Jump to content

The ultimate question: which From Software Souls game is the best?


Which From Software Souls game is the best?  

251 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

Sekiro was good but such a one pump chump. When the credits roll there's nothing to see. I think Nioh 2 is a far superior game with way more depth.

 

As far as From's games go, Bloodborne is easily the best. Dark Souls 1 was close to perfect until you light the kiln and then it takes a big dip. Bloodborne is amazing throughout. Even the non random Chalice dungeons were great.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, the_debaser said:

I’d say Demon’s Souls. The other games are too hard. 

 

? That's the hardest one aside from maybe Sekiro!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Timmo said:

 

? That's the hardest one aside from maybe Sekiro!

 Playing it again recently I vehemently disagree. It was a cakewalk for the most part. Most of my deaths came from one half-pissed session and being rubbish again 4-1s skellies.. 

 

I think people remember it as being the hardest because it was their first. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, robdood said:

 Playing it again recently I vehemently disagree. It was a cakewalk for the most part. Most of my deaths came from one half-pissed session and being rubbish again 4-1s skellies.. 

 

I think people remember it as being the hardest because it was their first. 

It even has an easy mode (play as royal) for the start levels anyway 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dark Souls is best. The world design is so far beyond anything else they’ve ever made (or anything else I have ever played). It’s amazing how consistent the space is, and how well it fits together. Level design is generally top notch as well, with even the “bad” areas having some well designed rooms with satisfying combat encounters. It’s also so much braver than any of the games that follow it, using ideas to that are generally off limits in other games (like actual darkness, or the punishment for getting cursed), being explored where they were removed or streamlined in later games. Many interesting systems were nerfed into pointlessness or straight up removed in sequels. It has amazing bosses and fantastic weapons and amazing build variety.

 

Bloodborne close second, with the best story and characters and narrative setting. The pacing is top notch, the combat is the best in any game I’ve ever played, and the bosses are incredible. Probably the best game in the series objectively, but far less ambitious and creative than Dark Souls.

 

Dark Souls 3 is a good game on paper, but there’s nothing interesting about it. Everything is just something else from the other games. It has cool areas and weapons and good bosses and nice graphics, though I think it’s difficulty is badly paced, and it feels as though it’s designed to provide a challenge for veterans and offer constant structure and story callbacks for them, and so the difficulty of the game is really uneven and frustrating. More than that though, it’s all so forgettable because even when it’s not just stuff from previous games, it’s surrounded by stuff from them. It’s like a copy of a copy of a beautiful picture, you can still see what’s good about it but it’s not memorable or beautiful like the original.

 

Dark Souls 2 is almost an amazing sequel, but unfortunately the combat and movement are shite, which kinda pulls the bottom out of the Jenga tower. DS2’s beautiful areas, cool enemies, interesting weapons, clever lore and well designed areas are all pointless, because they live in a world where the movement and combat are weightless, floaty and badly animated. It reminds me of little big planet, where I always wondered how they’d ended up building such an amazing level creator around such a terrible platforming engine. DS2 also has awful enemy placement and encounter design, and a variety of stupid and confusing systems blocking progression through the game. But it’s mostly the combat being crap that ruins it.

 

Sekiro should not count. Bloodborne has so many systems and items which are exactly the same as DS but with different names, I can see how it’s basically part of the same series. With stamina removed, no weapon diversity, no stats and poise instead of health it plays and feels nothing like the Souls games. There’s no options, no player agency. It’s just a thing you do over and over in the one way you can do it until you can do it properly, which is the exact opposite of the player freedom and choice that Souls and Bloodborne are built around. It’s closer to Ninja Gaiden or something, with the lack of customisation and online features also making repeat playthroughs pointless. 
 

I’ve never clicked with Demon’s Souls.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dark Souls remains quite a special game for me. It's the first Souls game I played, the only one I finished more than once and the only one I've played the DLC for. I was completely obsesses with it for a while, and spent a long time reading, watching and listening to stuff discussing the lore. The quality did drop later in the game, of course, but the world as a whole is still incredible.

 

I prefer a lot of the mechanics in DaS over the other games too. I like that you're never forced to grind for healing items for a start, so you're not really penalised from dying other than having to retrace your steps.

 

Bloodborne is ace too of course, but I just don't have the relationship with it that I did with DaS1, and I haven't played the DLC. At some point I want to play it again, along with DaS2:SotFS, DaS3 and its DLC. My DeS replay can wait until the remake on PS5. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

The final third of Dark Souls does dip, but it gets a far worse wrap than it needs. Given how the map is designed and how it expands, warping is absolutely the right choice at that point. 

 

The game manages to remain oppressive right to the end. The Tomb of the Giants might be an arse, but the smothering darkness and giant skeletons can still panic you. The Archives is pretty and has interesting lore, and while the Crystal Caves don't work, they are very short. New Londo is another area that gets at you, with no bonfires and Darkwraithes that can be a proper handful the first time through. Only Lost Izalith feels really unfinished. 

