... Not enough responsiveness behind controls (like The Witcher 3, I hate that game for its bad gameplay, yet The Division does something similar but pulls it off so nicely). Auto-attack (left clicks) wasn't done properly IMO, looked way off on warriors especially. And I still don't know why the devs chose to completely lock movement during attacks (animation priority > controls), like a poorly done dark souls-ish system. The virtuoso + Isabella feel much better to play with that in mind as they can attack while moving, isn't that cool. Also, don't make undodgeable attacks (red templar spikes, demon commander charge), that ain't cool. ....
Neither DAI, nor Witcher or Division are "normal" shooters and neither have sync kill enemies. This is probably why developers went that route in either game. However, as you said, it is not cool, there should be some option for override. At least in Witcher 3, with enough points in red skills, your animations become blazing fast and barely noticeable. The basic idea is silly and means that if that enemy does this and that, you should counter with that and this and nothing else and then, you'll be fine. This takes away a lot of freedom from gameplay and turns it into a game of experience and general situational awareness. Basically an extended version of QTE. While in Witcher it works fine due to variety, it does seem monotonous in Division and plain sucks in DAIMP as for some reasons those unavoidable damage spikes were introduced. Well, I guess, the main purpose was that people should promote and get better and grind and spend more time playing the game. This whole concept is not entirely wrong since there are some people who do enjoy that and even some who still play DAIMP but it is just their number is too small to make a difference as majority. I'm talking about 99% here, not even 90%, who do not find much fun in it for an extended period of time.
This whole genre is a bit underwhelming without the RPG framework and combat by itself cannot provide sufficient depth. There should be variety, variety, and more variety, basically. variety should be essentially endless. This includes variety in maps, strategies, builds, weapons and their usage, abilities, and everything else. Leaderboards, manifests, and all that bs can be present in every game and this does not make it addictive or popular. There are still thousands of people who play ME3 once a week and who never advanced their weapons, progressed in difficulty levels, or climbed the challenges. They do it just because ME3 provides for almost endless variety and this variety has quite subtle but noticeable RPG elements somewhat linked to the story of the single player. While discussion about ham can be humorous when heard for the first time, it gets old pretty fast.
... Not enough responsiveness behind controls (like The Witcher 3, I hate that game for its bad gameplay, yet The Division does something similar but pulls it off so nicely). Auto-attack (left clicks) wasn't done properly IMO, looked way off on warriors especially. And I still don't know why the devs chose to completely lock movement during attacks (animation priority > controls), like a poorly done dark souls-ish system. The virtuoso + Isabella feel much better to play with that in mind as they can attack while moving, isn't that cool. Also, don't make undodgeable attacks (red templar spikes, demon commander charge), that ain't cool. .... Neither DAI, nor Witcher or Division are "normal" shooters and neither have sync kill enemies. This is probably why developers went that route in either game. However, as you said, it is not cool, there should be some option for override. At least in Witcher 3, with enough points in red skills, your animations become blazing fast and barely noticeable. The basic idea is silly and means that if that enemy does this and that, you should counter with that and this and nothing else and then, you'll be fine. This takes away a lot of freedom from gameplay and turns it into a game of experience and general situational awareness. Basically an extended version of QTE. While in Witcher it works fine due to variety, it does seem monotonous in Division and plain sucks in DAIMP as for some reasons those unavoidable damage spikes were introduced. Well, I guess, the main purpose was that people should promote and get better and grind and spend more time playing the game. This whole concept is not entirely wrong since there are some people who do enjoy that and even some who still play DAIMP but it is just their number is too small to make a difference as majority. I'm talking about 99% here, not even 90%, who do not find much fun in it for an extended period of time. This whole genre is a bit underwhelming without the RPG framework and combat by itself cannot provide sufficient depth. There should be variety, variety, and more variety, basically. variety should be essentially endless. This includes variety in maps, strategies, builds, weapons and their usage, abilities, and everything else. Leaderboards, manifests, and all that bs can be present in every game and this does not make it addictive or popular. There are still thousands of people who play ME3 once a week and who never advanced their weapons, progressed in difficulty levels, or climbed the challenges. They do it just because ME3 provides for almost endless variety and this variety has quite subtle but noticeable RPG elements somewhat linked to the story of the single player. While discussion about ham can be humorous when heard for the first time, it gets old pretty fast.
Demon's Souls
Elden Ring