I just watched a video where it was argued that the focus on blind playthroughs being the "real" way to play a game does not hold up well for older games, like Diablo 1 or 2. Both games have a lot of obscure mechanics that are not explained well or in detail - same goes for many older titles or titles that are less handholdy, so I immediately thought of soulslikes.

In the video the person argues that the way you used to "look up" guides was to talk to friends and family about the games you play. You did not look up optimal builds or specific guides, but you'd just find information on the games you play through word of mouth or by learning from other's playthroughs. Additionally, manuals and instruction booklets were meant to be perused in tandem with your playthrough as they'd complement your run with additional information that was not explicitly mentioned in the game.

Now through the advent of the internet, guides have become very ubiquitous and the norm for most people to use. Having a go at DS1, for example, without a guide or some semblance of help, however, sounds like a miserable experience unless you have a vague idea of what you're looking for, where to look for it etc.

What do you think? Are you advocates for blind playthroughs or do you like having some help (in whatever form that may be) in your games?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 3 points 2 weeks ago*

I would say it depends both on the player and the game. Some games may rely on the fact that there is an online community. And some players might enjoy figuring stuff out themselves, while others just want to get past a tedious section so they can go back to the bits they actually enjoy.

I remember there was a character in Vampire Survivors that could only be unlocked by looking up a code online.

  • source