No.31618[Last 50 Posts]
Can we get sort of a Souls/Bloodborne general thread going? I am mostly a PC gamer, but I do own a PS4, and I just bought Bloodborne. I've been really playing it a lot, and currently I'm fighting the 'Witch of Hemwick.' Anyway, I really like the atmosphere of these games; lonely, foreboding, and depressing. Very much like the life of a wizard in the sea of normal-ness. I think my favorite Souls-like game has to be Dark Souls II. Although I actually never completed it, I had a lot of fun, and I thought that m+k was much more tolerable than it was for Dark souls I.
This thread is a simple thread that can be about Bloodborne, Dark Souls I,II or III, or even Dark Souls. It can be about any element, the lore or enemies, or anything. Also, any action RPG game recommendations are greatly appreciated.
>This thread is a simple thread that can be about Bloodborne, Dark Souls I,II or III, or even Dark Souls
I mean Demon Souls, the PS3 one.
This is one of the best descriptions of these games I have ever read. You're a cleanup character, killing ancient things after a battle already took place. I like that outlook, even though I always roleplay as a wizard clearing enemies out of his magical dimension. I also like them because I don't have a lot of money, and they provide a lot of entertainment, with multiple playthroughs.
I just got Demon Souls. I've only played DaS and DaSII and like how the bosses so far feel unique. On the spider boss now, the opening section to it is pretty annoying along with the webs near it.
I have the unfortunate curse of being constantly reminded that I'm shit at video games, but in no other game am I reminded more of that fact than in Souls titles.
Great games, it's just that I feel like I'm missing out on the experience a lot of the time. I suppose that's the reward of not being shit.
I like everything about them (atmosphere/mood, level design, illusive story/lore, creature/boss design, etc.) Everything, except the combat. Personally, I find it to be clunky, simplistic, unintuitive & slow but, thankfully, it's not enough to ward me off from the franchise as a whole. Out of all of them, I'd say Demon's Souls is my favorite. It's the bleakest/most visually distinct of the series and I slightly prefer the Nexus/level based archstones, compared to the cyclical open world of the other games. Plus, it was also my first Souls games, so it'll always be the most special in that regard.
After DeS the games became more linear. Like you can't move on in the game before ringing the bells in DaS. Can only go one of two/there ways from the shore in DaS2. DeS also kept the pacing from their previous Kings Field games a bit before turning more into an arpg with DaD.
I also found that in DeS it didn't matter how many healing items you had, you would still die to bosses because their patterns were better and that the character upgrade path you chose always had a weakness. There was more incentive to summon players because having half an hp bar in hollow form was another challenge, likewise with invading. Unlike in DaS where you can just pop a humanity thats farmable from mobs and unhollow yourself whenever. Haven't played BB and think they are kind of assholes for keeping it on consoles. Overall I think the series got progressively worse until BB which I hear was a gem. It got popular for the wrong reasons, and lots of DeS fans cringed at the Dark Souls: Prepare to Die subtext. It was also easy to discuss for secondaries during DaS era rather then DeS because of introduction of pyromancy and stuff like drake sword.
I don't know, I just got the game now and it feels as linear as the others. I beat the second boss in the first world and the game told me "You can't go any further, go murder an archdemon first." And I'm assuming I'm supposed to run around the other worlds until I stumble on one or get told the same thing and jump to the next. Not really a problem because the bosses are more than "Big guy with three swing sword combo" (and maybe a fourth depending on where you're standing) like in das/dasII.
Drake Sword is a real trap of a weapon simply because it's too strong in the -very- early game against mobs, requiring very little from the player and thus not learning key game mechanics such as parrying or dodging or timing.
Then by the time such mechanics are really needed it's too late for them. Ornstein and Smough being considered THE WALL in Dark Souls simply because it's the first arguably difficult boss in the game (Capra Demon not withstanding, that is just straight up bullshit and poor design). People who use Drake Sword up to this point and don't quit out on Sen's Fortress (which I never found that difficult) will probably stop here, because they will have learned nothing.
DSP's 1st playthrough if das will always be the token example of that
I don't to sound like a normalshit, but just don't give up. I know this advice sounds like horseshit, but it's true for DS games. It's as simple as leveling up early on, and choosing a weapon you're comfortable with (a good build). Do you like heavy, huge damage weapons? Or, quick, lower damage movement? I usually play with a lot of strength, and use a gigantic sword or hammer (Kirkhammer in Bloodborne.) They key to these games is to not fight an enemy right away, rather watch what he does. This is the same for bosses. Souls games are about exploiting weaknesses in the AI, which is why it seems tough at first. I'm not very good at games either, but I am good at patience. If you have no patience, I guess they aren't for you.
My first Dark Souls game was DSII. I couldn't get past the first enemy in the game, the giant on the circle, for about an hour. I finally learned his movements, and was able to progress. I like using different weapons, exploring, and exploiting the movements of the enemies. It makes me feel powerful, more-so than any other normalshit RPG game like Dragon Age or something.
