Jump to content
rllmuk
Sign in to follow this  
idiwa

Which Dark Souls?

Recommended Posts

I have got as far as the Capra Demon three times in about 7 years (most recently on the switch).

 

On my last try I got the bastard down to his last slither of health by lobbing all my firebombs at him, at which point I took my eye off the ball and started celebrating only to be interrupted by his stupid jump attack killing me.

 

Haven't gone back to it since. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Vemsie said:

 

Which bosses? Some of the DLC bosses are ace, like Fume Knight, but the main game has nothing on bosses like Ornstein and Smough, Father Gascoigne, The Nameless King, The Two Princes, The Abyss Watchers and Sekiro bosses like 

  Reveal hidden contents

Demon of Hatred, Owl and Sword-saint Isshin.

 

I can only recall the really crappy ones, like the rats. 

 

But to each his own of course, I think Sekiro has the best bosses, followed by Bloodborne = DS3, DS, DS2.

 

I guess I just prefer more agressive, faster-paced stuff. I hope Elden Ring caters to that playstyle as well.

 

There are a couple of things in DS2 I really like though. The hub, the torch mechanic, the increased magic options and the harbour and Bastille with its two different entry points are ace levels.

 

Haha yes the rats was indeed a shitty boss :lol: 

 

Fume knight was excellent, same goes with ivory king and Sinh, the Slumbering Dragon, looking glass knight, smelter demon, elana, sir alonne. I have yet to play Bloodborne....I'm starting that one tonight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, KRP said:

I have got as far as the Capra Demon three times in about 7 years (most recently on the switch).

 

On my last try I got the bastard down to his last slither of health by lobbing all my firebombs at him, at which point I took my eye off the ball and started celebrating only to be interrupted by his stupid jump attack killing me.

 

Haven't gone back to it since. 

 

Terribly designed boss. It’s ok that you gave up here though because the game nosedives in quality after this point. 

  • Downvote 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Uncle Nasty said:

 

It just reminds me of how much of DS3 was spent running across nondescript areas, courtyards and cathedrals. Yes it has particle effects and lighting. But it communicates nothing. It's not memorable or iconic. The bridge you linked to in DS is one of the first big holy shit moments in the game. So much happens there that it burns into your brain forever. The graphics are perfect for what it's trying to show you. It doesn't need "improving" with particle effects or other noise.

Each to their own then, I guess. I absolutely love all of them (although I’ve never played 2), but 3 is easily the best looking for me.

 

Just to reiterate, I wasn’t talking about level design, environmental storytelling or any of the other stuff people keep mentioning. I’m just talking exclusively from an aesthetic angle.

 

It was only a quick reply to someone who said that the DS1 remaster was the best looking of the lot and it’s all gone full RLLMUK!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Blunted said:

Surely there is more to the "look" of a game than particles and resolution though?

Enough. I’m done. I think DS3 is infinitely better looking than DS1. The end. You can all think whatever you like.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody has even replied yet with what is the only correct answer - all of them.

 

Play all of them at some point, and play them all in as many different ways and playstyles as you can.

 

Plus dont forget Demons Souls. You did ask “Which Dark Souls?”, but the game where it all began was, and still is, absolutely wonderful. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Uncle Nasty said:

 

3 just wasn't as memorable. The locations weren't as iconic or creatively twisted as the first game. There was less of a focus on exploration and interconnected level design, so despite technically being more advanced and modern, a lot of 3 was generic (or just plain awful, like the swamp which was far worse than even the midway slump in DS) and forgettable. Yes, flashier particles and textures, but the world building didn't have the same impact.

 

I can't think of anything in 3 that improved on the original, and a lot of it was clearly worse - having to go back to the hub to level was a step back, lack of merchant variety, less creativity in the boss designs, samey level design, less atmosphere, even the actual goal of what you were doing was less compelling. Still a good game though.

 

 

 

The weapon arts.

 

Plus Cathedral of the Deep and Grand Archives are up there with the best in terms of level design.

