Dark Souls

Acid · 57994

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Blue Valkyrie

  • Master's Unit
  • *
    • Posts: 3916
    • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Reply #250 on: August 04, 2015, 11:13:12 PM
I'm so happy to see Dark Souls III is using the bloodborne engine, looks amazing.



Offline Fxeni

  • Master's Unit
  • *
    • Posts: 4552
    • Gender: Male
  • Shall we?
    • View Profile
Reply #251 on: August 05, 2015, 03:05:48 AM
It's looking good... the monsters seem to have more variety already than DS2, so that's cool.



Offline Flame

  • The obsessive
  • RPM Soldier
  • ****
    • Posts: 16013
    • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Reply #252 on: August 06, 2015, 08:54:12 AM
and we got some gameplay

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ha8eRiP0DmI

looking good, but after DaS2 and Bloodborne, I cant help but pick apart "what will be removed in the downgrade"

like that random chair at the start.

...When Larry the reploid accountant goes maverick of his own accord, he's certainly formidable during tax season, but he isn't going to provide X the challenge needed to make him grow as a warrior and reach his potential.


Offline Blue Valkyrie

  • Master's Unit
  • *
    • Posts: 3916
    • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Reply #253 on: August 11, 2015, 04:14:27 AM
Dark Souls II suffered for that more than Bloodborne though, like a whole mechanic that it took an HD release to kinda put back in. X_x




Offline Kieran

  • He's just a
  • SA-Class Hunter
  • *
    • Posts: 836
    • View Profile
Reply #254 on: August 12, 2015, 02:47:45 AM
Which particular mechanic was that?

The Other Side
http://www.crowdedstreet.net
irc.esper.net #theotherside

Commander Shepard: *stares blankly at a video of scantily clad asari dancers* ...What kind of hotel is this?
Liara T'Soni: It is a luxury resort with an... exotic edge.  Azure is slang for a part of the asari body in some places on Illium.
Shepard: Where?
Liara: The lower reaches, near the bottom.
Shepard: I meant, "where on the asari body?"
Liara: So did I.


Offline Blue Valkyrie

  • Master's Unit
  • *
    • Posts: 3916
    • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Reply #255 on: August 12, 2015, 03:02:21 AM
They boasted about how important the torch mechanic would be in Dark Souls II but they basicly removed it for unknown reasons. They kinda but it back in the HD version although it was not the same as the early releases.



Offline Kieran

  • He's just a
  • SA-Class Hunter
  • *
    • Posts: 836
    • View Profile
Reply #256 on: August 12, 2015, 06:02:50 AM
"Unknown reasons" essentially being "there's no way the PS3 and 360 can handle these lighting effects, so let's go back to DX9 and dumb everything down so the game will actually run on consoles."

And I don't know how high you people crank your brightness settings, but there were plenty of places in the vanilla PC version where I needed to use a torch to see what the hell I was doing.

The Other Side
http://www.crowdedstreet.net
irc.esper.net #theotherside

Commander Shepard: *stares blankly at a video of scantily clad asari dancers* ...What kind of hotel is this?
Liara T'Soni: It is a luxury resort with an... exotic edge.  Azure is slang for a part of the asari body in some places on Illium.
Shepard: Where?
Liara: The lower reaches, near the bottom.
Shepard: I meant, "where on the asari body?"
Liara: So did I.


Offline Da Dood

  • SA-Class Hunter
  • *
    • Posts: 891
    • Gender: Male
  • Dood Trigger!
    • View Profile
Reply #257 on: August 12, 2015, 03:19:30 PM
It blows my mind that someone actually thought being forced to light a torch to see anything would have been interesting for the entire game. You should never have to sacrifice like 3 different play styles just to see what's in front of you. Double handing, shielding, dual wielding, powerstancing, all of that would have been hurt if you had to choose between fighting or having a decent light. It's just a really dumb idea and I have trouble understanding why people go out of their way to defend it.


