RockmanPM Forums

Amatiramisu · **Reply #325 on:** May 15, 2016, 06:00:57 AM

Personally:

DaS > BB > DaS3 > DeS > DaS2

DeS is just far too dated for my tastes and I don't like a lot of the design decisions. DaS is a superior game by all regards.

ViperAcidZX · **Reply #326 on:** May 15, 2016, 07:12:31 AM

The only Souls game I ever really played is Dark Souls III since I got that from a giveaway (though I'm still on my very first playthough). I only played Demon's Souls a bit and some of Shadow Tower to get an idea of what the Souls games and it their spiritual predecessor King's Field is like.

Amatiramisu · **Reply #327 on:** May 15, 2016, 08:30:24 AM

Honestly Souls is a massive departure from Shadow Tower and Kings Field. I wouldn't compare them.

Blue Valkyrie · **Reply #328 on:** May 15, 2016, 02:30:02 PM

Quote from: THE Almighty Janitor on May 15, 2016, 08:30:24 AM

Honestly Souls is a massive departure from Shadow Tower and Kings Field. I wouldn't compare them.

Well no you should compare them since a majority of their themes come from those two series as well as some of the more basic game play elements. Yeah they are not first person but theres way to much lifted from the older games to say they shouldn't be compared.

My order of the games-still not sure how I'd place Dark Souls 3, but I've enjoyed my 5 Newgame+ runs overall and lookforward to the three DLCs coming later this year and next.

Demons Souls >> Dark Souls 3 >>> Dark Souls 2 >>> Bloodborne >>> Dark Souls

Shadow Tower Abyss is better than all of them though--It has Rurufon.

Nexus · **Reply #329 on:** May 30, 2016, 07:40:54 AM

Well I mean, if you really want to simulate a modern King's Field on crack..

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDShspLkux0[/youtube]

Blue Valkyrie · **Reply #330 on:** June 02, 2016, 04:22:27 PM

Link is broken but I know the mod your talking about. More like Rayman Field--Souls..Borne.

Amatiramisu · **Reply #331 on:** June 02, 2016, 08:40:27 PM

http://youtu.be/nDShspLkux0

gotchu fam

ViperAcidZX · **Reply #332 on:** August 25, 2016, 03:23:37 AM

Trailer for the first DLC of Dark Souls III.

[youtube]youtu.be/u5JCsO6eblw[/youtube]

In Ashes of Ariandel, you get to explore an frozen, undiscovered land to uncover its secrets. The DLC will also add new equipment, spells, challenges, a new PvP arena, and expands on Dark Souls III's story. It comes out on October 25th for PlayStation 4, Xbox One, and PC and will go for $14.99 USD. I guess I need to finish up Dark Souls III then...

Blue Valkyrie · **Reply #333 on:** August 25, 2016, 04:05:52 AM

Painted world of Aramis much.

Trailer sadly doesn't tell us much else. Kinda disapointed it's not Londor but hey theres still one expansion to go.

Amatiramisu · **Reply #334 on:** August 25, 2016, 10:00:03 AM

There's a few hints that it actually is Ariamis from what I've read 'round the net.

Fxeni · **Reply #335 on:** August 30, 2016, 01:05:57 AM

It's interesting to see how everyone rates the games differently. Mine is more or less along these lines:

BB > DaS > DeS = DaS3 > DaS2

Do note I'm more of a PvE guy for these games, although DaS3 I've dabbled a bit more into the PvP due to the trophy requirements. Rolling doesn't cost nearly enough stamina, and people seem to run away less when invading than in previous games (guess they're happy that I'm always alone instead of having 2 phantoms like most of their invasions).

The first DLC looks interesting, although I think Londor would have been cool. Oh well, From's DLC track record is pretty awesome so I'm sure it'll be good.

Flame · **Reply #336 on:** September 01, 2016, 07:40:44 AM

Quote from: Jonathan on May 15, 2016, 08:30:24 AM

Honestly Souls is a massive departure from Shadow Tower and Kings Field. I wouldn't compare them.