 

I liked the swamp level :lol:

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, the_debaser said:

It’s ok that you gave up here though because the game nosedives in quality after this point. 

 

Well you're technically correct in that Capra is followed by the first few rooms of the Depths, with the dogs in the floodwater. That's not a very good bit of the game.

 

Then you get to the Butcher and the Depths proper, and it improves again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because most people presumably have their PS3 tucked away most of the time and Dark Souls is better?

 

DeS is fucking excellent, mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Darwock said:

Why is it that Demon's Souls is always overlooked? We are on page 3 and only two people have even mentioned it.

I personally prefered the monster/enemy design and Nexus hubworld of Demon's Souls to Dark Souls but both are brilliant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Demons is good, and I think if anything the lore of that one might edge even Dark Souls, but it's unrefined in comparison, is even more esoteric - Jesus the upgrade paths - there's still no option other than a PS3 to play it. Plus the servers are down. It is an excellent game.though and has peaks to match nearly anything else in the series.

 

I've a soft spot for DS2, despite it being a mess. I racked 100s of hours on it, at least as many as DS ducking about. The DLC is excellent too.

 

But nothing beats the original DS. Even subsequent game has highlighted how well put together that world is, just a perfectly linked little model, which constantly throws up little secrets and hidden depth. No.other From.game, not even Bloodborne gets near it. They all essentially go for a spike and wheel arrangement in comparison. I can see why From simplified the world traversal. But the back and from, intimately knowing areas is what absolutely makes  Dark Souls.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DS2 > DS3, I genuinely think it's more varied and interesting. Everyone talks about how good the DLC for 2 was, but there are just as many locations from the base game etched into my mind. I can barely remember a thing about DS3, it was tough in places but lacked teeth.

  • Upvote 4
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't make me weigh in on this never-ending argument. Even though i'm a relic and the days of "Sir Curtis" are distant memories buried in pages 1-30 of all the Souls threads. 

For me, 'the best' and 'my favourite' never match up.


 

I have such a personal connection to Demon's Souls (triple Platinum, different servers/playerbase each release, 5am PvP sessions in 4-1 with a beautifully esoteric crowd of Japanese players). Makes it my absolute favourite. But that's not to say its the best.


 

Dark Souls: The one that got the attention of the masses (myself not included having spent maybe 1600 hours on Demon's at this point) is a game of two halves. And without sounding like a broken record: everything up to and including Anor Londo (& Painted World) is 10/10! After that it falls off drastically. It's only rated so highly because thats when everyone got onboard.


 

Dark Souls 2: The lack of Miyazaki is evident. The 'fingered/tree branch' layout of the overworld and plethora of bonfires rubbed everybody up the wrong way. And yes, there were way too many humanoid armoured bosses. But, there's a lot to love about it. I hold it in high regard especially after the Scholar remix (which they could've easily sold as optional DLC to all the games - think about it - you know the game inside out, so why not fuck with the enemy placements to keep you on your toes? A gimmick for sure. But it keeps you playing). My absolute favourite campaign on any of these games was the 'no bonfire' run. And I challenge any of you who says “Dark Souls 2 sucks”, to play it without bonfires. Then you'll appreciate how good it is. And how good it feels to beat that boss at the end of that particular branch, just so you can warp back home.


 

Dark Souls 3: A nice throw back. But because of From's output, we were all getting a little bit jaded by this point. Its a lovely swan-song, but it did nothing new for the franchise. The DLC was excellent, and in my personal opinion the final boss of DLC3 is the greatest encounter i've ever witnessed, and a beautiful send off to the series.

 

Bloodborne: Before the DLC it was a 1-and-done game which i quickly dismissed and shelved upon completion. Only to return after they added build diversity which changed the game completely! Now I understand its utter brilliance!


 

Sekiro: I honestly cannot get on with it. Difficulty has never been a problem. I have never attempted a boss more than 4-5 times before succeeding. Its the regimented one note (read: rhythm action) approach which doesn't appeal to me at all. I like to experiment, and try things out for myself. Not dance to the beat of someone else's drum.


