Nioh vs Bloodborne

I don't own a PS4 yet, but when I get one someday (hopefully soon) should I play Nioh or Bloodborne first? I'm a Souls veteran- I've played through Demon's Souls and the Dark Souls trilogy. Is one more difficult than the other? Is one an overall better game?

Still early in Nioh, but I think Bloodborne is a better game. Not sure about difficulty, but Nioh isn't difficult yet.

Like the combat in Nioh, but prefer Bloodebornes atmosphere. My two cents.

While I'm looking forward to playing both myself I think my preferences would go more towards Nioh because I'm a big fan of the Ninja Gaiden games and the combat in Nioh looks to have that same kind of tight feel to it.

Haven't played Nioh mostly because I'm not sure if the world will keep me engaged. Bloodborne it's amazing, and if you like Souls then it's an easy pick. The changes made to the combat work great but don't expect a big challenge. Except for one boss towards the end, that took me like 10\15 tries, the game is more intimidating than hard. Stellar level design and atmosphere.

Bloodborne is, in my opinion, the best game I've ever played. Dark Souls is a close second.

Nioh is very, very good, maybe even great, but aside from some neat twists on the formula, I don't think it does anything better than any of the other Souls games (okay, it's better than DS2).

If you have to pick between the two, I'd pick Bloodborne, but I'd also make sure to eventually get Nioh.

In terms of difficulty, I wouldn't say that Nioh is more difficult, but I would say that it has more, shall we say, bullshit moments than all of the 5 Souls games combined, mostly when it comes to the bosses. The difficulty is also all over the place. About half the bosses I killed on my first try, and of the remaining ones, half I got down after 3-4 tries, and then there were the bosses which took me ages to beat. Obviously there are bosses like that in the Souls games, but in those I never found it annoying to repeatedly die, except with... Elana from DS2 on NG+ and The Watchdog in Bloodborne in the Defiled Chalice Dungeon. If you've fought those, then you know how obnoxious they are, and quite a few bosses in Nioh made me feel like those did.

The difficulty from regular enemies and traps in levels is more even, and I rarely found myself dying there, except with... Wheel Monks. If you think the Bonewheels in DS are annoying, wait till you see these. To be fair, once you figure them out they are much more manageable but figuring them out is very hard. Bloodborne's normal enemies are more interesting and diverse. Nioh's enemies are either humans, which are more-or-less all the same, or the Yokai, which are different sorts of demons, and the game reuses and reskins the most common one quite a lot.

Bloodborne is also a much better looking game, and the soundtrack is better. If you care for the story in Souls games you won't really get anything similar in Nioh. The game is filled with cutscenes that aren't really interesting, and if you don't know some things about Sengoku Jidai you'll likely be confused because the game throws in a bunch of characters and expects you to basically memorize their glossary entries. It gets more engaging by the end, but then it's over. Bloodborne has a great horror aesthetic and is incredibly atmospheric and interesting.

Coming of from DS you'll find that both Nioh and Bloodborne are a lot faster-paced in combat, but Bloodborne is the fastest. There's no shields in either game, so you have to dodge constantly, but the dodging in Nioh never felt natural to me, unlike in Bloodborne where some of the fights look like gorgeously choreographed quick dances. I'm not even sure if there are invincibility frames in Nioh's dodges, and combine that with wonky hitboxes and you'll get most of the bullshit moments from that.

Nioh's combat and upgrades are a dozen times more complex than DS's, and especially Bloodborne's. There's like twenty different ways you upgrade your character in Nioh, whereas in Bloodborne you pick your weapon and the stats that go with it and that's it. I prefer Bloodborne's more streamlined approach, where there aren't many weapons but each is unique and has twice the moves of DS weapons. Nioh has 5 weapon types and each weapon in that type has the exact same moveset.

Nioh's level design is quite bland, too. Visually it's just a bunch of villages and forests without much personality to them. Yharnam and it's surroundings in Bloodborne are unforgettable. Nioh is mission-based, so don't expect the world design you'll find in Bloodborne which is like Dark Soul's but a bit less interconnected.