>>31639>Overall I think the series got progressively worse until BB which I hear was a gem. It got popular for the wrong reasons, and lots of DeS fans cringed at the Dark Souls: Prepare to Die subtext
I think Bloodborne is a real return to form for the series, and it wasn't stale or stupid with memes. Bloodborne II, which I'm sure they'll make, will be awful. The problem here is that BB is probably most console players first "Souls" game, so they are going to bitch that it is too hard. I checked my trophy PSN list, and only 55%-60% of people bother beating Father Gascoigne. That is a lot of people that give up before beating the first real boss. This is drastically different from DSIII, which I found easy. There's even a boss where you attack a ring on his finger, and he dies; I beat it on my second try. I think the mechanics for BB were perfect, the speed was perfect, and the focus on unique enemies was cool.
Unfortunately, whenever normalshits like a game series, it's ruined forever. I expect there to never be another Souls game that is fun ever again, although NIOH might be okay. I don't have £40 to drop on it right now, so I can't speak on it. The whole "praise the sun" reddit shit was stupid though. The game should have been praised as a game that returns to what gaming was; no cut-scenes, no hand-holding, just fun gameplay.
tbh I think you are just bias since it sounds like ti was your first souls game, des bosses are so much simpler than the rest as they are far less aggressive and slower, and with infinite grass healing you can literally ttrade blows, heal, repeat
getting used to mechanics is by far the hardest part of souls games
I don't want to sound condescending, but can you explain what makes DSIII easy? Because it just sounds like you've been playing a series since the beginning and don't realize your skill isn't resetting at one for each title. Someone who played Street Fighter since II is going to do far better than someone jumping in the series for the first time at V.
>>31653>can you explain what makes DSIII easy?
I'll try to explain my POV, which may very well be influenced by someone who really likes these games. The first boss you encounter in the game, Iudex Gundyr, is basically a little more powerful sentinel from DSII. He attacks by slashing down, which is really easy to roll away from. There is a giant tree, or "cursed tree", which remains stationary. All you need to do is attack different blisters on it, and it dies. As mentioned before, there is a boss, "High Lord Wolnir", who can easily be exploited for a quick win.
To boil this down, DSIII is more about exploitation of little tricks, then it is about pure skill. If you can exploit something, you can win. This is different from my favorite, DSII, in which the first boss you encounter in the arena is relentlessly difficult for a newcomer. I'm linking a video to this boss, in case you don't know of him. It's more about rolling, dodging, and thinking than DSIII. Or, I may be very biased.
Not sure if you played beyond the first 2 bosses because it's the exact opposite. Dark Souls starts the whole Big guy with huge swing bosses. Also DaS starts relying more on fall-off ledges to your death then in DeS, which had way more tougher enemies. Weapon upgrading in DeS was also harder and more grindy, but was worth it.
>>31657>Weapon upgrading in DeS was also harder and more grindy
For a game where your skills are challenged, gating upgrades behind how long you're willing to go in and out of a world to kill trash mobs for drops isn't good.
I'm not the guy you were replying to before, I just thought that making weapons harder to upgrade isn't a bonus. And everyone game in the series has required boss souls near the end or at certain points of an upgrade path. I was obviously referring to the core upgrading which would've been going in and out of worlds killing mook enemies for (noun/adjective)stone. You pointing that out as if it were some gotcha moment is like me saying making a cake is easy and is just mixing together butter, flour, eggs, etc and then you go, "But you also have to put it in the oven!" It's even more ironic when you're trying to act as if you're above be by calling me a secondary when you only made a vague statement only supported by common knowledge.
This thread started good, but if it's going to delve into a pissing contest over what everyone's favorite title in the series is ala /v/ then I'll step out. My mistake for thinking Wizards were able to discuss and rationalize their views without resorting ego stroking.
Hey anonymage, I started this thread. Please don't let some asshole get you down, this is not a /v/-tier thread at all. This is a thread to talk about anything that has to do with the game, or action RPG games similar to it. We can talk about the lore, the atmosphere, favorite weapons or play-styles; it should not be a bragging contest, i.e. "I beat x boss my first try, git gud."
So why are the people in Yharnam turning into beasts?
Because of the blood they consumed.
PLayed the series up to 90% through dark souls 2 and quit. I found the much vaunted difficulty level didn't compensate for the simple minded combat formula and utter lack of story. If bloodborn's the same sort of trash I'll never play it.
I don't see how a story is warranted for a game; gameplay is what's important. I have played every game in the series, and I still don't know the story. Who cares?
Can you explain how the combat is simple minded? There are many different weapons with different movesets, or you can even play as a wizard if you want. Each boss is unique in its own way, meaning the combat is not "simple minded." Did you not enjoy fighting the Skeleton Kings in DSII? I loved it.
Bloodboorne is an improvement in terms of combat but it's still very similar at the core. You still parry, you can backstab but they are harder to land There are less weapons overall but almost every single weapon is completely unique in design and moveset, and the form changing adds some much needed spice to the combat, and they do away with blocking all together so there is more of a focus on speed. And you can charge strong attacks too. DSIII tried to add some new stuff too (like the charge attacks) but ultimately I think bloodborne did a better job at feeling more fun in combat.>>31687
Not him and I enjoyed all the games but the combat is very simple, sure there is a variety of weapons be every weapon has what 3-5 light attacks and 2 heavy attacks? Backstep/run/roll attacks attacks are situationally useful (and almost exactly the same as eachother) and the critical attacks are exactly the same for any weapon. The kick is decent but incredibly clunky and only useful on a small amount of enimies and the jump attack is basically useless aside from a finisher because it leaves you wide open. Not to mention the flow of the combat encourages you to stop attacking constantly to block/dodge and wait for the counter so the majority of the time you don't get past the second or third attack in the light combo anyway.