You've two great bosses in the Four Kings and Seath, too. 

 

On 14/06/2020 at 07:34, Jamie John said:

 

Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed AotA, I just think the DLC in the other games is more interesting in terms of the locations they take you to and the variety of enemy types.

 

I'm 180 on it. The other games DLC often feel like they are tacked on, no matter how good they are. AoTC feels like an organic extension of the game; it rewards investment in the main game and ups the ante even when you thought that wasn't possible. I find it more satisfying as a result. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sekiro for me. Never really enjoyed the combat in the rest of the Souls games but Sekiro has the best third person combat I've ever played. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought Dark Souls on release, working at Gamestation and having heard my assistant manager go on about Demons Souls and seen Edge's coverage that made it look right up my street. And then I banged my head against it for a couple weeks. I eventually got to Blight Town and it ran so awfully on 360 it beat me. I'd persevered until then, even enjoyed a fair bit of it, but the performance coupled to what is an especially irritating area on first run through pushed me over the edge. I then bought it again a few years later in PC, downloaded DSfix, got to Blight Town, and couldn't be arsed with it. 

 

When Dark Souls 3 came out, I was between jobs with some time on my hands. And I just got that hankering for it again. And I loved it. There was something that clicked with it - it looked fabulous, and it played brilliantly. There were still the moments I despised it - the dungeon is bullshit on your first run, Champion Gundyr drove me mad - but I absolutely devoured it. I've subsequently platinumed it, which as someone who doesn't really touch the multiplayer is a chore, but I didn't mind that much, because it plays so well.

 

Bloodborne was the next I tried and at that point I was onboard. I love Bloodborne. It's tight, incredibly tight, the world and lore is wonderful, it's got that frenetic action aggressive style that Souls can be played like when your eye is in, but Bloodborne forces it on you, for the better. It isn't flawless - it's got performance issues, blood vial farming doesn't add anything to the game, stuff like the cursed defiled chalice dungeon is bullshit - but at the highs, of which there are many, it's stunning.

 

The bug got me and I went back to Dark Souls when the Remaster came out. And I smashed through it. It's wonderful. It looks good still, it plays well still, it has so many iconic moments... Until the time and money runs out. The back third of the game is a step down from the brilliance beforehand for me. There's still a bunch of great stuff there, but there's obviously bits that have less polish and less care. But it's so good up to then. Good enough to platinum also.

 

Dark Souls 2 is the runt. I've played, though yet to finish, Scholar of the First Sin, and while it has its moments it does feel less of a quality thing than its brethren, and it's got some of the more bullshit mechanics in the series (their messing with dodging is one of the most infuriating things they could have done). It just isn't as good as the rest and it's hard to get away from that feeling.

 

Never played Demon's Souls unfortunately and Sekiro is it's own thing that I think is ultimately not as compelling as the Soulsborne games (I'm playing at the moment, in the endgame, and have liked it but not really been wowed and don't see myself returning to it).

 

3 is the one I love the most, 1 is 3/4s of an all time great that stumbles at the end (I can't give a game that has Bed of Chaos in it top marks), Bloodborne is excellent... But 3 just takes it for me. It does have that greatest hits feel and it's not quite got the cohesive world feel that 1 did, but it plays so well and so much of it is great.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2, 1 and 3, in that order.

 

The first game will always hold a special place in my heart, but Scholar of The First Sin perfected the franchise. It had the best pvp, the best implementation of magic and upgrades and the best bosses and the best dlc.

 

The third game didn’t really give me the same feeling as 1 and 2. In terms of visuals it felt too polished and too shiny. Hated the pvp and how they did poise. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hands up how many people have played King's Field.....I'll wait..... :P

 

I'm replaying Dark Souls 1 now. I'm also playing Bloodborne, so can make a direct comparison. Dark Souls is still the best! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve played (and loved) all the soulsbourne games - Sekiro was the first one which made me learn how to parry. Just started Bloodborne again and it’s an entirely different game post Sekiro (for me).

 

.... I still voted for Bloodborne though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bloodborne is the best, Dark Souls 1 is the greatest.

 

Tower of Latria in Demon’s Souls and Cathedral of the Deep in Dark Souls 3 are as good as anything in the series though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Stevie said:

The first game will always hold a special place in my heart, but Scholar of The First Sin perfected the franchise.

 

I've never played DS2, and I've heard different things about how different Scholar of the First Sin is to the base game.

 

e.g. this Reddit comment suggests that people tend to conflate the differences between launch DS2, patched DS2, DS2 DLC, and Scholar:

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/darksouls/comments/6kdf20/which_is_better_vanilla_dark_souls_2_or_scholar/djljaix/

 

Quote

Some people exaggerate the improvements of Scholar, they're really nothing major. Other people might be referring to the difference between launch vanilla DS2 and current Scholar, which IS enormous, but that's more on patching and the great DLC content that was added than the changes made to the base game itself.