Also, expect a ton of inventory management in Nioh. It's basically Diablo in that regard. I found myself spending fifteen minutes after every mission just cleaning my inventory. Enemies constantly drop trash items.

Anyways. Nioh is a good game but Bloodborne is amazing. Nioh isn't any more difficult but it is more frustrating.

Whelp, I'm not gonna top that ^^^

@svenus97: I completely agree with your first sentence, the rest I didn't read... yet

haven't played nioh though, sold my ps4 when I knew the ps4 pro was going to release.

I died more in the nioh demo then when I played bloodborne so I'll go with bloodborne.

Currently working on Nioh, and it's really good. It's combat is leagues more interesting than Souls combat ever is. The game also happens to do multi-enemy stuff better than Souls games by a good margin too. I've heard a lot of complaints about "mah immersion" and "well the level design isn't good" from clowns who barely can describe what specifically about the level design is the problem, and so far I'd argue the larger problem is that of presentation.

A lot of the spaces look too similar, but the actual placements of enemies, traps, and what the space allows the player to do in combat is rock solid. If anything the way the game is structured is infinitely better than what DS2, Bloodborne, n DS3 do with their teleport everywhere, so there is literally no fucking point to any of it being connected in the first place routine.

The bosses have left me wanting, not necessarily in that Souls bosses are better, but more so because Ninja Gaiden bosses make Souls bosses look like chumps. So these bosses being about what I would expect from a From Software joint so far is disappointing. That and if I had to guess: Nioh has less enemy types than Dark Souls. Which I'm going to assume will become a late game detriment. But who ever thought up Ki-pulse, and then flux? What a G.

I haven't played Bloodborne yet, but compared to Dark Souls, I liked Nioh more. The combat is both faster and smoother, and the best part is that the game encourages you to experiment. Unlike a certain overrated game that came out earlier this year, Nioh doesn't do that breakable weapon bullshit, and the cost of redistributing stats is essentially negligible. That's how you're supposed to get a player to want to try out different things, because I went from a heavy axe and katana user to a duel wielding speed specialist by the end of my playthrough. The only real negative I can say about Nioh is that it gets repetitive, but if you like combat, Nioh will keep you entertained despite that fault.

Havent played Nioh yet but BB is my fav game this gen thus far (more even after finally playing The Old Hunters DLC) so, if Nioh ends up surpassing it when I eventually play it, I'll be mighty surprised. From what I gather Nioh has the better combat but BB has the better environment/setting/artstyle. Since I'm a fan of the later I think BB will still reign supreme in the end but I'm sure I'll still enjoy the hell out of Nioh aswell.

Answering your question, well if you're a souls fan then I would say Bloodborne is more obligatory than Nioh, being it from the same developers so the similarities are more profound and all that

@svenus97: nah. Nioh does almost everything better than every souls game (especially combat, which no one sould disagree on), and then it does more.

Right when I got there, I stopped reading your post.

Champ is more on point here imo.

@X_CAPCOM_X:

Yeah, I thought that was silly too.

"I don't think it does anything better than any of the other Souls games"

Yeah, because the combat, the thing that you're doing for the majority of these games, doesn't deserve mention lol. They're not even in the same league tbh, Nioh's combat almost breaks through the trappings of ARPG combat and gets closer to beat 'em up territory.

I'd definitely give the Souls games their due credit. Their environments are far more interesting and varied. In their stronger sections, the level design is a good notch up from the best stretches Nioh has to offer. And games like Demons, Dark1, and Bloodborne have atmosphere for days. Plus you can't ignore that enemy variety.

So I wouldn't say that either choice is "better in most ways", it's a split really. But the meat of the game, the combat and various character builds, is absolutely in Nioh's favor.

Nioh is a cool 10 hr game trapped in a 50 hour copypasta.

although everything is subjective, I'll give you the combat part. I'll agree with you on that. But Nioh does not top Souls games, especially Bloodborne, in atmosphere and environments, or even in implicit storytelling. How many people make lore videos about Bloodborne versus lore videos about Nioh? That's right, there is almost nothing to hypothesize about Nioh lore. A huge part about Souls games is the implicit lore.