Yes, the bosses and enimies are interesting and fun to fight and are the major reason I liked the games, but if you strip them away and look at the combat system itself, it's functional but really bland. To contrast, what I've played of nioh so far is basically the opposite, the combat is great but the level design and enemy variety is sorely lacking for the most part, bosses have been pretty okay though.
Would you say NIOH is worth £40? I like creative bosses and visuals, but I like gameplay more. If the combat is better, I'd pick it up. I just need to know it isn't so far opposite of Dark Souls that it actually sucks (for me).
I don't feel like I wasted money, it's up to you if you want to wait for sales though.
The combat is stamina based like dark souls but that's where the similarities end (just in combat it borrows a lot of stuff elsewhere) There are 6 weapon types, each have their own skill trees with special moves although some skills carry between weapons and there are trees for ninjutsu and onmyo magic as well which are basically useable items and buffs with limited use. All the skill trees are meaty and include parries and special moves for each stance as well as passive and active buff abilities.
There are 4 stances, sheathed, low, mid and high. You can do certain special attacks out of sheathed, low does little damage but is much faster and improves your dodge, mid is mid damage and speed but has the best block and is the stance you use for parry moves, and high is slow but big damage/guard break.
The other big thing is ki pulsing. Basically you have a chance to regain a certain amount of stamina by timing a button press (or stance change or dodge), the youkai enimies drop these aoe pools that immensely slow your stam regen and increase theirs (guard breaking is a pretty big thing in this) and getting a perfect pulse will purify the aoe if you are standing in or near it. You can also unlock skills that make a perfect pulse buff your damage etc for more insentive to do it.
The game has a lot of problems still, and the inventory and crafting are like diablo loot or mmos where you reroll stat lines and dismantle tons of junk etc. so that's personal if you like it or not. And the enemy variety is very low. Boss variety is very good however.
Overall I like the combat enough to not care about the other stuff and the bosses, especially the humanoid ones you can parry combo are a blast.
And just in case it wasn't clear stance changing is freely doable mid combo
Thank you anonymage, this sounds cool, but I prefer non multi-tasking games. The whole "getting ki pulsing and changing stance midway-through" sounds too complicated for me. I think I'll wait for a sale.
>>31689>they do away with blocking all together
Well that's very unrealistic. Let me guess, they did this because the "git gud" crowd complained that blocking made the souls games too easy, "casual" even. Christ.
It could be, but Bloodborne is supposed to be its own IP, "inspired" by Dark Souls, even though they are both From games. It's supposed to be like DMC or God of War, in that you don't block with a shield, you just roll. The in-game excuse is that the beasts and monsters are so strong that they just rip through a shield, and if a hunter were to use one, he would be outpaced by a beast. Stupid, but it does make the game different.
Yeah no problem.
It's really not as complicated as it sounds because the controls are pretty intuitive, but I get not wanting to jump in, I only got it day 1 because I already knew I liked it from the beta.
Good luck whenever you pick it up.
The official statement was somethong along the lines of wanting to speed combat up, the dodge takes a lot less stamina and they have the whole health regen thing so it felt different but not really harder.
There actually are 2 shields in the game, but one's useless and the other is more situational.
You can see their reason for removing shields in the description of the useless one: "Shields are nice, but not if they engender passivity".
That's the one thing I hate about Bloodborne. I always use a sword and shield (w/ 100% block) in Dark souls. I still have trouble in rolling-only playthroughs, because the timing needed is very difficult for me to handle.
Flamelurker seems pretty anti melee with half his movesets being aoe shit. He's pretty slow though, I might just fight him with arrows.
I've quit and restarted DaS1 so many times that I'm more or less burnt out on it (the first quarter or so, at least), but I keep coming back for one more try.
I don't care for how underpowered the guns are, myself.
Flamelurker was were I stopped playing. You literally cannot touch him, he uses explosion attacks out the ass, and regular attacks come out quick. I looked up to see what I was doing wrong in the fight after a month and people either cheesed him by getting him stuck or go an OP weapon and wailed on him as fast as possible since he gets stronger the lower his health gets. The only reliable opening he has is his aoe when he gets on all fours or his jump attack. Everything else is too risky because the one armed aoe can easily be followed up with a swipe (that will take half your health) or vice versa.
Yeah, I don't even feel like playing anymore.
I tried using water veil to negate his damage but that doesn't matter when he's at the halfway point. Enchant weapon works the best but I feel the entire fight is just attrition.
Like you put it, you either kill him quick or he kills you. I had one fight with him where I had him to a 1/3 of his health left and he literally did the aoe attack 3 times in a row.
I just hate when rpgs have you build a character then pretty much tell you "Sorry your playstyle is fucked here!" Like going through a car wash only for the exit to have nothing but mud and other shit around it.
>>31941>he literally did the aoe attack 3 times in a row
That is his so called "rage mode", when at low health he starts to spam aoe over and over again, that's an expected behavior. I agree that he's a bit narrow when it comes to classes that could fight him comfortably, because only mages can shit on him easily (he has shit resistances + you don't have to be close + it's even possible to one-shot him like that). Next boss after him is much worse though.
