Anyone played Blasphemous?

[KyriakosCH]

For a game with so much style - and interesting symbols, for example an iron helmet that has the eyes covered with hands, or The Turned Throne - I was personally let down by the story-change they made in the closing dlc. The video is about that change:

I think the story was better before, and it may have been too hasty to leave behind before the next game. Without spoiling things, it's not a good idea to reduce the main antagonist, and that's even if you aim to make them a nested figure in your next game in some way; I think that in this type of setting you do require a respectable main antagonist and not one which is reduced to just another target.
Then again, Blasphemous is an action game, mechanics-wise; for that it is the norm to reduce the archenemy to another target of the heroes. But to me it went against the atmosphere built in the previous versions.

[newwaveburritos]

I played it a few years ago and loved the graphics but I did not love the gameplay so I never finished it.  Not much to add here I'm afraid lol.

[Creamy]

Without spoiling things, it's not a good idea to reduce the main antagonist, and that's even if you aim to make them a nested figure in your next game in some way; I think that in this type of setting you do require a respectable main antagonist and not one which is reduced to just another target.

I haven't played Blasphemous. But it reminds me of this GDC talk by some of the creators of Owlboy.
At 23:00, they explain that they had prepared a fight against the main antagonist. Yet they feared it would belittle him so they scrapped it. It's a pity but I can understand it. Although the story is generally paper-thin and secondary in these kind of games, I think it's important to maintain a semblance of logic.

That's one aspect I disliked about Iconoclasts: the story didn't make any sense and was just an excuse to throw action sequences at you. As a result, my involvement dwindled over time.

[KyriakosCH]

Without spoiling things, it's not a good idea to reduce the main antagonist, and that's even if you aim to make them a nested figure in your next game in some way; I think that in this type of setting you do require a respectable main antagonist and not one which is reduced to just another target.

I haven't played Blasphemous. But it reminds me of this GDC talk by some of the creators of Owlboy.
At 23:00, they explain that they had prepared a fight against the main antagonist. Yet they feared it would belittle him so they scrapped it. It's a pity but I can understand it. Although the story is generally paper-thin and secondary in these kind of games, I think it's important to maintain a semblance of logic.

That's one aspect I disliked about Iconoclasts: the story didn't make any sense and was just an excuse to throw action sequences at you. As a result, my involvement dwindled over time.

Imo Blasphemous (despite being a beat-em up) does rely considerably on atmosphere, and I do think that was better in the version before the final expansion. Because now the main antagonist is really... just another obstacle, while before it was (literally and figuratively) on a different plane.
I guess in the new game they can always make that antagonist be another side-figure ("nested"), but still I see no reason to have the player fight and do stuff on the different plane too; it reduces any sense of distance and the idea of different levels and wonder at unapproachable things above This won't change even if they have still further levels of separation in their new game: if you are told that you are on x, but y is another realm and y is the true realm, then even if told x and y are lower realms and some z higher realm exists you have no reason to imagine z is the last=> loss of atmosphere.

[MikeTenebrae]

As stated, the atmosphere is its driving point. Brilliant identity and animations.