What are your thoughts on Boss Battles?

[Syntax]

The whole purpose of the boss battle is honestly to make sure that you spent enough time learning skills, and gathering levels, or items that would let you defeat them. I see them as the doors into a new area that is even more challenging, and without the game knowing you can make it over there, it would be an area that you probably wouldn't normally make it through on your own.

[Heatman]

46 minutes ago, Syntax said:

The whole purpose of the boss battle is honestly to make sure that you spent enough time learning skills, and gathering levels, or items that would let you defeat them. I see them as the doors into a new area that is even more challenging, and without the game knowing you can make it over there, it would be an area that you probably wouldn't normally make it through on your own.

You have a very solid point about the whole learning and preparation stuffs in order to have what it takes to defeat bosses when you get to them. But in most cases, it doesn’t end there or that easily because with some bosses, you have to learn and study them. You'd most likely die a couple of times because you get your wits about how to deal with beating them. 

[Kane99]

Also with boss battles, I feel as if they really need to push the envelope, as in they need to make the boss fight memorable. Especially if it's the final boss, you want that fight to be memorable right? I feel like a lot of games don't make the final boss, or most bosses memorable enough. Usually they're the typical three stages and you're done. I feel like boss fights these days are kinda lazy compared to the past. 

[Justin11]

On 8/17/2022 at 12:04 AM, Kane99 said:

Also with boss battles, I feel as if they really need to push the envelope, as in they need to make the boss fight memorable. Especially if it's the final boss, you want that fight to be memorable right? I feel like a lot of games don't make the final boss, or most bosses memorable enough. Usually they're the typical three stages and you're done. I feel like boss fights these days are kinda lazy compared to the past. 

They aren't putting enough hardwork to make it that way, at times some video game developers rush their game just to milk from it. If they calm down do the boss fight just the way you narrated it, it will look more appealing to players so it wouldn't be a boring ending. 

[Withywarlock]

4 hours ago, Justin11 said:

They aren't putting enough hardwork to make it that way, at times some video game developers rush their game just to milk from it.

No they don't (OK, publishers maybe). This goes for @Kane99's response with laziness too. There's time constraints, changes in priorities, being overworked, and more and more cases of sexual harrassment cropping up. Try making a boss battle when you need to sleep in the office, working depressed and frustrated to the point of injury and being treated sexually inappropriately while nothing happens about it.

Laziness is an intellectually lazy response to the failings of gamedev. I'm sure devs fully appreciate the importance of a boss fight being memorable and necessary, and if they can't deliver there's no doubt in my mind there's reasons why they can't deliver on that experience.

Speaking of gamedev, I wonder if bosses are left toward the end of the development progress or storyboard creation, and that's why they get less emphasis unless it's a boss rush game? That they'd rather get the beginnings and ends sorted out, especially story-wise, before focussing on the fights between.

[Justin11]

12 hours ago, Withywarlock said:

No they don't (OK, publishers maybe). This goes for @Kane99's response with laziness too. There's time constraints, changes in priorities, being overworked, and more and more cases of sexual harrassment cropping up. Try making a boss battle when you need to sleep in the office, working depressed and frustrated to the point of injury and being treated sexually inappropriately while nothing happens about it.

Laziness is an intellectually lazy response to the failings of gamedev. I'm sure devs fully appreciate the importance of a boss fight being memorable and necessary, and if they can't deliver there's no doubt in my mind there's reasons why they can't deliver on that experience.

Speaking of gamedev, I wonder if bosses are left toward the end of the development progress or storyboard creation, and that's why they get less emphasis unless it's a boss rush game? That they'd rather get the beginnings and ends sorted out, especially story-wise, before focussing on the fights between.

What you said is correct, when the gamedevs fails to make it memorable it becomes boring at last, laziness can be outlined as next to such kind of development. Their are games that lives up to their billing, and they receive lots of plaudits from gamers. It is so bizarre for any gamedev to overlook a boss fight, when it is the penultimate contest of an action or adventure game. 

[Withywarlock]

5 minutes ago, Justin11 said:

What you said is correct, when the gamedevs fails to make it memorable it becomes boring at last, laziness can be outlined as next to such kind of development.

Please tell me if I'm wrong about this, but if I'm reading this right you're saying I'm correct... and then proceed to say that laziness is still a factor? What I'm saying is that laziness is not a factor in game development. Lazy people don't exist in the game development: they all got fired about a decade ago and were replaced by younger people who can work harder for less money, in a never-ending meatgrinder.

