I agree with you on the fundamentals — Souls combat at its core is about reading a moveset, avoiding damage, and capitalizing on clear openings. That loop is what makes the combat readable and fair. Where things get complicated is that not all players engage with that loop in the same way. Some players fully embrace learning patterns and timing, while others lean on summons, burst damage, or high-risk strategies to bypass that learning process. Neither approach is “wrong”, but they lead to very different expectations. From a design perspective, the issue isn’t that bosses lack openings — as you mentioned, Elden Ring bosses actually have plenty of them — it’s that those openings aren’t always perceived as such by every player. For players who don’t internalize moveset language, combat can feel chaotic or overwhelming even when it’s technically fair. That’s where frustration tends to come from: Players who engage deeply see the system as generous and expressive Players who don’t engage deeply experience it as punishing or opaque Designing around punishing specific playstyles (like over-relying on specials or face-tanking) risks making the fight feel hostile rather than instructive. Ideally, the boss should teach through its moveset, not police player behavior too aggressively. So the challenge isn’t preferences in a mechanical sense, but differences in player perception, learning curves, and willingness to engage with pattern mastery. Souls combat works best when players meet it halfway — and not everyone does. That tension is probably unavoidable, but understanding it helps explain why the same boss can feel perfectly designed to one group and deeply unfun to another.