@X_CAPCOM_X:

The combat is more complex, definitely, but not better, in my opinion. It's just additional frosting on the cake. It always comes down to feel, and Bloodborne's combat just feels better to me. When I'm bored I can just run Bloodborne and do a random chalice dungeon because the combat just has such a great feel to it. In Nioh, yes, you can do a 100 different things that will give you an infinitesimal edge, but it still boils down to the basics of combat, and Bloodborne's basics are better.

As for everything else, I simply can't see how Nioh does anything better. Art direction, level design, soundtrack, voice acting, sound design, characters, plot, lore, pacing, structure, atmosphere, variety, exploration, boss design, enemy design, UI, etc. are all somewhat or very much so better in Bloodborne. Not to mention the unique problems to Nioh such as the poor submissions and inventory managment.

The three integral parts of Souls games are to me: combat, exploration, storytelling. Everything else is in function of these. Even if you argue Nioh has better combat, it certainly doesn't do exploration and storytelling better.

I agree. Nioh is better imo. Bloodborne is great and all but Nioh gets downright crazy

@ConanTheStoner: I....might argue it stacks up favorably to beat-em ups. It wouldn't be interesting for freestyle combo videos, but it's also not dial-a-combo centric either. Command moves for days. It's a lot closer to how something like God Hand handles business, or the type of stuff I wish was explored by games influenced by DMC (specifically Itsuno's DMC games).

It's no Ninja Gaiden, but what is?

This is ridiculous. It's hardly just frosting, considering how fundamental it is to basic decision making in these type of games, and pure feel is concerned Nioh hits all the marks one would need. For starters you can actually play Nioh at a framerate acceptable for video games.

Bloodborne, my world opened after I started to play that game.

Gosh, a classic debate of style versus atmosphere. I can't pick a better of the two. Both doubled down, intentionally, on what they did well and are equally worthy of a purchase.

@svenus97: I am pretty much in agreement with you. Ocarina of Time is truly the best game I have ever played, but Bloodborne is (obviously) much more fun because of the modern gameplay and graphics. The slick, fast movement, the nasty-looking weapons with transformations, the obsession with blood, blood coming out of everything, blood soaking your clothes as you fight, the boss battles, the overall atmosphere, the boss music, it all was so wonderful I think I will play it again. Bloodborne is my favorite game to play nowadays.

Nioh on the other hand, well, I tried it for about 10 hours. Got to the fight with the giant centipede and after 3 hours of trying with that boss I gave up. I felt like the gameplay was a lot less polished in Nioh than Bloodborne. I really tried with that boss too, I thought I put a decent amount of points in the stamina category but that damn big bug was just ramming me off the higher ledge into the poison below. Having to go up all the time to start that fan to blow away the poison and trigger the boss to fight it on a narrow structure. I know that FromSoftware has frustrating moments but I personally had it with that fucking boss. Anyways, I wasn't really enjoying Nioh all that much anyway so I just sold it on ebay for almost as much as I paid for it.

Bloodborne is far superior.

@jg4xchamp:

Not really, considering that most fights are over before you can really do anything fancy. Again, the options are there and I don't deny it, but does it really matter if you hold L1 and then press triangle to parry an enemy's attack only to grapple them, or hold L1 and then press triangle to sweep them down so you can grapple them? In the end, gun parrying is better :P

@poe13:

Well, you see, I beat that centipede on my first try, but against, for example, Yuki-onna, I struggled for like an hour, and I've heard that some beat her on their first try. Difficulty is always subjective in these games, but I felt it was most subjective in Nioh.

Nioh is still a great game, and for what's it worth, it gets better as it goes on, because the story starts making more sense, and the levels actually have a reason for you to be in them, unlike early in the game where every second level is some random asshole's son or whatever has gone missing and you have to go and find them. The bosses, too, get better as the game goes on. Maybe you would have ended up enjoying it if you stuck with it.

