|
Dark Souls 2 was consistently good but not amazing, while Dark Souls 1 had amazing moments with some really goddamn lovely, awful moments thrown in too. Both have their merits and the whole A Team vs B Team stuff is silly.
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2015 20:26
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 18:30 |
|
|
Dark Souls 3 needs to be a prequel where you play as Sif and you can roll on the ground and do doggie tricks for gestures.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2015 21:58
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:Given that they pretty much phoned Dark Souls 2 in I don't have huge hopes for this. Dark Souls remains one of the best games I have ever played, Dark Souls 2 left me feeling empty and dead inside, and not in the way Dark Souls 1 did. Dark Souls 1 is full of great moments intersped with horrendous, lovely moments that people overlook because of rose tinted nostalgia goggles. After Dark Souls 2 and Bloodborne's quality of life improvements, Dark Souls 1 feels downright archaic and not in a good way now. Dark Souls 2's hate is overblown just because it doesn't reach the highs of Dark Souls 1 but also doesn't reach the lows of that game either and the whole B-team, not canon, not Miyazaki directed nonsense annoys me because Bloodborne suffered from some of the same drat issues Dark Souls 2 did and then some new ones on top of that.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2015 22:24
|
|
|
Ruddha posted:dark souls 2 is a good game, but if you think it's better than dark souls 1 you're straight up retarded It's a far better game mechanically and the only people who argue otherwise are those who complain about soul memory because they are babies and soul memory has now been completely negated as of a few patches ago. Dark Souls 1 did have a more interesting and connected world though to the point one of the Dark Souls 2 patches had to completely rewrite some of the lore to make it interesting.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2015 22:40
|
|
|
Dark Souls 1 also had a much smaller pool of viable PvP builds. You could do something cool and interesting but why bother when there were 3 top builds that everyone and their grandmother used? Also the last third of the game, besides New Londo flatout sucked. The Catacombs and Tomb of the Giants were annoying and gimmicky, Demon Ruins and Lost Izalith were bland and full to the brim of complete bullshit culminating in one of the worst bosses in any Souls game and the Duke's Archives were boring, the Crystal Caves short and gimmicky. The DLC really saves the last third of Dark Souls because it's really good, otherwise it feels like a slog just to finish the game.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2015 22:52
|
|
|
Miyazaki is overrated. Some things in Bloodborne was a regression and he did directly helm that game from the beginning.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2015 19:35
|
|
|
If one of the Lords of Cinder aren't a Giant Dad, clearly representing the Dark Souls 1 protagonist then it'll be a poo poo game and the weakest Souls game.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2015 01:57
|
|
|
It's also a typo. The protagonist of Dark Souls 3 is actually Shovel Knight.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2015 11:49
|
|
|
Funnily enough I always thought God of War, at least the first game anyway had Zelda-like elements to it as well, with puzzles you need to solve in the Temple of Pandora to progress. The sequels focused more on the combat and spectacles though.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2015 09:47
|
|
|
Bugblatter posted:Every game is actually Zelda when you really think about it. I've actually heard that every game is basically Dark Souls far more than I've heard every game is basically Zelda.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2015 15:51
|
|
|
turtlecrunch posted:Miyazaki: That just sounds like they wanted an expanded King's Field game more than anything, which I suppose the Souls games are.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2015 09:36
|
|
|
It's a fun game that has absolutely no replayability or build variety. It's why I rank Dark Souls 2 over it, even if Bloodborne has better combat mechanics.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2015 19:30
|
|
|
I was doing a replay of Dark Souls yesterday and cut off the Gaping Dragon's tail and thought to myself "You know what Dark Souls 3 really needs? The dismemberment system from Shadow Tower Abyss". Then I got sad because that'd never happen, but it'd be cool if you could cripple enemies and bosses but they can potentially do the same to you.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2015 10:46
|
|
|
Regarding whether DS 3 will be the last Souls game or not, I took the comments to be kind of like what happened to the King's Field franchise. The first three games are clearly connected while the fourth one, while still bearing the same name, has completely different lore from the others. So expect Dark Souls: The Ancient City after Dark Souls 3 comes out.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2015 12:35
|
|
|