 

So yeah. I typed all that and still refuse to rank them. I love them all in different ways for very different reasons. Roll on Elden Ring.

 

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, jonamok said:

Define better looking. I think Boletarian Palace is ‘better looking’ than any of DS3.

 

And I even have eyes!

 

I think Bloodborne is better looking than all of them.

 

In fairness, I have no eyes barring the hundreds now facing my inner skull.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bloodborne has a singular (dual?) Purity of atmosphere and it frankly nails it. It also has the best lore. And some of the best enemies. 

 

Dark Souls has that 'oh fuck I'm not sure I'm supposed to be here' vibe and it nails that. It has a lot of nods to ICO. 

 

Both are the best. 

 

I'd say play Dark Souls Remastered and Bloodborne and then go where you like. You must play Bloodborne. I wish they'd patch it for Pro to remove the aliasing and chromatic aberration. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Benny said:

It's quite odd actually that it seems like the best parts of all of the Soulsborne games are their DLC.

It sort of makes sense. They have a bit of time to allow them to bed in and tune them. 

 

I still haven't played the DLC for any of the dark souls games! Bloodborne is the only one I have. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Darwock said:

Why is it that Demon's Souls is always overlooked? We are on page 3 and only two people have even mentioned it.


Less people have played it. That's why we need that remake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really should play Demon’s, Dark Souls 2 and Bloodborne at some point. Once I’ve finished Sekiro, that lot should keep me going until Elden Ring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I envy the OP.

 

Imagine not having played these games, and to have them all lined up ready to attack!

 

Makes me wish I had a week off work and a lobotomy.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Demon's Souls is the best introduction, followed by Dark Souls.

 

I could never got on with Bloodborne. The atmosphere was too unrelentingly bleak for me and I preferred the slower, more methodical and defensive combat of the Souls games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I noticed Steam is having a Dark Souls sale at the moment. Is it worth upgrading DSII to the Scholar of the First Sin edition? I never played the DLC. Might pick up the DSIII DLC if that's supposed to be good too?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Benny said:

I noticed Steam is having a Dark Souls sale at the moment. Is it worth upgrading DSII to the Scholar of the First Sin edition? I never played the DLC. Might pick up the DSIII DLC if that's supposed to be good too?

 

The DS2 (especially) and the DS3 DLC are both great. Cant really go wrong for what is probably only a few quid!

 

Scholar of the First Sin definitely improves the main game. I would say it depends on how recently it was you played DS2. If you havent played it for a while then go for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Curtis said:

 

Dark Souls: The one that got the attention of the masses (myself not included having spent maybe 1600 hours on Demon's at this point) is a game of two halves. And without sounding like a broken record: everything up to and including Anor Londo (& Painted World) is 10/10! After that it falls off drastically. It's only rated so highly because thats when everyone got onboard.

 

 

People keep saying this, but as per up thread, I really disagree. Post Anor Londo you have Dukes Archives, Tomb of the Giants, New Londo and Lost Izalith. Of those, only really Lost Izalith is a bit crap, and even then one of the more interesting quest lines goes there. Duke's is both one of the prettier and more unsettling bits of the game, and Tomb of Giants gimmick makes it oppressive. New Londo has the Dark Wraiths, fun and challenging to fight, though the run to it is annoying. All the bits are good for lore if you are into it. 

 

And by now we can consider the DLC as part of the game in the round - it's hard to buy it without it now - and it is truly excellent, right from stepping in the portal. Ultra aggressive bosses weren't overused at the time too, and it had even more impact. 

 

TL;DR Dark Souls is the game of forever. 

  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15/06/2019 at 18:23, mdn2 said:

Dark Souls

Bloodborne

Dark Souls 3

Sekiro

Dark Souls 2

 

In that order. 

 

But that way he will never play dark souls 2 :(

 

you must start with 2

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.