Offline Blue Valkyrie

  • Master's Unit
  • *
    • Posts: 3916
    • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Reply #258 on: August 12, 2015, 10:13:59 PM
Because a torch and dark areas add soooo much to the game's atmosphere and level design and allow the devs to do neat an interesting things with the darkness, people defend it because they want to be immersed in a creepy environment and thats like half the point of the Souls series.  >.>

Plus not being able to block while using a torch keeps things interesting, and keeps the player out of their safe zone. At least thats my reasoning.



Offline Da Dood

  • SA-Class Hunter
  • *
    • Posts: 891
    • Gender: Male
  • Dood Trigger!
    • View Profile
Reply #259 on: August 12, 2015, 11:58:45 PM
You wouldn't just be unable to block, though. You wouldn't be able to block, parry, double wield, powerstance, buff. So many things that you'd lose and/or be forced to alternate with having the ability to see. Just imagine doing 120+ hours of that. There is no way that that sacrifice would be worth it for atmosphere (even because these games already do atmosphere pretty well, so why would people not want to see all those beautiful areas? It's just... so dumb...).

To me this sounds more like a cool idea in people's minds than anything. I'm glad they never went through with it. Horror games have been doing atmosphere well since forever and being trapped in a dark place does not mean you shouldn't be able to see the game you're playing.


Offline Blue Valkyrie

  • Master's Unit
  • *
    • Posts: 3916
    • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Reply #260 on: August 13, 2015, 12:47:52 AM
Slight flaw with your WHOLE argument though. No one EVER said all of Dark Souls II was going to need the torch just certain areas where it made sense. NO ONE is saying the whole game should be like that or Dark Souls III for that matter.

Also they did go through with the "cool" idea, Bloodborne. And again in Dark Souls III this isn't some untested idea--it's a tried and true mechanic that dates back to Shadow Tower. Hell Demons Souls had some dark areas in the same vein--people complained that Dark Souls 1 was too bright (minus the tomb of the giants) and it was so they wanted to make the sequel literally darker with more dynamic lightning and a torch system that would be used in certain darker areas.



Offline Da Dood

  • SA-Class Hunter
  • *
    • Posts: 891
    • Gender: Male
  • Dood Trigger!
    • View Profile
Reply #261 on: August 13, 2015, 01:47:56 AM
I'm not saying they can't do clever things with darkness, and I'm not saying the dynamic lighting wouldn't have looked great. I'm talking about the idea of making people choose between seeing things and fighting with their own preferred style. And there is nothing mechanical about darkness. It's just an obstacle, no matter how far back it dates (there are even older games that do that... and it was still dumb... >_>).

In Dead Space you feel like you're in a crazy dark place simply because the presentation is good. But everything you see is perfectly clear. They don't have to hinder the player to get them scared.

And YES, it was going to be the entire game. I'm sure there would have been bright areas still, but the bulk of the game was definitely supposed to be indoors without a proper source of light. Just look at the actual game and count how many areas are buildings, towers, caves and dungeons. Huntsman's Copse and FoFG were extremely dark in early videos. It would get old super fast.


Offline Blue Valkyrie

  • Master's Unit
  • *
    • Posts: 3916
    • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Reply #262 on: August 13, 2015, 01:59:12 AM
No it wasn't, they just showed it a lot in early footage since it was a new mechanic; the dev team NEVER said it was going to be. As for not being able to fight as well with one--you DON'T NEED to block or use powerstance all the time to win.

besides you could fight just fine with a torch in Bloodborne--the old city it was a great weapon choice for the enemies there even. Torch is also a popular side weapon for Arcana heavy builds.



Offline Da Dood

  • SA-Class Hunter
  • *
    • Posts: 891
    • Gender: Male
  • Dood Trigger!
    • View Profile
Reply #263 on: August 13, 2015, 02:03:44 AM
Again, they didn't have to say it, all you have to do is look at the game's areas. You don't need to block or use powerstance to win, but you may want to, and that's a very unwelcome limitation in such an open and customizable game like Dark Souls.

Actually, now that I think about it, there are games where I think drowning the world in darkness works pretty well, like in Silent Hill. But in that game your choice is always between fighting or running. My beef with this idea in Dark Souls is that the combat is so good and technical, it doesn't make a lot of sense to force people to be conflicted about it.