It feels contradictory to me as well when games do that. You're supposed to choose a playstyle and then hit a point where the game wants you to play another way.
I always hated aoe attacks in souls games because their hitboxes never felt consistent.
Atleast I found a trick with demon souls where if you quit a boss before your death animation ends you get reset to their fog gate. Now I don't have to do any quality souls platforming everytime just to get to the fog gate.
Same. I have a hard enough time picking a style/class and sticking with it to begin with.
Beat Flamelurker finally. Had no idea what to do with Dragon God but I beat him after 4 tries, though I think I was supposed to get him to break a wall for a big sword that's closed off by debris.
I really hate how everytime I look for help with these games there's some retarded norman claiming how easy it was to do it
I've gotten to the point where I just ignore them. They're the video game equivalent to looking a solution to a technical problem and seeing people reply with "Works for me :)"
Played all of them, Found BB to be the best. It just nails everything what makes the series great on the head. Great combat, best weapon selection and an incredibly well crafted world. BB is the first cosmic horror themed game with beatable bosses that still manages to create good lore. The first playthrough felt bleak, mysterious and it was magical. It felt like I was completely freed from the sorrows of the real world.
>there will never be a Souls game set in the bombed-out trenches of a World War, where you fight infernal beasts amidst a hail of gunfire, mustard gas, and mortar shelling.
I mean, I like dark fantasy and gothicism as much as the next guy, but something about parrying a bayonet charge and then blasting some dude in the face in the pouring rain with bodies and bullets snapping overhead sounds way more invigorating. I've been thinking about this fictional game off and on for a couple weeks now, envisioning different zones and scenarios. There'd be this "fog of war" zone in a valley, where the entire place is blanketed in fog and mustard gas, and all of the trenches are a maze that constantly change around you as you walk through them. There'd also be a claustrophobic underground part, with narrow tunnels crisscrossing in pitch blackness under the whole warzone. One of the bosses would be the physically manifestation of rot and decay, who you have a choice of not attacking at all and eating one of the corpses to "pledge" to their divinity, or just swinging your sword at him, thus triggering the actual fight.
I don't know. I find I am too often thinking of things I would enjoy more, rather than just enjoying what I got. Still, Souls-like combat with a bayoneted bolt-action could be pretty rad, I think.
Related to the thread, I like the new DLC. I just wish Ashes was this big, or they had at least one more. Still, this is better than nothing.
>>31653>Someone who played Street Fighter since II is going to do far better than someone jumping in the series for the first time at V.
seeing as how braindead V is, sadly I'm not sure that holds entirely true
Making a game easier lowers barrier of entry. But a pro will still shit all over someone who's still learning, especially when systems become simpler.
I regret not recording getting to 500 victories to max out the BoB covenant in DSII. Given the ridiculously high threshold, I was that guy. In other words, overleveled as fuck just in NG+, forbidden funning, and Havel fast rolling to rack up points faster. Got pretty grindy but plenty of shits and giggles along the way.
I was going for the lingering dragoncrest ring +2 that you get for 1000 banished red phantoms, but gave up eventually. Wonder how close I've gotten.
I'm on my first playthrough on DS1, and I've killed Ornstein and Smough yesterday. It took me lots of tries since I'm not doing any summoning but the most frustrating part of it was having to rush through the map to get to the boss fight. Why do I have to do that? If you die in your way to the boss that's frustrating because you know it's the game design fault for having to make you go through that, you just want to fight the boss but you have to do a marathon. If you die fighting a boss you know it's your fault you died so you have no choice but improve.
Today I went to the Darkroot Garden and beat the two bosses there, but either I was too overleveled or my weapon (Chaos Blade) is overpowered. Now I think I have five to go so I can fill the Lordvessel, but I checked all of them and none made me want to go on playing.
The only fun for me in this game was fighting the bosses and hearing the lore from the NPCs, doing the "mind mapping" to learn the areas is not fun and it's the hardest part of the game for me. Blighttown was annoying, The Depths somehow broke my mind and I spent two hours trying to find a route to the boss just to kill him on the first try, Sen's Fortress was annoying too, but not as bad as The Depths.
Undead Burg/Parish were the most fun areas for me, it was very simple to understand where and why you should go and where and why you should not.
I'm doing my first playthrough of DS, too, and I had to summon for Ornstein and Smough because I'm useless.
If you want to end your game early just go into the painted world and [x] touch fluffy tail. Fitting end fuck the outside world.
Otherwise cut off fluffy tail and go to the DLC if you seek harder fights.
here, finally beat the game.
The catacombs was shitty area, I couldn't find my way through. I liked the Tomb of Giants and Nito thought, both were very good.
New Londo Ruins and Duke's Archives were great. 4 kings was awesome.
Demon's Ruins and Lost Izalith made me very angry. The lava was hurting my eyes and the giant enemies in Izalith were annoying. I spent two months without playing because of it.
Gwyn made it worth it. The music made it feel like I was fighting an old friend instead of a monster.
I want to start DS2 but someone told me to skip it since all the areas in it are Lost Izalith but worse.
Enjoying playing DS2 a lot more than I expected after looking at some reviews.
Game felt pretty easy until I got to the DLCs where I spent hours stuck on the bosses until I finally looked tips on the internet and learned about the adaptability stat (wich I think is retarded).