I still need to finish both, though on the surface I'd say Nioh's design intrigues me more with a more Japanese aesthetic feeling fresh whereas Bloodborne still has a very western aesthetic, which is kind of redundant following the rest of the Souls games.

@svenus97: Nah, its okay. I wasn't really enjoying it very much during those 10 hours of playtime. I have more fun firing up Dark Souls 1, 2, 3 and Bloodborne. Atmosphere just reels me in with those games. For some reason, the lack of a direct story really pushes me to play the game. Nioh has some sort of plot but I wasn't paying much attention to it while I played because I was just trying to focus on the combat.

Tomato, potato, just could not get into Nioh. SoulsBorne games just do it better. But to each his own.

1. Most, not all.

2. That doesn't suddenly mean more interesting options aren't there for better players. In theory you can be a shit heel scrub who relies on the stats, a shield, n basic circle strafing for Dark Souls. Or Pyro. But that doesn't mean better players can't do more interesting stuff with parries, twink builds, sl1 playthroughs, etc.

3. That's completely ridiculous, as entire enemies are handled better through more efficient play, especially because of Ki Pulse n Flux during Yokai fights.

4. Yes it absolutely matters, it actually adds some decision making n expression to the system. Neither are superfluous or made redundant in the games sandbox.

You can spin this anyway you like but Nioh's additions aren't superfluous and they fundamentally add more depth. It also happens to play faster, responds on time, doesn't have frame skipping issues in n out of combat, has a healing system that isn't stupid, has more aggressive enemies for starters, is willing to do more multi-enemy fights that are actually freakin good (again the different stances n ki pulse definitely make these work better).

You may not be impressed by the combat, that's fine, different strokes in all, But the people arguing that pure depth is concerned, aren't wrong that Nioh's combat has a lot more going on. There's more to it, there's more you can do with it, on any technical level it plays flat out faster. There are optimal reasons as it pertains to dodge distance, how much stamina you will give up in which stance, how much n how often you can punish an enemy from each stance, and each stance gets its own set of moves as well. Plus if I had to guess, build variety? I'd probably wager you can make more interesting shit out of Nioh's builds since Bloodborne overly streamlined in that department. And as far as technical stuff is concerned. Nioh's faster, more responsive, and feel is concerned the audio is hardly a slouch n attack animations are tight, with enemies that properly sell their hits.

Dispelling yokai realms....I mean you have to completely not understand the game to think that stances n ki pulsing are just frosting when they are so key to higher level play in that game. It's false by any measure.

Bloodborne is, in my opinion, the better game (but Nioh has better combat).

Always am.

@jg4xchamp:

I never said anything about stances or ki pulses, those are essential. Speaking of those, transforming weapons I found better than changing stances, and ki pulses are just the rally system from Bloodborne, but for stamina instead of HP. They are both small but important changes, but the rally system encourages aggressive combat completely different from previous Souls games, whereas ki pulses, while adding to the rhythm, just add another button to press while in combat. I was talking mostly about combo finishers you get from skill points, which to me felt largely as cosmetic upgrades for attacks rather than meaningful changes.

There is a difference between depth and complexity. Bloodborne is not complex, but it has depth, because with the tools you have you can do many things. Nioh also has depth, but not much more depth, only more complexity, because much of the complexity is clutter, ie. the twelve different ways you build your character which ultimately lead to the same result Bloodborne accomplishes with less complexity. Nioh does have more build variety.

Nioh doesn't play faster than Bloodborne. Faster than the other 4 Souls games, definitely, but not faster than Bloodborne. I had no response problems with Bloodborne. Nioh has, due to lack of invincibility frames, much more obvious hitbox detection problems, which lead to a poorer feel to combat, especially with grab attacks, jump attacks, and tracking attacks. Bloodborne has a worse healing system than Dark Souls, which is basically what Nioh's healing system is. Though since you can stock up on blood vials for cheap in Bloodborne, it really isn't an issue. Bloodborne has more aggressive enemies, I'm not sure how you can argue otherwise. I don't remember any enemy in Nioh being as relentless and quick as Ludwig or those big sharks. As for multiple enemies? You mean like in those few sub-missions where you can fight 2 random bosses from the main game at the same time, even though they were clearly not designed to be fought together. Stuff like that and other cheap padding really holds Nioh down. Nioh doesn't have a single actual boss fight with multiple bosses (if it does in the DLCs, which I haven't played yet and don't wanna spoil for myself, then I take this back), but if it did then I'm sure Shadows of Yharnam, or the Demon Princes would put them to shame.