I do think Dark Souls 1 was better with level design and lore and perhaps better overall than 2 and Bloodborne was better in level design and lore too, but I'm always baffled when people say 2 is a bad game or why people praise Bloodborne as the best game yet. Now don't get me wrong, Bloodborne is great for one playthrough but it has extremely little replayability and very little in the way of build variety. Outside of future DLC there really isn't much reason to do a second playthrough of Bloodborne. That alone made it my least favorite out of it, Demon's Souls or Dark Souls 1 & 2. Dark Souls 2 changes things up on new playthroughs and there is a wider variety of builds that are perfectly viable to use in that game. Yeah people might bitch and whine about Soul Memory but anything from SL. 150 to 225 was viable for PvP purposes, in Dark Souls the unwritten rule was SL. 125 at max, here's a very small lists of viable builds, interesting gimmick builds are fun but useless. What I'm really hoping is that Dark Souls 3 combines the best aspects of all Souls games and Bloodborne because every other game seems like a few steps forward but a few steps backwards in areas that were fine in previous games too. If they can pull it off, I think the game will be something special.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2015 15:09
|
|
|
BottledBodhisvata posted:It's nice that they patched a not poo poo ending into the game years after its release. I didn't know Dark Souls 2 was years old, wow.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2015 18:53
|
|
|
oldpainless posted:Time is distorted here. Hah, well done. For real, Dark Souls 2 had a messy development history and was a bit unfocused. Which is why the DLC and the SotFS additions massively improve the game, because it makes the game more focused.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
pretend to care posted:This makes me want to play DS2. I never actually did, and the PS4 version combines all the DLC too. Hrmmmm. Easily worth playing to tide you over until Dark Souls 3. It's more replayable than Bloodborne too so give it a shot.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2015 19:43
|
|
|
Aren't the DLC crowns from DS 2 also visible in DS 3's trailer? Not to mention DS 2's ideas of finally finding a way to break the cycle, something which seems to be your aim in DS 3. So 3 might borrow a lot more from 1 than 2, but I doubt 2 will just be retconned.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2015 16:57
|
|
|
Couldn't you press Y or Triangle or whatever you've set it to on PC to cycle between context sensitive actions anyway? Like if there were a message right next to a lever to pull, pressing Triangle/Y would switch the action you perform.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 8, 2015 21:09
|
|
|
Zombies' Downfall posted:I like this post btw. One of the things I've always been annoyed with wrt lore discussion and literary criticism of Dark Souls (and by extension how people respond to Dark Souls 2) are people who seem to be taking the game's content too literally, taking Kaathe's description of man's history and Manus into account and going "well, dark is the inevitable and natural state of man" or taking Aldia's stance in Dark Souls 2 and saying "everything is pointless as long as we're trapped in a cycle of light and dark". My problem with this is that it's implied in Dark Souls 2 that people and souls reincarnate. You're not so much delaying the inevitable so future generations can have a good life so much as you're dooming future incarnations of yourself into doing the exact same poo poo over and over again. It's interesting you get that interpretation from the games though because I get a totally different interpretation; I think one of the themes of the Dark Souls games is about letting go. Gwyn and his followers were so afraid of change that they caused untold pain and suffering not only to humanity but also themselves because they were afraid of letting go. Vendrick was much the same, only he realized his mistake when it was too late. People go Hollow because of their inabilities to let go as well. Big Hat Logan goes Hollow because his search for immortality in Seath's research drove him mad, the Crestfallen Warrior goes Hollow and falls into despair because he's so wound up with the troubles in Lordran instead of moving on with his life. Oscar goes Hollow because he clings to a prophecy that ultimately proves to be a lie and despite passing the task onto the player character, still laments that he couldn't fulfill it himself. Everyone seems to cling to the glory of ages long past and it destroys them in the end. At least, that's what I got out of the series so it's interesting there's an argument to be made for the opposite as well.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 22:34
|
|
|
Flytrap posted:The only ones we see do that are the Lords, whose souls were just too powerful to simply fade away. Even if it were just the Lords being reincarnated, they're still doing the same self-destructive cycle over and over again and refusing to simply let go. Every time they try to maintain the glory of their kingdoms and powers and every time they fail.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 22:53
|
|
|