Also hate how farming bellkeeper covenant was done if you don't like PvP.
Wish my PC would handle DS3 but I'll probably end up never playing it.
funnest part of ds2 was doing belltower pvp on first week of release - no minmax faggots or tryhard shitters that all you come across now, no one knew what they were doing so it was extremely fun outskilling people because everyone was pretty much on same level of stats/ gear at that point
i got over 100 titan slabs, so over 100+ people got rekt by me in the first belltower but by the time i got to the sol one the tryhard faggot minmaxers started showing up and r1 spamming and chugging sunny d to death when losing
Does anyone have the Fate/ Dark Souls 1 challenge runs?
Just finished DS2: SoTFS and all the DLC.
Had much more fun with it than DS1. Unlike DS1 it gets really good as you go on playing instead of decaying. I also could enjoy online play with the covenants and invasions which never happened in DS1.
I'll wait a few weeks and start DS3 but sadly I'll have to play it on 30 FPS because my computer can't handle it at 60. It'll be hard getting used to it after 70 hours of 60 FPS on DS2.
It's the best ever made
It's pretty good, I liked it more than DS overall very good atmosphere and gameplay is solid. If you like the gloomy type of setting it has and have enjoyed souls gameplay (though it is a bit different)you should give it a shot.
If you don't like those things it's probably not for you.
It depends. If you like the idea of Souls except it's faster and more aggressive than it'll be up your alley. Personally, I didn't like it. Enemies (including bosses) stagger and are parried way too easily, the areas get pretty short and linear after the Yharnam headstone, and there just seemed like there was less build variety overall.
These are good points, builds all feel very similar and there is a lot less weapon variety in exchange for more unique weapons. The weapon transform thing attempts to give you some more interesting combos to work with and it sort of works but ultimately you are still going to end up R1ing all the time with the addition of an L1 here and there to change the form.
And yeah the areas don't feel as in depth as DS in the latter half of the game, I still enjoyed them though because like I said I was into the atmosphere, if I wasn't I would get bored.
The DLC is definitely the best souls DLC released after Artorias though.
I bought a controller yesterday so I could play DS2 on my PC again, just leveled the sh*t out of strength, dexterity, bought a big a** shield and got the flame sword and pretty much just walk through being able to block about anything. Is this just a cheese tactic or what?
No. You can have an even easier time with big blunt weapons such as the great and large clubs. Some bosses do make blocking impractical though so investing in adaptability to raise your agility stat to >=100 is a must.
Yeah you're ruining the game for yourself. Both DS2 and DS3 are meant to be played without shields.
No it's something likely to bite you in the ass late game and in the DLCs. You have to learn to dodge and be mobile against bosses that hit for a shitload and mobs that have a ton of endurance and don't stagger. Recently saw a video of someone trying to block/tank the Fume Knight and failing that the Blue Smelter. The unbelievable fail was hilarious to say the least.
Fucking christ the Grand Archive has to be the most annoying area in DaS3. Thrall things every where, fucking priest guys who can slow you down with magic and cast magic ontop of the fucking crystal mage shooting shit at you and the transient curse arms that pop up fucking everywhere. And then you have to deal with a 3v1 npc encounter where the npcs chug estus. The most annoying thing about it is that they respawn and they give the fucking mage cunt a parrying dagger because "lol fuck you for trying to prioritize her" jesus.
if you dip your head in the wax the books won't hurt you
i've been playing ds3 for 12 hours now, killed the forest witch and every other boss(except the first one) on a second try. is dark souls 3 supposed to be easier than the rest or the entire series is not as hard as people make it out to be? don't get me wrong, it's far from easy, but i expected it to be more punishing.
i'm playing as a knight, not using any guides and i'm not experienced in the genre, i've never even got to anor londo in the first game, because i've used a terrible pad and in some areas fps would drop massively.
Difficulty of a Souls game largely depends on your your character build. I went to das3 with the barbed sword no shield. Bosses that gave me the most trouble were fast attacking ones like pontiff and dancer. All the bosses before Irithyll are very simple too, at least to me.
I saw it awhile ago, I vaguely remember his main points being:
>Demon Souls had more unique bosses>Newer Souls games are too fixated on "Artorias clones"
Which are both pretty dumb. Demon Souls had "unique" bosses but a lot of them once you figured out how to beat them that was it they offered nothing else. Calling any aggressive boss an "artorias clone" was silly too because pontiff and astraea fight nothing like him. Ideally you can make a boss fight that's unique while still being moderately difficult. It doesn't have to be one or the other.
i think he's being nostalgic, DeS should be more recognized for what it did, but that doesn't mean it's automatically better than what followed. finding what works and then improving on it is how FROM operates, just look at how many king's field and armored core sequels they've made. besides they are done with DaS and their next game is supposed to be nothing like it, yet he acts almost as if they turned soulsborne into a yearly shitfest like CoD.
even if they don't innovate with each game, i think FROM deserves a lot of respect for not trying to mass appeal by significantly dumbing down their games like say bethesda does.
i dislike just how much stuff is unexplained in these games, like hollowing mechanic in ds3, i was worried it will be game over if the number gets too high, because you are repeatedly told throughout the game that hollowing is bad.
so i practically had to google it and spoil the game. turns out it has no negative effects at all aside from changing your appearance and somehow modifying the ending.