Transforming weapons barely have different properties beyond a binary state, the stances being faster (which in turn the notion that it doens't play faster, when its combos clearly play faster, is absurd) and interconnected means you can connect the stances better in strings. And how is the rally system any more about aggressive play than a meter that is directly tied to the amount of moves you can make, in a game that punishes you even harder for depleting your stamina gauge, and again Flux, which ties back to stances, which again have their own move set, which again is tied to yokai realm stuff.

Not only do the new mechanics reward more aggressive play than what Bloodborne, it actually happens be more unified in its approach by connected to 2 to 3 different mechanics at a time seemlessly n logically.

To you is the key difference here. Objectively they have their own pros n cons, yeah some filler ones in there sure, but a good chunk of those commands have interesting interplay with the rest of the mechanics. To say otherwise shows a lack of experimentation on your part.

You are correct. Nioh happens to have both over Bloodborne by any measure of an action game.

Why aren't they designed to be fough together? Surely it's better than the usual round of "because the game has lock on combat" or "I have to manage the camera". The former being a really shitty meme started by matosis, and the latter being a welcome to third person action games.

lol wut,

Three things

1. It absolutely has i-frames in its dodge. It's at the beginning of the role versus the center of the roll like Bloodborne.

2. The stances specifically dictate your i-frames on your roll.

3. Even when you are in high stance and have less frames to work with, the lack of iframes is hardly a detriment or even a design flaw for these type of games. You as the player should now adjust and move your hurtbox. Kind of like how Hyper Light Drifter handles business (it actually doesn't have iframes).

@jg4xchamp:

I could have easily made the argument that the only difference between stances in Nioh is speed and damage, but I didn't, because that's not true, and the same holds for transforming weapons in Bloodborne, which clearly gives you a whole different moveset for the same weapon, and changes whether you can parry or not. Transforming weapons in Bloodborne is fluid and can be chained, while in Nioh changing stances is quite fussy due to the controls. There is nothing in Nioh as quick as transformed Blades of Mercy.

The rally system incentivizes you to go in for additional attacks to regain your health, thus leading to a faster pace to combat without the Dark Souls/Nioh style of backing away and waiting for the enemy to attack so you can react. Bloodborne's combat is more active and less reactive. The additional stamina you regain in Nioh is of course useless if you have no health.

I could experiment more, for sure, but the game should also give me reason to use it's many tools other than it's already here so might as well try it.

Those bosses aren't designed to be fought together because they don't compliment each other like Ornestein and Smough, or the Shadows, or the Demon Princes, or Ariandel and Friede do. Fighting multiple bosses in Nioh leads to a mess because there are barely any openings. If you played those missions in Nioh then surely you know what I'm talking about.

Nioh does have invincibility frames, but fewer than Souls games. Fewer i-frames is not bad design, but then hitboxes should be more accurate. Bloodborne has a fix for hitbox issues, and that is you not taking damage due to longer i-frames. The game screws up but usually doesn't punish you. In Nioh, when hitboxes misbehave, you get punished.

Because each stance has entire move sets/commands that other doesn't have. Outside of the saw blade, and the tonitrous (which really doesn't transform), the difference is usually that of base speed n power of hit (since it's basically the game's equivalent of two handing a weapon), and as you said the meaningful choice is giving up your parry.

But they aren't created equal because stances can link into each other better, considering block properties you can roll from a block in heavy, to a fast punish once the enemies attack chain is up while mixing in a proper kipulse/flux to make sure staming is never depleted, not through a choose but through the players skill. That's a level of skillful implementation that Bloodborne comes close to matching, specificially with its weapon transformations.

