next »

[s0]

i bought this mouse gam because i am trash

it's actually a fun little game

probably the best souls clone ive played so far (not that that's saying much but hey)

the aesthetic is cute

one thing i dislike is how the enemies all seem designed to be beaten with 1 particular strategy rather than the souls games' more freeform approach.

[s0]

I think I'd have to play all 4 again to be sure but I could probably get on board with that. The changes to the combat in bloodborne were really nice.

here's my personal assessment of all 4 souls games:

i'd say in the end dark souls 1 is probably still the most enjoyable to play for me due to its flexibility.

demon's souls has some top notch level design and really good art direction/atmosphere and of course i'll never forget how it completely took me by surprise in 2009. but it has a few annoying mechanical quirks and balance problems that got improved on in the later games, as well as quite a few underwhelming boss fights.

dark souls 2 is like a souls megamix basically. it's a good game and it's fun if you like experimenting with lots of different gear and it's the best for organized pvp, however it has some level and boss design issues and lacks a lot of the interesting lore and subtle touches that make the other souls games so special. it's in some ways probably more flexible than dks1, but the flexibility is less meaningful and more like "here's a bunch of content, knock yourself out".

bloodborne is like the polar opposite of dks2. it's a really smart reimplementation of the souls mechanics (blood vials notwithstanding) that shifts the focus to tighter action without losing the essence. also level and enemy design wise it feels like it really builds on the lessons learned from demon's souls and dks1 (which dks2 kinda doesn't). unfortunately they sacrificed some freedom in customization (and therefore replayability) for the increased tightness. also chalice dungeons are a good idea with mediocre implementation. i guess theyre ok as a more fun alternative to regular grinding.

[joseph ¯\_(ツ)_/¯]

bloodborne is the first souls game I've actually wanted to replay, but I've been unable to find a build that's anywhere near as good for a straight pve playthrough as my first one and always stop halfway when I realize my character is trash and I'll have to go get chalice dungeon gems or something.

[s0]

souls games are the only games i want to replay

also you beat all bosses first try but let a "trash" character keep you from completing the game? wat a heck. you can beat the game with almost anything. chalice grinding isn't needed unless youre an arcane build. i mained the threaded cane once for an entire playthrough and i'm pretty sure i'm a much worse player than you.

[joseph ¯\_(ツ)_/¯]

also you beat all bosses first try but let a "trash" character keep you from completing the game? wat a heck. you can beat the game with almost anything. chalice grinding isn't needed unless youre an arcane build. i mained the threaded cane once for an entire playthrough and i'm pretty sure i'm a much worse player than you.

Part one: yes, it feels like I'm playing a game on an unlockable hard mode where every enemy has twice as much health but nothing else has changed and that doesn't appeal to me personally at all (see also, ng+.) I just have to do the exact same thing i already did, but with less mistakes and surprises. Feels routine.

Part two: yeah joke's on me guess what build I tried the hardest to do

edit: to elaborate, I was only trying substantially different builds -- bloodtinge and arcane. I don't really percieve str/dex as a different build, since all of the good weapons are quality, and the stam/vit curve you'd want on any given character feels pretty constant.

[s0]

since all of the good weapons are quality

that's not true at all. chikage is one of the best weapons in the game and is dex. the axe is also very good and is STR. same for the pizza cutter aka whirligig saw. also who says you have to use "good" weapons?

[SousaVilla]

Bloodtinge builds is one of the best builds in the game. I've tried an arcane/strength build using the tonitrus and then the moonlight sword and I did fine without ever farming for gems in the chalice dungeons. Isnt farming only required when you wanna turn a normal weapon into arcane? 

The chikage is dex/bld but yeah its great. The rifle spear is manly dex and is really good for pve. Blades of mercy is dex and its great. You can beat the game with most weapons and builds without turning into hardcore mode, the only exception could be trying pure arcane without a weapon with natural arcane scalling and no farming, but you shouldnt do this since is crazy.

[s0]

Bloodtinge builds is one of the best builds in the game. I've tried an arcane/strength build using the tonitrus and then the moonlight sword and I did fine without ever farming for gems in the chalice dungeons. Isnt farming only required when you wanna turn a normal weapon into arcane?

i guess, but my last arcane build was before the old hunters, so there was no moonlight sword, so it basically WAS about gemming normal weapons into arcane.

i mean the tonitrus is ok as a secondary weapon, but i would never main it. apparently blades of mercy with a hybrid skill/arcane build are very good but i havent tried it.

the blades are also a really neat weapon btw, since we were talking about non-quality weapons. actually the majority of the best weapons in the game aren't quality i'd say. ludwig's is the only exception.