also, i think they obfuscated the plot too much, but i see why some people will love that, it's just that for me and most players there is no motivation to go and kill some dudes.
tried some souls likes like nioh and dead cells and gotta say i'm disappointed that they are not blatant clones. dead cells is too bright and fast paced, nioh doesn't take itself too seriously and tries to be diablo. it's a combination of things like gloomy atmosphere, slow exploration, weight management etc. that makes dark souls feel so special.
i just realized that having to run to the bosses after death is just a meaningless annoyance that adds zero value to these games, this is especially noticeable during the last bossfight, where you have a long uphill path to boss, but there are no enemies in your way.
they should've put a bonfire right before boss gates or maybe implement some other way to quickly restart a boss fight. i don't even mind if it means making boss fights harder.
also, in theory it made sense in older games, you couldn't apply humanity right before the boss fight, you had to do it at a bonfire, so while running to a boss you were vulnerable for invasions, this is a payoff for ability to summon
it makes no sense in das 3 because you can just apply "humanity" anywhere at anytime.
"Humanitiy" in das2 was applied like in das3 too iirc
Yeah, but you could still be invaded while undead.
Is Bloodborne much easier than Souls games? I heard all about how difficult they are… then thought Bloodborne wasn't particularly difficult at all when I played it recently
never played BB, but i've heard DS3 is very much like it, 1 and 2 are much slower than 3, more methodical if you wish, you may find them more difficult until you get used to slow movement and punishing stamina management.
yeah I typically play fast/agile characters, get frustrated with slow weapons and blocking
then you'll probably find DS3 challenging, but enjoyable and older games not so challenging, but frustrating. what's worse is that slow weapons are often the best ones in 1 and 2 due to stun, and block is more effective. some people like it that way, but for me DS3 combat and balance is a massive improvement.
Does anyone find the lore behind the Ringed City incredibly stupid?
Don't get me wrong, it's a cool place with great bosses but the reason for it's existence is just seems like retarded fan fiction.
I think I would've preferred if DaS didn't get any direct sequels. DaS3 could've been more about pontiff sulyvahn or aldrich and had no connection to the Dark Souls universe.
The story didn't really need anything added to it.
Souls games don't have stories.
without reading wiki or watching youtube it's all so vague for me that i don't really care. i only care about npc you meet and talk to and in that regard das 3 wasn't as good as das, but it wasn't bad either.
knowing the story is as simple as reading items you pick up
and i know people will hate this but dark souls 1 is only good because it was many peoples first souls game. i started with des and das was mediocre in comparison. hell the game is only halfd finished.
You'd have a point if DeS was superior to DaS in every way, but there's really only a few good aspects of DeS that are lost in the rest of the Souls games+Bloodborne.
Dark souls built on Demon's souls pretty well. I remember how much I enjoyed it when I played it after waiting for it's release. The release version is better than the patched version in this regard. It's bad balancing and cluster fuck quality checking introduces weird interesting aspects. The dino butts being "fixed" changed a memorable area into a bland one. It is most people's first experience with the series and they hype it up too much.>>44216
DeS is superior in world design. Each location you visit is more memorable than anything DaS has. The weakest area is the Swamp and it's boss makes up for it. The path down to the swamp and the boss are both pretty memorable for good reason. In DaS there's a lot of areas which should be special but aren't. Seeth's crystal area should be stunning but they made it such a bore to get through that it didn't work. Good concept but used poorly. The archive is even worse and deserves a nut punch for it.
My favourite is DeS and after reflecting on the series I like DaS2 second best. Not because it's the best game but because it's the most interesting game. It has problems beyond any of the others, I won't deny that but the exploration was more rewarding. Distinct areas that became memorial able on a less open world is more fun to me than generic areas I already saw. DaS3 is the worst for this and feels like DaS with Bloodbornes discarded content thrown in. DaS1 has some good areas but the game speed is so low I can't play it any more. Bloodborne I never liked, I thought it was bland and was hanging onto systems that needed updating if it wanted to be an action game. The bosses being fur flailing around made it hard to know what was going on and you lacked the combat options to fight at the speed they wanted you to. You can't remove shields and then double the combat speed keeping every other mechanic. It just feels clunky and you end up exploiting the AI rather than battling it. It doesn't need to be DMC but it does need updating.
Memorability is a pretty relative. An area can be memorable for any reason, Lost Izalith is memorable to me because of BoC and the lizard asses. I found the crystal cave more interesting and memorable than the swamp in DeS because it's visuals and gimmick made it stand out to me compared to wading around slowly getting poisoned while enemies come at you, and I have to think swamp areas are some inside joke for FROM since they threw one into every game in Soulsborne, kinda like the moonlight greatsword but they threw that into all their games before Souls as a series even existed.
The entire series suffers from an autistic fanbase so they repeat what they want to keep sales going. That's why DaS3 is a rehash in so many ways. It doesn't make sense as a world any more.
Lost Izalith on an unpatched console release is memorable for how difficult it is. You enter and go on fuck… now you see like 5 dinos and it's done. The 1.6 patch made Dark souls a different game and that's what the majority of people played. They all got the PC release which can't be depatched.