8 minutes ago, Justin11 said:

It is so bizarre for any gamedev to overlook a boss fight, when it is the penultimate contest of an action or adventure game. 

Indeed, but it's not often that happens. A lot of work goes into them, and sometimes due to time constraints or budgetary concerns, among other reasons that the current version of the boss has to be the final one.

The lead developers of World of Warcraft would use raids as some sort of currency: "we could do that... but it'd cost a raid tier." So they wanted players to choose between content other than bosses, or bosses exclusively. Apparently not enough people thought both was an acceptable response to such an asinine statement, and that's why the game's tanking subscribers: everything before bosses exists solely to get you to fight the bosses until the next string of bosses comes out, and when those bosses come out the past ones mean nothing. In WoW's case one still needs to put a lot of effort into the bosses though: a bad boss now means lost subs, even when it'll be irrelevant tomorrow.

[Kane99]

13 hours ago, Withywarlock said:

No they don't (OK, publishers maybe). This goes for @Kane99's response with laziness too. There's time constraints, changes in priorities, being overworked, and more and more cases of sexual harrassment cropping up. Try making a boss battle when you need to sleep in the office, working depressed and frustrated to the point of injury and being treated sexually inappropriately while nothing happens about it.

Laziness is an intellectually lazy response to the failings of gamedev. I'm sure devs fully appreciate the importance of a boss fight being memorable and necessary, and if they can't deliver there's no doubt in my mind there's reasons why they can't deliver on that experience.

Speaking of gamedev, I wonder if bosses are left toward the end of the development progress or storyboard creation, and that's why they get less emphasis unless it's a boss rush game? That they'd rather get the beginnings and ends sorted out, especially story-wise, before focussing on the fights between.

Of course, there are always chances of all of that happening. I'm just referring to boss battles that do the same three stages that most other games have done. Maybe I shouldn't say lazy. And yeah, publishers not giving their teams the time needed to develop a game is the main problem. It's why I like indie titles a lot, because most of the time you're going to end up with a fairly good game. But when a publisher is involved, trying to make them hit a target date for release, it really hurts that games development, because they may have to now crunch to get it all done. So yeah I get what you're saying. 

[Justin11]

30 minutes ago, Withywarlock said:

Please tell me if I'm wrong about this, but if I'm reading this right you're saying I'm correct... and then proceed to say that laziness is still a factor? What I'm saying is that laziness is not a factor in game development. Lazy people don't exist in the game development: they all got fired about a decade ago and were replaced by younger people who can work harder for less money, in a never-ending meatgrinder.

Indeed, but it's not often that happens. A lot of work goes into them, and sometimes due to time constraints or budgetary concerns, among other reasons that the current version of the boss has to be the final one.

The lead developers of World of Warcraft would use raids as some sort of currency: "we could do that... but it'd cost a raid tier." So they wanted players to choose between content other than bosses, or bosses exclusively. Apparently not enough people thought both was an acceptable response to such an asinine statement, and that's why the game's tanking subscribers: everything before bosses exists solely to get you to fight the bosses until the next string of bosses comes out, and when those bosses come out the past ones mean nothing. In WoW's case one still needs to put a lot of effort into the bosses though: a bad boss now means lost subs, even when it'll be irrelevant tomorrow.

I got all your points man, and I agreed to them. I was thinking you condemned some sort of laziness in the video game development Industry. I know gamedevs are hard working, if they aren't hard working it wouldn't be possible to have some of the games we have now. But I'll say, more work is needed in the aspect of the boss fight, content and storyline is okay in some games. 

[Heatman]

On 8/17/2022 at 12:04 AM, Kane99 said:

Also with boss battles, I feel as if they really need to push the envelope, as in they need to make the boss fight memorable. Especially if it's the final boss, you want that fight to be memorable right? I feel like a lot of games don't make the final boss, or most bosses memorable enough. Usually they're the typical three stages and you're done. I feel like boss fights these days are kinda lazy compared to the past. 

Gaming companies got a lot more greedy recently compared to decades ago. It affected everything and everyone when it comes to how they run the gaming industry. Everything is all about them making money at all cost even if it means putting their workers at risk, they don't care. It's why work quality output have dropped so hard. 