[SousaVilla]

I have heard that using an arcane build with the blades is a waste, since you cant put fire/bolt/arcane gems in it and the arcane scalling is negligible. According to the internet, the best weapons to use for an arcane build are the ones with some special bonus from arcane (the wheel, the moonlight sword, the tonitrus and the kos parasite) or a normal weapon with arcane gems and/or all attack gems that you get through the main game. Then you can start farming in the chalice dungeons if you like. Check it out: http://bloodborne.wiki.fextralife.com/Pure+Souls+Arcane+Guide

The tonitrus got me really far in the game, so I dont know why the tonitrus hate   It can give a lot of damage on kin enemies in its transformed state with good arcane and it scales with strength as well. I would always recommend going for the tonitrus asap if you're trying an arcane build.

Another thing for arcane builds is to remember to use molotovs and the flamesprayer, two very useful tools often overlooked.  

EDIT: by the way, the tonitrus is so strong that they had to nerf it with the low durability.

[s0]

the tonitrus is good as far as damage, but low durability and constant need to charge are annoying. i also dislike the moveset personally.

i should really finish the dlc with my arcane build, because it adds quite a few good arcane weapons like the moonlight sword and the kos parasite. i used a mix of tonitrus and fire gemmed saw cleaver previously.

Another thing for arcane builds is to remember to use molotovs and the flamesprayer, two very useful tools often overlooked. 

yes, molotovs have become part of my playstyle for my arcane build. i also use some of the spells like executioner gloves. i never really warmed up (lol) to the flamesprayer tho. the problem tho is, you can't really stock up on molotovs until you either get to ng+ or unlock depth 4 chalice dungeons due to the blood echo cost.

[jwilliams]

The first part of Dark Souls is one of the best games I ever played. It reminded me one old game- Blade of Darkness, maybe because of that I enjoyed it so much. Unfortunately I don't have PS3 and PS4, so I played only DS 1 and 2, but the second part... it's not bad, but I felt that she was a bit.. easier maybe. I still remember an epic battle with Artorias and my butthurt with Manus from the first part)

[InfiniteStateMachine]

I think I'd have to play all 4 again to be sure but I could probably get on board with that. The changes to the combat in bloodborne were really nice.

here's my personal assessment of all 4 souls games:

i'd say in the end dark souls 1 is probably still the most enjoyable to play for me due to its flexibility.

demon's souls has some top notch level design and really good art direction/atmosphere and of course i'll never forget how it completely took me by surprise in 2009. but it has a few annoying mechanical quirks and balance problems that got improved on in the later games, as well as quite a few underwhelming boss fights.

dark souls 2 is like a souls megamix basically. it's a good game and it's fun if you like experimenting with lots of different gear and it's the best for organized pvp, however it has some level and boss design issues and lacks a lot of the interesting lore and subtle touches that make the other souls games so special. it's in some ways probably more flexible than dks1, but the flexibility is less meaningful and more like "here's a bunch of content, knock yourself out".

bloodborne is like the polar opposite of dks2. it's a really smart reimplementation of the souls mechanics (blood vials notwithstanding) that shifts the focus to tighter action without losing the essence. also level and enemy design wise it feels like it really builds on the lessons learned from demon's souls and dks1 (which dks2 kinda doesn't). unfortunately they sacrificed some freedom in customization (and therefore replayability) for the increased tightness. also chalice dungeons are a good idea with mediocre implementation. i guess theyre ok as a more fun alternative to regular grinding.

Here's mine

Demons Souls : Tied with Dark Souls as my favorite. This is because personally world design and environment probably appeals to me more than most people. Demons souls has a really twisted and interesting world. Boletaria I think is my favorite castle design across the games. Especially with the pacing they use where you return at a later point and realize 1-2 was not the end.

Some of the shortcuts in this game were really diabolical. The hole in 2-1 to get to the boss quicker I don't think i would have found without a companion to show me.

Dark Souls : Again,  tied with Demons Souls as my favorite.This game was the closest thing I've seen to a modern castlevania in regards to the game world. Easily the most coherent and well thought out world design for me. As I moved through the world I could very easily mentally map the area I was occupying in relation to the whole world. I remember thinking that I couldn't go any further under the world (I'm in magma!) and then finding the underground sea. Lots of great moments and feelings from the world design alone.

Dark Souls 2 : Your description is a perfect way to describe it. It does feel like a megamix. The world doesn't feel like it was designed holistically. It feels like a lot of levels grafted together.