A Steampunk Gent posted:The point is 'letting go' results in a situation which most resembles Resident Evil. It's true relighting the flame is fighting an endless battle against inevitability, but it still gives generations of people the opportunity to live real lives, design goofy onion armour and go on the epic quests that form the legends that appear on your item descriptions. Everything dies eventually but that's no reason to give up on it Considering the average human life is pretty goddamn poo poo except for those in high positions of power and authority during the ages of fire, I don't see how it's a particularly good thing. The age of dark is the age of humanity, which we never once see the outcome of while the age of fire is the age of powerful beings being assholes and invading other countries and lands for their own glory.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 23:08
|
|
|
Jose posted:its a controversial opinion but DS2 was the better game, because playing it was more fun than DS and then Bloodborne did some really loving stupid stuff to make it less fun and i don't give a poo poo about lore It's better than Bloodborne because like you said, Bloodborne does some really stupid stuff and isn't nearly as replayable as other games in this style but I think DS2 is about equal with the first game. On one hand DS2 has soul memory, no interconnected worlds and an overreliance on enemies bum rushing you instead of smart ambushes but on the other hand DS1 has a really goddamn lovely second half that's far worse than anything DS2 does. Almost every area and boss in the second half is gimmicky or unfun in some way and the Artorias of the Abyss expansion is about the only thing that saves it. DS2 never reaches the highs of DS1 but it never reaches the lows of that game either and it about balances out I think.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 23:42
|
|
|
Sorry to go back to an earlier discussion that's been beaten like a dead horse by now, but Dark Souls and Bloodborne are set in a relatively small area. Dark Souls was mostly set on a mountain which had Anor Londo sitting at the top of it, while Bloodborne was set around the city of Yharnam and the areas directly surrounding the city. Drangleic in Dark Souls 2 was a continent, and the level geometry that seems off is because you're basically travelling across the continent from one end to the other repeatedly. The big problem with it though is that the transitions don't give you that feeling that you're traversing across a continent. It tries to have its cake and eat it too by making you feel the world is interconnected through small tunnels and passageways when it isn't. I often wonder if From Software would have been better off having Majula as a hub and then you warp to different locations from there, like in Demon's Souls.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 16:20
|
|
|
Dark Souls 3 is looking real good, though it definitely looks like Bloodborne with a Dark Souls skin thrown over it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 18:33
|
|
|
Harrow posted:I wouldn't be that excited about that, but that's just because I've never really enjoyed first-person melee combat. If a game has done that well, I've never played it. Shadow Tower Abyss had locational damage and it was rad as hell. Basically you could slice off or shoot a demon's limbs or head off and it would change up their moveset. Really cool game. The Souls games only kind of have that with the tails of certain enemies.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 19:47
|
|
|
Skyrim's dungeons looked visually more interesting but it was mostly a straight corridor with small side paths to treasure every so often and then at the end you find a shortcut straight to the entrance of the dungeon. I wouldn't say they're well designed. First person melee combat can work well but only a small handful of games actually do them well.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 20:01
|
|
|
Harrow posted:Why have I never played this game? This looks fun as hell. It's kind of janky but just kicking everything into spikes or death pits or pretty much anything you can think of is a lot of fun. It goes on sale frequently on Steam so you can pick up Dark Messiah of Might & Magic then. Tenzarin posted:The shortcut thing really got noticeable. Yeah it was really dumb. Like Oblivion's dungeons were extremely boring and copypaste visually but at least it was possible to get turned around in them and you had to backtrack out of them.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 20:06
|
|
|
Flytrap posted:I'd call the shortcuts a good design point myself. If I have to choose between immersion the breaking shortcuts to save time or the immersion breaking boredom of walking backwards through something I just finished, I'll take the former every single time. I'd prefer if they had shortcuts to different parts of the dungeon and you use Mark & Recall if you want to warp out. You know, like how Morrowind did it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 20:12
|
|
|