Demon's Souls is highly similar to King's Field though. for all intents and purposes, Demon's Souls is a third person King's Field. It's Dark Souls that is a big departure, mostly because it is derivative of Demon's, and therefore further removed from KF.

Dark Souls 2 however, gives me heavy King's Field vibes, and I'm not just talking the PS1 graphics.

Blue Valkyrie · **Reply #337 on:** September 01, 2016, 03:58:08 PM

Quote from: Flame on September 01, 2016, 07:40:44 AM

Dark Souls 2 however, gives me heavy King's Field vibes, and I'm not just talking the PS1 graphics.

The hidden sliding doors gave me warm KF fuzzies right away-as far as PS1 graphics all the games actually borrow some textures from KF and Shadow Tower.

Amatiramisu · **Reply #338 on:** November 11, 2016, 09:48:23 PM

Blue...

I really hate Dark Souls 3.

Blue Valkyrie · **Reply #339 on:** November 11, 2016, 10:04:12 PM

Quote from: Blue-Footed Booby on November 11, 2016, 09:48:23 PM

Blue...

I really hate Dark Souls 3.

Alright?

Amatiramisu · **Reply #340 on:** November 11, 2016, 10:50:56 PM

I WANT to like it but it railroads you so hard compared to 1 and 2 and it's just... Not as hard as the others. I'm up to Irithyll now and it just... Hasn't hit me yet. I've had my share of deaths sure, but it wasn't nearly as much of a hurdle for me to end up coming out on top.

Blue Valkyrie · **Reply #341 on:** November 11, 2016, 11:24:26 PM

Quote from: Blue-Footed Booby on November 11, 2016, 10:50:56 PM

I WANT to like it but it railroads you so hard compared to 1 and 2 and it's just... Not as hard as the others. I'm up to Irithyll now and it just... Hasn't hit me yet. I've had my share of deaths sure, but it wasn't nearly as much of a hurdle for me to end up coming out on top.

I think I died more in the Boreal Valley than I did in Anor Londo and Drangliek Castle combined honestly, it's a pretty challenging area IMO.

As for progression it's hardly a straight path.

Road of Sacrifices leads to Cathedral of the Deep and Farron Keep. Catacombs of Carthus lead to Irithyll of the Boreal Valley and to a hidden optional area While Irithyll leads to *insert Spoilers* and Irithyll Dungeon the later also leads to a hidden area.

The final area Lothric Castle also has two areas the castle and the garden the latter has a hidden area to find too.

Fxeni · **Reply #342 on:** November 12, 2016, 02:03:54 AM

Hmm... I think Irithyll Dungeon, Lothric Castle and one of the later hidden areas were the only spots that I feel hold up difficulty-wise (and ID is mostly in one room in particular), so I can sort of see that complaint. You might appreciate the DLC as it's kind of a step up from most of the main game, although it could be seen as being a little short.

What type of character are you playing?

Amatiramisu · **Reply #343 on:** November 12, 2016, 06:56:50 AM

I know spoilers for DS3 so no needing to hold back.

Still, having only a couple options for movement in 3 isn't really that much of an improvement where 1 let you traverse anywhere up to an orange fog or Sen's Fortress before the bells and 2 gave you Forest, Heide, and the Majula Pit from the getgo. Shaded Woods if you found a couple branches. In 3 you got... Swamp Episode 2 or Undead Settlement Episode 2 ft. the first of way too many cathedrals.

As for difficulty, Irythill had some trouble near the beginning until I realized I can literally just bait every enemy there into a combo and poke away with an estoc.

I'm running a melee quality build because DS3 seems to hate anything that can't attack in a split second. Estoc/Skill Shield/Farron Greatsword/Greatshield.

Above all it's just... So easy. I've had a good few deaths in catacombs and Irithyll sure, but at no time did I feel that I had to improve to overcome an area so much as "figure out how to bait a combo and also maybe upgrade a weapon sometimes."