The covenants and very obvious specific PvP areas made me feel something akin to "breaking the fourth wall". There was less of a feeling of discovery and the gameplay elements felt a lot more contrived.

That said, I've found that makes this game the only one where I don't resist looking up builds and strategies on the internet. I've made this game my designated sandbox for experimenting with DS gameplay and builds.

I'm currently working through the DLC on this one. The winter castle is ok so far. It's a little barren and some of the enemy arrangement is a tad boring. The final boss makes up for it a bit though.

Bloorborne : I'm really glad that the development team has no problem with ripping out a lot of the core design and trying something new each game. The combat changes are really nice. I really like that they altered it to move you towards a more agressive and dodge style of gameplay.

Less weapons that are more meaningful was also a good change.

As for the world. It's beautiful but a little repetitive. I'm also not a huge Lovecraft fan so some of that might be lost on me. I suspect part of the reason was simply cost. The art is of a way higher fidelity and it probably just costs more to make it so they have to employ a lot of reuse.

I haven't played the DLC yet. When I bought it I forgot I was just starting a NG+ so it will take me a while to get there.

souls games are the only games i want to replay

If you were to ask me I would say I want to replay a lot of games but Souls games are typically the only ones I ever DO replay 

[s0]

As for the world. It's beautiful but a little repetitive. I'm also not a huge Lovecraft fan so some of that might be lost on me. I suspect part of the reason was simply cost. The art is of a way higher fidelity and it probably just costs more to make it so they have to employ a lot of reuse.

i don't think they actually reuse that many assets. it's just a lot of similar looking locations because the world is just yharnam + surrounding areas. i actually like that tho, because i enjoy settings that are limited in scope.

also yes i do have a thing for lovecraft, which is probably why i enjoy the lore and etc so much. it's also not really a standard take on lovecraftian horror, firstly because it mixes the lovecraftian elements with liberal doses of gothic horror, secondly because it thematically differs from lovecraft in some key points, tho it borrows a lot of his motives.

also it should be noted that demon's souls was already pretty dang lovecraftian in a lot of aspects, which is probably why some people feel that bloodborne is a "sequel" to demon's. dark souls took a lot of that stuff out and went into a more "high fantasy" direction which is also cool.

Dark Souls 2 : Your description is a perfect way to describe it. It does feel like a megamix. Th world doesn't feel like it was designed holistically. It feels like a lot of levels grafted together.

that's because it IS a lot of levels grafted together. dks2 kinda has a troubled dev history. they basically had to fire one of the directors and start from scratch halfway through. though they decided to keep all the levels they designed for the old version and just rework them to somehow make them fit with the new ones. the game also just lacks direction in general and a lot of the more interesting ideas were thrown out. basically it feels like they couldn't decide whether to please old fans or bring in new players, so they kinda did both but neither of them very well. or at least i doubt that dks2 changed a lot of people's minds about souls as a series.

[InfiniteStateMachine]

As for the world. It's beautiful but a little repetitive. I'm also not a huge Lovecraft fan so some of that might be lost on me. I suspect part of the reason was simply cost. The art is of a way higher fidelity and it probably just costs more to make it so they have to employ a lot of reuse.

i don't think they actually reuse that many assets. it's just a lot of similar looking locations because the world is just yharnam + surrounding areas. i actually like that tho, because i enjoy settings that are limited in scope.

also yes i do have a thing for lovecraft, which is probably why i enjoy the lore and etc so much. it's also not really a standard take on lovecraftian horror, firstly because it mixes the lovecraftian elements with liberal doses of gothic horror, secondly because it thematically differs from lovecraft in some key points, tho it borrows a lot of his motives.

also it should be noted that demon's souls was already pretty dang lovecraftian in a lot of aspects, which is probably why some people feel that bloodborne is a "sequel" to demon's. dark souls took a lot of that stuff out and went into a more "high fantasy" direction which is also cool.

Dark Souls 2 : Your description is a perfect way to describe it. It does feel like a megamix. Th world doesn't feel like it was designed holistically. It feels like a lot of levels grafted together.

that's because it IS a lot of levels grafted together. dks2 kinda has a troubled dev history. they basically had to fire one of the directors and start from scratch halfway through. though they decided to keep all the levels they designed for the old version and just rework them to somehow make them fit with the new ones. the game also just lacks direction in general and a lot of the more interesting ideas were thrown out. basically it feels like they couldn't decide whether to please old fans or bring in new players, so they kinda did both but neither of them very well. or at least i doubt that dks2 changed a lot of people's minds about souls as a series.