Harrow posted:Yeah, they could've sort of sprinkled shortcuts around the dungeon so that you don't always need to have a single shortcut that leads you outside from the end. Instead, you could unlock shortcuts as you go that, together, add up to a quick trip back (or an easy way back inside, if you want to leave for some reason before you get to the end). Y'know, sort of like how Demon's/Dark Souls and Bloodborne areas are designed Yeah but that requires good level design which is something Bethesda will probably never be good at. Flytrap posted:Sadly--much like flying--teleporting is likely gone for good. Not really sure WHY though. I get the flying I guess, it would break the boundaries set now that towns are in their own zones if you just flew over the wall, but what the heck did teleporting break? Quest scripting? I guess since Morrowind was straight up willing to let you make the main quest unwinnable they weren't so concerned with that. I don't think teleporting broke anything, their excuse is that you can fast travel which replaces teleportation. What Bethesda don't realize is that you can't fast travel out of dungeons and being unable to do so will either cause lots of backtracking, or make dungeons basically a long corridor that wraps around itself.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 20:30
|
|
|
Mazed posted:Has there been word on PC system requirements for this? My computer hates DX11, so if it ends up needing that, I'm stuck on PS4. No word, but it's safe to say you'll be stuck on PS4 unless you upgrade.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 21:05
|
|
|
Perfect Potato posted:Tomb, Ruins, and Archives poo poo over most of DS2, nevermind its weakass half baked second half, like that dragon place that people only like for its skybox or that mansion that's almost literally a hallway Nah. The worst of Dark Souls 2 is just uninspired and boring. The worst of Dark Souls 1 is bullshit that's the antitheses of fun, but people overlook it because the first half was so strong.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2015 17:46
|
|
|
Perfect Potato posted:Those three levels are just as good as most of the rest of the game though? Whereas garbage like the giant memories were uninspired, boring, and also not very fun. You do realize that Lost Izalith does not constitute the "second half" of the game right I... kikkelivelho posted:All the areas after Anor Londo are really bad. Uninteresting, gimmicky and sometimes unfinished areas with some of the games worst bosses. Exactly. Catacombs isn't too terrible, but Tomb of the Giants is a great concept done horribly wrong because of awful enemy placement and an underwhelming wet fart of a boss I was looking forward to from the intro cinematic, Nito. Which also completely breaks the Gravelord covenant so it's clear they didn't put a lot of thought into the design of that area or covenant. New Londo is basically a race against time of a sort, unless you're crazy enough to get cursed from basilisks, by using Transient Curses so you can actually kill most of the enemies there. Then you need to figure out you need to equip Artorias' ring so you can fight the Four Kings which is a timed boss fight and also can gently caress up your character build if it relies too heavily on a specific ring since you need Artorias' ring equipped the whole time. Duke's Archives commit the sin of forcing you to die against Seath for pretty much no reason but isn't too terrible, but the Crystal Caves afterwards looks pretty but is awkward to navigate with physics that just don't work because you're sliding down towards the pit below when you shouldn't and it only gets worse with the 60 fps enabled tweak, before ending with another underwhelming boss fight against Seath. Demon Ruins and Lost Izalith being so terrible pretty much speaks for itself. But not only are the level design, bosses and enemies poo poo but the aesthetic is really painful to my eyes and the first thing I do when installing the PC version is download the mod that makes the lava less of an eyesore. The DLC content being available on the second half is about the only thing that saves it, but that didn't come out until around a year after the game released.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2015 18:18
|
|
|
SweetBro posted:This game is going to be poo poo. So which thread on 4chan did you steal this from?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2015 17:24
|
|
|
I thought the coffin just changed your sex. Unless there was some new update that took you through character creation again?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2015 21:14
|
|
|
Your Gay Uncle posted:was there a lore reason for this coffin or was it just a hilarious way to make gamer gaters mad? Why would a Japanese game developer give a single poo poo about GG? Why'd you automatically jump to the conclusion it had to be about that either? The coffin's just a neat little easter egg, nothing more.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2015 19:53
|
|
|
Replaying DeS after the other Souls games really threw me for a loop over the speed of certain animations and forgetting about some mechanics that exist like item burden being a different thing from equip burden. Which I suppose makes me appreciate that Dark Souls for the most part streamlined things in a good way without making it too simple.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
Mighty Dicktron posted:I'm pretty sure the only games ever since King's Field 2 that don't have the Sword of Moonlight in some form are Metal Wolf Chaos and Bloodborne. The lack of it in Bloodborne is especially weird, you'd think they'd be able to tie it into the Moon Presence somehow.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2015 21:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 18:30 |
|
|
kikkelivelho posted:step 1. Buy expensive and gaudy gaming mouse Ah the Logitech G502. Gotta love it, even if it does look like a disaster.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2015 16:43
|
|