Also it doesn't help that 3 really hates certain playstyles. The only boss that gave me issue was Abyss Watchers and even then that's because I was trying a greatsword because using my estoc felt like cheesing them. Everything in this game is too fast for so many of the strength weapons unless you're really good at spacing or have prior experience with the enemies. I end up wanting to use my FG (because I favor STR builds on my first run through each Souls game, 1 and 2 namely.) but ultimately I have to switch to the estoc because it's twice as effective.

I don't know. DS3 is still an above-average game but coupled with banking much of it's lore on DS1 nostalgia, completely retconning 2 (including the improvements like powerstancing and lances/twinblades, lifegems), little replayability, and entirely invalidating some builds because it thinks it's Bloodborne, I think it's just... Lazily designed.

Also I don't have the DLC because I've been playing my brother's pirate copy to gauge if I want to buy it properly, so that also eliminates co-op (which I rarely used in the other games anyway) and PVP (which isn't that great in 3 anyway).

Once again though, I really want to like DS3 more because it's still a Souls game which puts it above a lot of games released this year, and I have a lot of fun fighting the faster, more Bloodborne-inspired enemies. Abyss Watchers was [tornado fang]ing TIGHT, dude. I just feel like DS3 is... So lazy compared to DS1 which respected player agency more than any other game in the IP and DS2 which pushed it's own lore separate from 1 and added so many QoL improvements.

Blue Valkyrie · **Reply #344 on:** November 12, 2016, 03:26:07 PM

Heavier slower weapons will have a tougher time over R1 spammy weapons like the longsword.

I personaly use a Lothric Greatsword and thats it, so playing carefully is my bread and butter since I don't use heavy armor at all.

I will agree DS3 is a little R1 spammy but thats kinda trained me to deal with such players through the PvP thankfully.

As for the bloodborne comparison I agree, I kinda wish they gave us the same speed as Bloodborne because I feel a lot of the damage I take is mostly due to some weapons lacking the speed to react.

I still feel Demons Souls is the best game in the series as no other game favored slow and fast, melee and ranged combat so equally.

Amatiramisu · **Reply #345 on:** November 12, 2016, 05:58:46 PM

I still haven't played DeS or Bloodborne (though I impulse bought the latter not long ago) due to lacking the consoles, but didn't DS3 take it's fast/fatroll only system from DeS?

Blue Valkyrie · **Reply #346 on:** November 13, 2016, 03:13:05 AM

Quote from: Blue-Footed Booby on November 12, 2016, 05:58:46 PM

I still haven't played DeS or Bloodborne (though I impulse bought the latter not long ago) due to lacking the consoles, but didn't DS3 take it's fast/fatroll only system from DeS?

I'd say Demons Souls feels faster than Dark Souls 1 but still slower than Bloodborne. So yeah not to much off from Dark Souls 3 although the enemies are not Bloodborne levels of fast.

Amatiramisu · **Reply #347 on:** November 13, 2016, 05:53:49 AM

Much flak as it gets, I think the distinction between Souls and Bloodborne is best shown by DS2. The combat in 2 involved a lot, and I mean a LOT more careful spacing and stamina management (because almost everything ate up stamina like a [sonic slicer], even rolls) and was all-in-all very, very, very methodical. Almost everything was viable because of the way combat worked, and there's even proper arguments for playing locked-on versus unlocked combat styles. I agree that 2's balancing is heavily biased with PVP in mind but it loans itself to PVE just as well.

3 trying to mix the two was a misstep because the very nature of Souls combat loans itself to defensive gameplay when 3's mechanics want you to be even more offensive because of the hyper-aggressive enemies invalidating your defense. Rolls throw you around way too far to follow up on a good dodge. (Which could've been alleviated by just... Actually following through on the Bloodborne emulation and making the character only step aside when targeted.) Way too many times I find myself just mashing B to get some damn breathing room (which should be punished, not encouraged, as panic rolls were easy to punish even by AI enemies in 1 and 2) and then just getting to stunlock the enemy - again - with an estoc R1 spam.