Re Bloodborne : I think at the very least they seem to reuse a lot of materials and textures. Maybe not necessarily the geo.

Re DS2 : Ah that explains a lot. I wonder if that's why it seems to feel a lot more coherent later in the game.

[Raptor85]

DKS2 is basicly the only game in the series i haven't gone back to much since i first beat it, it's levels and design are just a downright yawn compared to the other games. And while, yes, due to some of the mechanics changes ORGANIZED pvp (not arenas, good god no, like actual fight clubs) is a bit better the soul level matching system basicly made organized pvp the only type you ever saw, I have an easier time invading and doing co-op in demon's souls than i do in dks2 :/ (though i hear that ring in the DLC greatly helps this, but honestly i can't be assed to buy the DLC for a game i didn't particularly like just to make it playable)

Open pvp in dks2 is probably the absolute worst of the series though, arenas and the rare invasion that actually suceeds it's just full havels dark weapon builds with infinite spell attunements of acid mist.  It's like pre-DLC ninjaflip giantdad in dks1 but 1000x worse.

[Glyph]

Nothing will be worse than fog ring in DkS 1.0...

Wow actually reading up on DkS 1.0 stuff was interesting. I remember having so much trouble my first time through and then steamrolling it thereafter, and while a lot of it may be attributable to skill there were some HUGE changes apparently:

Ways the patch makes the game harder: Nerfs on specific outlier gear and spells (most of which you wouldn't use first time through), nerfs on stability of smaller/medium shields (quite noticeable), nerfs on elemental weapon damage (not huge but noticeable), nerf on pyromancy (-20% damage).

Ways the patch made the game easier: Draw ranges massively lowered on most enemies (absolutely huge), soul drops increased (2-3x on regular enemies, ~10x on bosses), all non-elemental weapons have huge buffs to damage (larger than elemental was weakened), it's much harder to get cursed, curse no longer stacks (used to 4 times), most enemies have less shield stability/poise, some enemies do less damage/take more damage/have less health. Not really difficulty related so much as tedium related but merchants have larger inventories and more bonfires can be warped to. There are other very specific things (textures fixed = less falling deaths especially in CC/GH, can parry while blocking) but most had very small effects on difficulty.

Like the soul thing alone encourages you to play through the game at a lower level which has huge implications. And the draw range thing, I remember the area just after the bonfire in Undead Burg being much harder to get through since the guys in the room across the bridge would aggro soon enough to block you off. Some other interesting tidbits are that some enemies were weakened (no quantification though) and overall roll/parry frame data was supposedly buffed. Also I tend to remember bosses not giving humanity when killed before some patch, which isn't huge but made a difference.

[s0]

honestly tho i think the changes were for the better. playing through the entire catacombs without even getting 1 soul was dumb, so was not getting soul drops for many bosses. also blighttown ghouls aggroing on you before you can even see them was also annoying as shit.

also this gamefaqs post really understates the balance problems the game had before the patches. because lightning weapons were far and ahead the best thing in the game and elemental damage doesn't scale, there wasn't even really a point to leveling stats for proper scaling and etc.

also stacking curses were removed in a day 1 patch because they realized the idea was stupid. unless you declined installing the day 1 patch, you never played with stacking curses to begin with.

[s0]

Open pvp in dks2 is probably the absolute worst of the series though, arenas and the rare invasion that actually suceeds it's just full havels dark weapon builds with infinite spell attunements of acid mist.  It's like pre-DLC ninjaflip giantdad in dks1 but 1000x worse

in dks1 (pc version) there's an approx 50% chance of an invader being either a twink or a cheater who oneshots you with bare fists. so i kinda stopped bothering with invasions in that game. before the non-gfwl pc version i always had terrible connectivity.

i mean i don't pvp a lot in any souls game tbh. i thought demon's had the best pvp scene. what i'm saying is dks2 is better for organizing pvp.

[Thomas Finch]

I'm not really the PvP kinda guy in any game, but I love it in Bloodborne. It's intense and exciting and I never see cheaters (since it's on PS4 only). In Dark Souls 1, Silber is definitely right. Every time I got invaded I sighed because I knew it was just gonna be some prick trying to get a rise out of me by cheating. Usually I'd just let them kill me without any attempt to defend myself. Dark Souls 2 I don't think was thaaaaat bad. A lot less cheaters in my experience. Online play in Dark Souls 2 was badly designed though, for sure. Soul Memory is terrible.

[s0]

that said, the uncertainty and inherent awkwardness of the situation can also make random invasions really fun. i think it's best to treat them as a social experiment of sorts and not approach them with a MLG 420 NOSCOPE mindset.