[Withywarlock]

7 hours ago, Heatman said:

Gaming companies got a lot more greedy recently compared to decades ago. It affected everything and everyone when it comes to how they run the gaming industry. Everything is all about them making money at all cost even if it means putting their workers at risk, they don't care. It's why work quality output have dropped so hard. 

That isn't true either. They've (whoever 'they' are, which is a conversation for another thread) always been 'greedy' (see the Video Game Crash of 1983), greed being another word that is ruinous to discussion because it's too satisfying to develop on and creates circlejerks. I will say we saw an uptick thanks to the greater emphasis on online functionality (online subscriptions which are no longer necessary; DLC; Season Passes; Online Passes; Battle Passes; 'Beta' Access from Pre-Ordering, et cetera), but let's not pretend that their customers haven't provided custom to continue doing this. Unlike '83, we're still waiting to smugly say "pride comes before a fall" (and I'll be there with everyone else here.)

Putting workers at risk is indeed awful and you're right: lead designers and publishers don't often care, and production can go downhill as a result. We're just repeating the same points though.

Now that this has been addressed, we're going to bring this back on topic: what are people's thoughts on boss battles? Anyone who wants to talk about greed or laziness can do so in PMs or another thread, and that goes for me also.

As ever I invite people who haven't yet contributed to the topic at hand to do so, or those who have contributed to add something new to discussion. Thanks to all who have made their contributions so far.

[Heatman]

16 hours ago, Withywarlock said:

That isn't true either. They've (whoever 'they' are, which is a conversation for another thread) always been 'greedy' (see the Video Game Crash of 1983), greed being another word that is ruinous to discussion because it's too satisfying to develop on and creates circlejerks. I will say we saw an uptick thanks to the greater emphasis on online functionality (online subscriptions which are no longer necessary; DLC; Season Passes; Online Passes; Battle Passes; 'Beta' Access from Pre-Ordering, et cetera), but let's not pretend that their customers haven't provided custom to continue doing this. Unlike '83, we're still waiting to smugly say "pride comes before a fall" (and I'll be there with everyone else here.)

Putting workers at risk is indeed awful and you're right: lead designers and publishers don't often care, and production can go downhill as a result. We're just repeating the same points though.

Now that this has been addressed, we're going to bring this back on topic: what are people's thoughts on boss battles? Anyone who wants to talk about greed or laziness can do so in PMs or another thread, and that goes for me also.

As ever I invite people who haven't yet contributed to the topic at hand to do so, or those who have contributed to add something new to discussion. Thanks to all who have made their contributions so far.

In this WatchMojo's compilation of bosses, which one's make your Top 5?

Mine would be ;

1. Vergil : DMC 5

2. Theseus and Asterius : Hades 

3. Maneater : Demon Souls 

4. The Nameless King : Dark Souls 3

5. Extreme Behemoth: Monster Hunter World. 

 

[Justin11]

They go both ways some can be really exciting while others rather annoying since it takes to long and with some extra effort to defeat those bosses.

Though meeting a boss usually indicates the last battle in that level before progressing to the next stage or level in the game so playing a video game and finally meeting the boss is exciting.

[Shortie]

Fighting bosses in games has always been my favorite part of any game, especially if it's a new game I am playing and I am on that learning curve of having to work out the best strategy to defeat a boss. The only gripe I have with some bosses in games is that some of them will be so difficult that you can spend hours just trying to defeat them. If they are really difficult and you find yourself playing for hours, trying to work out a strategy that would work but you get more frustrated as you try, I find myself just getting burned out on the game and leaving it. Games that get that sweet spot for a boss are the ones I adore. 

[Justin11]

On 11/23/2022 at 2:07 AM, Shortie said:

Fighting bosses in games has always been my favorite part of any game, especially if it's a new game I am playing and I am on that learning curve of having to work out the best strategy to defeat a boss. The only gripe I have with some bosses in games is that some of them will be so difficult that you can spend hours just trying to defeat them. If they are really difficult and you find yourself playing for hours, trying to work out a strategy that would work but you get more frustrated as you try, I find myself just getting burned out on the game and leaving it. Games that get that sweet spot for a boss are the ones I adore. 

Some bosses can be unreasonably difficult and I have encountered a good number of them in God of war and sekiro shadows die twice.

The best part of defeating a boss is the satisfaction that comes at the end when you have gotten to the next level or stage.