Offline Blue Valkyrie

  • Master's Unit
  • *
    • Posts: 3916
    • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Reply #264 on: August 13, 2015, 02:07:25 AM
Again, they didn't have to say it, all you have to do is look at the game's areas.

The only areas we ever saw the early lighting in was Forest of the Giants (beta) version and the Hunter's Copse from the network test. Not even 10% of the game's content, not even 5% really. >.>



Offline Da Dood

  • SA-Class Hunter
  • *
    • Posts: 891
    • Gender: Male
  • Dood Trigger!
    • View Profile
Reply #265 on: August 13, 2015, 02:11:24 AM
Because Gutter, Black Gulch, Amana, Undead Crypt, Wharf, Bastille, Darklurker caves, Grave of Saints, Drangleic Castle and literally every single building must have looked so much brighter than those? >_>


Offline Blue Valkyrie

  • Master's Unit
  • *
    • Posts: 3916
    • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Reply #266 on: August 13, 2015, 02:15:42 AM
Out of all those areas only Gutter, Black Gulch and the Crypt really lacked any light though.

The rest either had some light source (moon, magic or other wise) or were at least dimly lit. What I'm saying is they stated it the torch system was going to be used in SOME areas not all. That article you linked even says that.

Ever notice how the Abyss isn't really dark just a well lit black void? >.>



Offline Da Dood

  • SA-Class Hunter
  • *
    • Posts: 891
    • Gender: Male
  • Dood Trigger!
    • View Profile
Reply #267 on: August 13, 2015, 02:20:40 AM
In the final game, sure, they do have light sources. But if FoFG and Copse were that dark, just imagine the rest. But to be honest, I guess I'm not being totally fair just wondering how everything might have been.


Offline Blue Valkyrie

  • Master's Unit
  • *
    • Posts: 3916
    • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Reply #268 on: August 13, 2015, 02:56:03 AM
Well I meant you can see light sources, more than a few areas are either at dusk or have a visible moon. The Warf you can see the moon out that opening for example.



Offline Flame

  • The obsessive
  • RPM Soldier
  • ****
    • Posts: 16013
    • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Reply #269 on: August 13, 2015, 03:47:07 AM
Do understand that the game underwent 2 MAJOR catastrophes in development.

First, when it was just Shibuya as Director, DaS2 was going to be an open world game. early concept art specifically shows vast distances between the CU and the destination. They make a big deal about the game taking place on the whole continent of Drangleic.

Bamco decided they didnt like that and told them to make it more like Dark Souls 1. At which point, Tanimura was inserted as co-director, and they had to completely reimagine everything, but without starting from scratch because they didnt have the time. From there they also ended up having to downgrade the game and rush it out.

So you have some poorly connected areas, like Earthen peak to Iron keep, where Earthen peak was originally going to lead to the undead crypt, where the Rotten was going to be the boss. (which is why EP has those crypt guardians) Harvest valley was originally about you activating windmills to blow away the poison fog, not burn a windmill.

Amana would have led to Shulva, and the Dragon Shrine would have been the actual Castle Drangleic. Something painfully obvious from the intro to the game, which was clearly made very early before the development troubles.

in all this is the torch and lighting mechanic. DaS2 has in many areas, dynamic lighting of some sort. So, certain areas would be pitch black and need a torch to traverse. It was a gimmick. That hallway in the forest, and also The Lost Sinner, who is clearly meant to be in pitch black darkness to sort of motivate you to do the gargoyles for the key to light the room up. And the Gutter. The lighting was scrapped because lolconsoles, and so we'll never know what the game with the original lighting wouldve been like.

Personally, I'm of the theory that DaS2 was originally meant to be on the PS4, but that Bamco made them push it back onto the last gen so it wouldnt have to compete with Bloodborne.

...When Larry the reploid accountant goes maverick of his own accord, he's certainly formidable during tax season, but he isn't going to provide X the challenge needed to make him grow as a warrior and reach his potential.