I've used a trainer for Dark Souls 3 in offline mode to check out the main campaign. Then deleted all the saves and started anew with no trainers. But it says that my account is panilized, will it get unbanned or am i stuck with this notification?
hmm….. i beat the first 2 souls games and am currently midway through the third one. im really lazy with it though, and im not really motivated to beat it. im at anor londo at the boss that took the place of ornstein and smough, the magic boss that teleports
i dont know…. its just not fun for me anymore. probably ill go back to finish it up later, but i have strong doubts ill ever play demon souls or bloodborne
also ds2 was probably my favorite, even tho i think ds1 is probably an objectively better game. i just really liked ds2 for some reason. and probably the boss that brutally raped me the hardest out of all the bosses ive played was the capra demon when i just started out playing the first dark souls. i died to it what seemed like 40 times
I just ordered Demon's Souls of Amazon, I beat Dark Souls 2, working on 3.
Yes!!!! I thought I was the only one. There's such a soulsy feel to WW1 pictures, especially if they were taken in shelled out rural villages (there's a picture i've seen that evokes this very well but I cant find it right now)
Trenches are also an extremely rural fit for a traditional dungeon crawler. I've been toying with this idea for a few years now
>>45141>Stealth in a game about being a shinobi is bad>Verticality is bad>Combat that has far more going on for it than "run around in a circle and press r1" is bad
>Seems like barely anyone understands why DeS and DaS1 are so great, especially FromSoft.
It's almost as if the game isn't trying to be like Souls or something. You only have yourself to blame. I'm for one am glad From is distancing themselves away from an overrated franchise that overstayed its welcome and is only notable because it was moderately difficult during a time when games were braindead simple.
Is it anything like Tenchu or Shinobido?
Maybe like a serious and grim Tenchu. Very nice game but I don't think I have the endurance and nervous system enough for these death penalties and frustration after dying. It's a very hard game for me.
sekiro might be cool but honestly who cares, you can always just download dark souls 1 again and you'll never regret replaying it
Ive only seen videos and it looked like bloodborne in japan to me…
From what I've seen the combat seems more focused on parrying and aggression than just being evasive and waiting for an opening.
There's way more to the series appeal than its difficulty. It has its share of cryptic secrets but it still leaves a ton of stuff for the player to figure out through curiosity instead of telegraphing all of it because the dev didn't trust the players intelligence and capacity to explore and solve problems on their own. Once you know what you're doing Dark Souls 1 is basically an open buffet right from the start with how you choose to tackle the game which adds a significant amount of replay value nothwistanding the dozen upon dozen of character building options. It's absolutely earned its right to be talked about for years and years on end just like other games that grabbed peoples imagination like Ocarina Of Time used to be. Seeing it as nothing more than "praise the sun" and "muh hardcore difficulty" memes is insanely reductive
It has the kind of mystique games lost sometime during the PS2 era
Sekiro is extremely good. Seen lots of people from Dark Souls who are not able to play Sekiro because it forces you to master its gameplay mechanics instead of just hiding behind a shield if you want to progress.
maybe, but the overall design and details are not even close to bloodbourne. Sekiro is extremely mediocre
Austism-level repetition and memorization. I don't know how people enjoy playing the same areas many times in a row until they memorize what to do. Using trial and error deaths to see all enemy movesets and locations is the only way to play these games. No sense of flow and satisfaction as the game does not facilitate adapting to game mechanics to survive in novel situations. Lazy devs use death as a way to turn a short boring game into a longer one that engages you with repetitive ego bashing punishment.
I am a simple man, who just likes killing and looking at the blood go splat, does this make me evil? I never tortured animals or insects as a kid, but stabbing humanoids in video games gives me satisfaction. Sekiro's combat is superb for this.
The stealth is lackluster, but not the worst. I like the loyal ninja role, but going full spiderman with sci-fi tier prosthetics is a little over the top, don't you guys think?
You can get good enough to get through new hazards and make it out alive instead of brute forcing them
From what I've heard and seen, Sekiro is more Tenchu than Souls. Which would explain why so many people don't like it. But FROM did say it wasn't like Souls to begin with, so they only have themselves to blame.
DaS (and, to a lesser extent, Bloodborne) is one of those things that I really wanted to get into- and really enjoyed at the outset- but eventually ended up just burning myself out on since, between my short attention span and OCD-ish tendencies, I was never able to get very far- I just kept starting new files and then abandoning them.
Currently trying to work up the nerve to pick up where I left off in Bloodborne, but I don't know if I'll have any luck.
It's not like Tenchu in the slightest. Stealth is an occasionally useful tool at best in Sekiro, not a main mechanic like in Tenchu. Atmosphere is completely different as well. I have no fucking idea why people keep comparing everything to Tenchu, I remember another stealth-ish game came out some years ago called Aragami and everyone also compared that to Tenchu when, in fact, it was nothing like it whatsoever.
I have no idea why people think pointing out similarities between two games made by a developer is saying the games are the same, but here we are.
The similarities are barely even superficial, yet everyone and their grandmother seems to be saying "wow this is so much like tenchu!". Have any of those people even played tenchu or did they just hear from some shitty youtube influencer that once upon a time fromsoftware made a game with sneaking in it and keep parroting the same bullshit over and over? There's as much similarity between tenchu and sekiro as there is between super mario bros and minecraft - you can jump in both, and that's about it.