 

A few months ago I bought a disc copy of the Xbox 360 version of vanilla DS2 (£2.50 in CeX :lol:but I haven't played it yet. Is it worth playing that vanilla version (once all free patches have been applied), or should I ignore it and wait until Scholar of the First Sin turns up in a sale?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Scholar turns up all the time in sales for less than a Big Mac. Wait for that one I say, they shuffled loads of things around for the better and if you're not on PC the vanilla version on 360 will look even grungier than when it first came out. Imho.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Doctor Shark said:

Magic is far from unusable, it's just not straight up overpowered like it was in Demon's. Pyromancy and that lighting spear miracle are both crazy good in Dark Souls. 


That’s phase 2 though. It’s good in Demon’s, ok if you put effort in in Dark Souls, but beyond that it gets nerfed into oblivion and is virtually pointless in 2, and completely useless in BB and DS3. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Magic is pretty viable in all games, just not against bosses.

I mostly tend to use it to kill enemies from above though, as I'm more of a melee fighter. And because I like fast-paced combat, I'd rate BB and DS3 above the others. 

 

As I said before, I don't think Sekiro can be lumped in but I do want to say that I think Sekiro is far superior to the Nioh games. Better encounter design, better traversal, better bosses, much better level design, way better art direction and far more interesting world building. I also find the Nioh games hideously bloated. They're good combat systems wrapped in less good game design.

 

Also, Elden Ring is gonna be awesome. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

The worst thing about Sekiro is that somewhere along the way someone decided that the masterfully delivered stories that were perfectly designed to be discovered by the player as an interactive narrative should be replaced with shit, boring, poorly written cutscenes like every other game ever made has.

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Mr. Gerbik said:

Scholar turns up all the time in sales for less than a Big Mac. Wait for that one I say, they shuffled loads of things around for the better and if you're not on PC the vanilla version on 360 will look even grungier than when it first came out. Imho.

 

36 minutes ago, Nick R said:

 

I've never played DS2, and I've heard different things about how different Scholar of the First Sin is to the base game.

 

e.g. this Reddit comment suggests that people tend to conflate the differences between launch DS2, patched DS2, DS2 DLC, and Scholar:

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/darksouls/comments/6kdf20/which_is_better_vanilla_dark_souls_2_or_scholar/djljaix/

 

 

A few months ago I bought a disc copy of the Xbox 360 version of vanilla DS2 (£2.50 in CeX :lol:but I haven't played it yet. Is it worth playing that vanilla version (once all free patches have been applied), or should I ignore it and wait until Scholar of the First Sin turns up in a sale?

 

Yes, there are many subtle changes that just makes it better such as changes to placements and behavior of npc's and such. I played DS2 from launch and switched to Scholar when it launched and the improvement was notable. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Doctor Shark said:

Hands up how many people have played King's Field.....I'll wait..... :P


I tried playing the first one on my PSP a few years ago! And I might have tried emulating one of the PS2 games, but I’m not sure...

 

I think that if anyone was up to the challenge it could be an interesting retro folder topic: attempting to play one of the games and commenting on the experience. Not that I’m going to step forward... :P 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Broker said:

The worst thing about Sekiro is that somewhere along the way someone decided that the masterfully delivered stories that were perfectly designed to be discovered by the player as an interactive narrative should be replaced with shit, boring, poorly written cutscenes like every other game ever made has.

 

Oh, the traditional lore and evironmental storytelling is still there in spades. Vaati did some good vids on them.

Also, there really aren't that many cut-scenes and what is there is generally pretty short. It's not as much a departure from the Souls game in that regard as some think it is.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Vemsie said:

 

Oh, the traditional lore and evironmental storytelling is still there in spades. Vaati did some good vids on them.

Also, there really aren't that many cut-scenes and what is there is generally pretty short. It's not as much a departure from the Souls game in that regard as some think it is.


I only played the first ten hours or so, but purely relying on in game interactions with NPCs and notes is always my preference. The first portion had several boring cutscenes and any is too many for my taste. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Broker said:


I only played the first ten hours or so, but purely relying on in game interactions with NPCs and notes is always my preference. The first portion had several boring cutscenes and any is too many for my taste. 

 

NPC's are generally handled in the same way. Most of the cut-scene stuff is in the beginning, after that there are some shorter ones around boss fights but by and large it's not all that different from what I remember and I played through it twice. It has some of my favourite writing in a From game. Genichiro in particular is a very interesting character with believable motivations.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Woah. Steady on I think I just warped into an alternative reality where Sekiro is a cut scene heavy experience, magic in Dark Souls 3 is useless and Nickleback wrote a seminal album..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 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.