You could have easily said whatever you wanted, it wouldn't have made it less false.

Except with the way attack patterns work in both game you're naturally going to back off more, or be less engaged with stamina. When you get to a level of play where they can't even touch you, NIoh is flat out going to play faster. On a lower level play maybe Bloodborne has the edge, but at higher level play, you can ki-pulse for days.

And what more incentive did you need? It's not a cake walk of a game, you have a stamina gauge that depletes, and you have reason to link the chains better n work on your timing to wreck fools. I've beaten Bloodborne by barely using the parry, it would be incorrect of me to then pretend it has no merit to the combat or value, just because I didn't need to use it. It's the equivalent of someone playing Vanquish like Gears of War, and pretending it doesn't have any depth.

Don't really want to be spoiledo n the boss, but exactly how isn't it complimented? From what I've read there is a clear n obvious set of openings for the player to work n manage, as its more a heightened test of the player's understanding of how to flux. So I'm not taking that one at face value mate.

Personally haven't had any noteworthy issues with hitboxes/hurtboxes so far in this game, certainly not in the manner that I've seen in something like Dark Souls 2. So again, I'd actually like to see a pretty noteworthy. Because my youtube search is getting me beta complaints, from last year, or DSP, and well I'm not taking anything DSP does as gospel lol.

Either way you have two types of dodges in the game, one clearly has a ton of iframes (the slow roll, which is more or less identical to Dark Souls, my B for mixing them earlier), and a quick evade that has less frames, but is obviously there for quick punishes for people who do fine at just moving their hurtbox.

So again that complaint really has too many holes, because you have a roll to work with for that type of attack. At all times.

@jg4xchamp:

The moveset is different, when transformed. I don't see how that's debatable. A cane becomes a whip, a longsword becomes a greathammer, a twinblade a dagger and a rapier, a curved sword a scythe, etc. It is much more than two-handing a weapon. Bloodborne has 26 unique melee weapons, Nioh will have 8. With weapons transformed, and with the 3 different stances, that is comparing 52 and 24.

Stances chain into each other, but as you said, so do weapon transformations. Except transforming a weapon is more fluid and continues the combo whereas changing stances gives you stamina but doesn't continue the combo.

Parrying in Bloodborne is much more vital than the skills in Nioh, so it's not a valid comparison. You can beat the game with fists, if you want.

They're not complementing each other because they're too similar in attacks. To give you an example, this would be like if Bloodborne made you fight Cleric Beast and Laurence at the same time. The Shadows of Yharnam are a perfect fit because one is slow, one medium speed, and one quick.
This is a non-spoiler one since it doesn't have bosses. Take a look at this clusterfuck https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHirwqSxYAk .

Here is an example of the hitboxes from a video I watched yesterday: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AEFjoZCAHgY&feature=youtu.be&t=18m53s

Yeah I can get on board with that. I obsess over the holy trinity of beat em ups too much, which are games I don't feel Nioh stacks up to, combat wise. S-tier combat systems aside though, I could see Nioh being in A-tier, upper B-tier at worst if that makes sense. I'd take what Nioh offers over most games in the genre.

It doesn't quite have the mobility that the trinity games offer, doesn't go quite as deep as proper DMC or Bayo, not quite as precision/reaction based as NGB/NG2, but it has more than a strong enough kit between weapon variety, combat options/flexibility, and solid enemy design to carry an action game.

/runonsentence.

And it wouldn't take too many changes to make it a top end action game at that. Which is why Nioh really gives me hope for a new Ninja Gaiden lol. But even if they move on to a Nioh sequel, I'd be down for that as well.

For like one attack, and not nearly to the same level of expression. You're far too limited for weapon transformations to make use for an interesting combos. Stance switches can be done mid combo, while finishing into another combo. Not really the case with the transformation, since Bloodborne barealy has more than basic combo strings. This isn't a quantity of moves things strictly, this is flat out reality that you can flat out got more of an interesting chain going in Nioh with its stances.