>>45227>Have any of those people even played tenchu
It's a 20 years old game, of course most of the people who are talking about it haven't played Tenchu, they probably saw some screenshot and since they're both games that are based on old Japan it's enough for them to say they're similar. Hell I'm surprised they're not saying it's similar to Way of the Samurai.
I am playing dark souls 2 again, this time on company of champions as a wizard.
send help, my addiction to gaming have gone too far.
I'm so fucking sick of these games. I can't beat pontiff sullyvahn and it's been like five hours since I first reached him. Can't beat the poison hair boss thing in blood borne either. Makes me feel like turd since I've been playing these games since demon's souls but now I'm too dumb and slow for them.
>>45246>I can't beat pontiff sullyvahn and it's been like five hours since I first reached him
couldn't make it that far before giving up, but
>Can't beat the poison hair boss thing in blood borne either
the one guarding the chalice in Old Yharnam?
I just died to the Sekiro final boss (the one with 4 'stages' at least) about 30 times and give up.
Yes, the blood starved beast. I have gotten it down to only one or two hits multiple times but then it will kill me with some bullshit combo.
it's an optional boss if i remember right, you can come back later if you wish
for me, the killer was either the pounce-and-puke attack (effectively a oneshot unless you've really been pumping Vit) or the poison buildup you accumulate just for being near the asshole during the last stage of the fight. i take it you're already aware of his weakness to fire?
Iron Passage is kicking my ass guys
Yes, but it barely does more damage. Didn't know it was optional so I might come back later. I enjoy fighting through the dungeons in these games, but the bosses - they make me go nuts.
Sekiro actually did start out as a Tenchu game, iirc.
I feel like going through Souls again. I never really cared for the lore; I just liked going through the different areas and fighting bosses.
>>45141>are blatantly there to appeal to normalfags.
its actually harder than Dark Souls lol.
In Dark Souls you can have patience and cheese fucking everything just by playing safe and slow and tanking. Sekiro offers no such platitudes.
You don´t seem to have played past the first hour.
Give it time and strategies to cheese things will come out. That said I like how responsive everything looks control and animation wise. The main reason I never got all that invested in souls games is everything felt sluggish, sloppy, and imprecise.
Are there any games like DS that weren't made by From? I tried Dragon's Dogma but it feels too much like a regular RPG
The surge I guess. Most people didn't like it that much though.
Who told you Dragon's Dogma was similar to a Souls game? It's more of a hybrid of Monster Hunter and DMC (DMC's director is the creator, in fact). If you want more "Soulslike" games there's The Surge (like another anon mentioned), Ashen, Salt and Sanctuary, Sinner, and Nioh (probably the best one I listed) off the top of my head.
Thanks guys, trying out Salt and Sanctuary right now, just beat the first boss, it's alright.
I remember when people used to describe DD as "japan's answer to Skyrim"
Thankfully, it was actually a good game.
God I hope they make a DD2
Congratulations, you're a human being.
kinda but not really, It would be better if it was more about the stealth, but instead they allow the stealth and then you have to do the combat anyways. The game is about combat, stealth is barely a decorative element.
FromSoft owns the rights to Tenchu and originally the game was meant to be a Tenchu remake, then they realized "lol, no" and just made a souls-like type game anyways
I'm finally beat dark souls 1. A burden has been lifted after all these years
Congrats, if you liked 1 don't even bother with 2.
I enjoyed DS2, but it's true that it's not as good as the first one, which I haven't finished yet
I don't know, I didn't hate it but it feels like a step down fron 1 in every aspect.>boring, linear level design with a lot of dead ends>graphics were too bright and kinda "bloomy" (if that makes any sense)>uninspired bosses, a lot of them are just big guys with armor>designers went out of their way to make the game more difficult>unnesessary new stats
How's Bloodborne compared to the Dark Souls series?
As poor as it is compared to the rest of the series it stills blows every other Souls clone out of the water. I'm very thankful there's a Dark Souls 2 to fall back on after playing every other one to death
There's no shields which in my opinion changes the game a lot.
Neither here nor there, cause shields don't really work with BB's faster style, but I do think that narrowing your defense options to only roll spam or parry is generally a bad thing.
C mon, 2 out of how many?
i just killed crossbreed priscilla and feel bad about it. i thought killing her was the only way to keep exploring the painted world but now as i progress i wonder if i didn't miss a quest with her. so what did i miss?
You can do as she says and leave the place but that's it, you don't get anything for sparing her, so you didn't really miss anything, no. You can cut her tail off during the fight to get a dagger but that's it.
The first boss new players are most likely to encounter in DS2 are
the first is laughably easy and unmemorable, the second you can take down by strafing around him, no rolling required, and he can also be exploited for a quick win (make him fall off the ledge, although I admit it may be tricky to pull off) I love DS2 but DS3's bosses are much better and harder imo than DS2s, not necessarily for good reasons mind you, iirc the slowest weapons are nearly unviable against some bosses (like the last one, soul of cinder or whatever) in 3 because of how relentless they are, and you while you can afford to trade hits with a random mob or a npc, it's not advisable against bosses.
>>50235>i just killed crossbreed priscilla and feel bad about it
This game does a good job at making you feel like a dick for killing some of the bosses, I felt particularly bad after killing Sif
Is the Demon Souls remaster on PS5 worth getting?
[Last 50 Posts]
Only if you like horribly butchered games.