Blue Valkyrie · **Reply #348 on:** November 13, 2016, 02:33:49 PM

Quote from: Blue-Footed Booby on November 13, 2016, 05:53:49 AM

Much flak as it gets, I think the distinction between Souls and Bloodborne is best shown by DS2. The combat in 2 involved a lot, and I mean a LOT more careful spacing and stamina management (because almost everything ate up stamina like a [sonic slicer], even rolls) and was all-in-all very, very, very methodical. Almost everything was viable because of the way combat worked, and there's even proper arguments for playing locked-on versus unlocked combat styles. I agree that 2's balancing is heavily biased with PVP in mind but it loans itself to PVE just as well.

I feel a majority of the flak DS2 gets is unfair, yes their was some drama leading to some odd level design in the main game but the DLCs more than made up for it by giving us some of the most creative areas in a souls game. I really enjoyed 2's combat, and it remains the most solid PvP experience for me. As you said everything was viable in Dark Souls 2 (well minus lightning spells I guess

) so there was also alot of replay value to the game.

Quote from: Blue-Footed Booby on November 13, 2016, 05:53:49 AM

3 trying to mix the two was a misstep because the very nature of Souls combat loans itself to defensive gameplay when 3's mechanics want you to be even more offensive because of the hyper-aggressive enemies invalidating your defense. Rolls throw you around way too far to follow up on a good dodge. (Which could've been alleviated by just... Actually following through on the Bloodborne emulation and making the character only step aside when targeted.) Way too many times I find myself just mashing B to get some damn breathing room (which should be punished, not encouraged, as panic rolls were easy to punish even by AI enemies in 1 and 2) and then just getting to stunlock the enemy - again - with an estoc R1 spam.

I feel Miazaki has been having a hard-on for super fast aggressive enemies since Artorias of the Abyss, with bosses like Orphan of Kos pushing it waaaay to for into "How the hell do I react to this [parasitic bomb]?!" territory.

I feel Fire Lurker, Artorias, Manus, and Fume Knight, Farron Knights and Soul of Cinder (to give dark souls 3 credit) are some of the best examples of fast aggressive bosses done right though.

Pontiff Sullivan, Orphan of Kos, and Sanctuary Gaurdian can do die in a fire, terrible bosses.

Amatiramisu · **Reply #349 on:** November 13, 2016, 10:40:40 PM

Oooh yeah. I noticed that in AotA as well. I genuinely had to change my entire set from EK/Havel to full Gold-Hemmed Black (and later Chester set) in order to stay competitive in that entire DLC, which is a major no-no. (Granted, Chester + Pharis Hat became my Fashion Souls set for NG+ so I can forgive it a bit.) It forced me out of the mid-roll tank playstyle I was accustomed to into DODGE EVERYTHING OR [tornado fang]ing DIE. Which I thought was cool at first but then later realized that this is not exactly balanced.

Fume Knight is the best example imo, because while he was difficult, without changing my playstyle I was still able to overcome him after only a few tries.

Also I forgot to mention earlier that BB also had the whole rally HP-regen system that I entirely forgot, which made aggressive play more viable than DS3. I'd forgive a lot if you could regen from counterattacking in 3.

But uh... Yeah... Miracles in DS2 are... Sad. I'm amazed even after all the massive nerfs Sorcery got since vanilla, it's still the twink magic of choice.

Honestly, given my bias for DS2, my rankings have shifted to:

DS2 > BB > DS1 > DeS > DS3

Which, again, I'm heavily biased with 2 being my favorite. I know 2 has a lot of problems. Plus actually playing DeS (I've at least had BB in my hands for a good ten minutes as well as watching a fuckton of streams) would prooobably shift that around a bit.

News

Dark Souls