complaining about it. Like, yeah there were and I guess probably are shitheads who are all for the "hardcore gamer culture" but the overwhelming majority of Souls fans, including the really invested ones, think that the DS2 marketing was cringe as shit because the games aren't really supposed to be grimdark or sadistic like that. It's all about learning through trial-and-error, not "failure" as a mark of not being "good".
I think you sound a little silly being that selective in the side you're taking when I bring it up because after the fact and with no one in particular being targeted with that remark I got that much of a hostile and personalized response.
Good, but I didn't see that here. I'll just have to believe you there.
Yes, and as I said, I did enjoy the games for what they were.