Because said stances have their own skills+the ki-pulse mechanic n flux naturally has you stance switching a lot. It's a lot closer to style switching in DMC than it is transformations like Bloodborne. Nioh's system is flat out more flexible for expression as it is a more multifaceted set of attack options. The quantity of weapons wouldn't change that. Nero in DMC4 has one sword versus anything you carry in SOuls game, but anyone pretending Nero in DMC4 doesn't have more depth than a Soulsbourne character is on drugs.

How is the comparison off, you're saying it's a pointless addition or not worthy of merit, but even as vital as the parry is, outside of Father G, I beat one playthrough of that game with just the ludwig holy blade in dual hand mode. Nioh's skills similarly may skip them, but they aren't pointless. They have optimal uses (much like the parry), and they tie into the base mechanics well to boot. You not using them is on you. The different swipes n grabs have merit to how the stamina system works in the game.

Flawed metric, you already deal with multiple enemies in both games that are enemies with similar attacks. If they have exactly attacks, they have similar openings n chains. The Laurence/Cleric issue would come down to the Cleric having a sky high pounce move that would be a cheap tactic in a multifight, because he's a screen covering enemy, similar with Laurence. The bosses in Nioh from my understanding being humanoid size means that you'll have more options to work with. Because even something like Bayonetta does things like that in Angel Slayer, and Ninja Gaiden has done it before. And it was never "cheap", hard as shit, yeah, but nothing about it was cheap.

As for the vid, dude is playing mad sloppy. I'm not exactly seeing a cluster **** of things being thrown at the player that they can't handle, and aren't given proper breathing room to work with.

Hurtbox vid is fair tho, I'd argue that Soulsbourne games have cheap grabs like that as well, but fair, that's a bad hurt box. I didn't notice, I sort of wrecked that fight.

@jg4xchamp:

Well, if we continue this we will keep spinning in circles. I'm more than happy to agree that Nioh has more flexibility and complexity in combat, even depth, then, too, but I still wouldn't say that makes it better, since a lot more other things go into what makes combat fun to play. I guess I am just a sucker for the bloody horror aesthetic of Bloodborne and find the viciousness of the combat and the much more interesting and varied enemies you fight more fun.

In the end, Team Ninja does have an advantage over FROM, and that is Nioh has a lot of stuff that must be fixed, and if they do that, and Nioh is their Demon's Souls and Nioh 2 or whatever their Dark Souls, then we might get one of the best games ever. FROM will have a hard time topping Bloodborne, in my opinion.

As for the bosses thing, it's different when you fight regular enemies that die in 4 hits, and 2 very tough bosses at the same time. Again, I'd post the video that has what I actually mean but I don't want to spoil the bosses for you. Perhaps lazy and unnecessary is better to say than cheap. Because the stuff you mentioned about fluidity and chaining? You really can't do that when you have 2 quick and relentless bosses on you. It's still optional stuff, though, but then again the optional stuff in Souls games is stuff like Cainhurst and the Painted World.

Souls games do have bad grab attacks, but like I said, the added i-frames help there.

Both great games, but I prefer Nioh.

nioh is of the laziest games i played in a while

Literally every enemy and every level is copy pasted just to pad out it's length.Every "side quest" has you running the same copy pasted levels backwards,fightning the same enemies and the same bosses again and again.

I have literally fought this onryoki boss like 10 times so far.It's pathetic and lazy.

Meanwhile every area in bloodborne is unique.No copy pasted bs and it also has huge enemy variety.

I say Bloodborne, cause of the setting and being a game from the Souls devs.

NIOH is great too, i just don't feel it has an impact on you the same way BB has.

But a better option is to get both.

I like them both.

The atmosphere in Bloodborne is amazing and its so satisfying to pull off visceral attacks and defeat large bosses. The weapons are really unique with the transformations.

Nioh does loot and ng+ better plus it runs at a smoother framrate, I feel the difficulty is more balanced in Nioh as well, you feel way more powerful by the end after leveling and gearing up.