Offline Blue Valkyrie

  • Master's Unit
  • *
    • Posts: 3916
    • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Reply #270 on: August 13, 2015, 04:56:22 AM
I heard about that, I admit I would have liked to see how it would have been in it's original form. Not that I dislike the DS2 we got, more repayable than Bloodborne for me.   8D



Offline Fxeni

  • Master's Unit
  • *
    • Posts: 4552
    • Gender: Male
  • Shall we?
    • View Profile
Reply #271 on: August 15, 2015, 03:21:24 AM
It's amazing how much these games that are quite similar in nature can cause people to have such differing opinions about them. For me, Bloodborne is at the top of the replayability list, while DS2 is at the bottom.



Offline Blue Valkyrie

  • Master's Unit
  • *
    • Posts: 3916
    • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Reply #272 on: August 15, 2015, 04:29:21 AM
Oh I love Bloodborne but it lacks a wide variety of weapons and armor and the online is pretty limited compared to Dark Souls 1 and 2.

They may be similar true but playing Bloodborne feels very different than souls. Like night and day.



Offline Flame

  • The obsessive
  • RPM Soldier
  • ****
    • Posts: 16013
    • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Reply #273 on: August 16, 2015, 07:11:43 AM
gotta agree. Its fun, but IMO its just not worth more than the initial playthrough. and theres next to no content. in past souls games, especially the dark souls games, getting random drops of sets and weapons from enemies added to the diversity of content and playstyles. in BB, you cant get so much as a shitty axe. the only things you find are the pre-set items that will always be optained from the same corpses or killing the same NPC. The only variety is in gems you can get from enemies, and even then, ONLY from high level enemies, same from bloodstone. which of course, means you have to grind chalice dungeons for them. which themselves just have nothing to offer. Sure, there's 2 unique sets and 1 weapon, but thats it. And there's how many chalices? with how many layers each? and the loot is basically just blood gems or more ritual material? Or just different versions of the weapons you already have, whos only difference is having different gem slots and a fancier name? thats just lame.

its just a lacking game. And while I hope the DLC adds more content, (DaS2's DLC added s shitton of it, especially to the gameplay aspect) I'm seriously considering just selling my PS4, since Bloodborne just wasnt worth it.

...When Larry the reploid accountant goes maverick of his own accord, he's certainly formidable during tax season, but he isn't going to provide X the challenge needed to make him grow as a warrior and reach his potential.


Offline Fxeni

  • Master's Unit
  • *
    • Posts: 4552
    • Gender: Male
  • Shall we?
    • View Profile
Reply #274 on: August 16, 2015, 06:09:01 PM
I kinda like that every weapon is actually viable and different in its own right in Bloodborne. You can't say that whatsoever for the Souls games, particularly in the PVP aspect of the game where the majority of people tend to gravitate towards the same items anyways.

As far as random drops... you liked grinding the same enemies over and over just to get a specific weapon or to complete a set? Or in Dark Souls 2's case, having to up the difficulty of an area with a Bonfire Ascetic just so that you can continue grinding said enemies some more for the potential chance of getting a random item drop? Go for it; I can live without that.

As for game content... I'm satisfied with what I got. Is it shorter than the Souls games? Yeah, it is, I'm not going to deny that. Is that a bad thing? Not necessarily; I'm more inclined to go through Bloodborne again than trudging through Dark Souls 2, that's for sure. The areas are designed well and are fun to play through, which is more than enough for me. All the optional areas certainly add length to the game as well.

"But what about the lack of magic?" you may ask. I never cared much for the magic in the Souls games, to be perfectly honest. I tried making mages a few times, and I pretty much got bored halfway through (or earlier) each time. Then we have the PVP mages, who are expert chickens that hide behind every enemy along the way because they don't do melee (doesn't apply to every player obviously, but this is the majority of my experience). Having a game that focuses more on the melee aspect? Just right for me.

The weakest link for me in Bloodborne is the Chalice dungeons. They clearly put a lot of effort into them, but due to their random nature they lose all the atmosphere and tight level design that the main game has. The unique boss fights in them just doesn't make up for the rest of the stuff in there.

Anways, I'm looking forward to the DLC for Bloodborne, as well as Dark Souls 3. The Stance stuff they have going in Dark Souls 3 looks like it borrows aspects from the Trick weapons of Bloodborne, which makes me look forward to the melee fighting. I might use a spell here or there like in the other Souls games, but unless they do something more interesting with it I'm most likely not ever going to have a mage.