Dark souls 3

[Qistina]

 

Dark Souls 2 was fine, look at Lords of the Fallen if you want to see how can a Dark Souls-like game fail. Then again I suppose DS2 bore the name of Dark Souls franchise...

Yeah, I don't really care how Dark Souls-y or not a non-Dark Souls game is...

 

And I would very much disagree with Dark Souls 2 being "fine": Dark Souls 2 was like...if you took the combat of Dark Souls 1, slowed it down like 25-33%, made most every weapon shorter and slower and consequently more difficult and unfun to use (so much so that I literally never found a single weapon I actually enjoyed using like I did in Dark Souls 1), and you replaced what felt like roughly half of the bosses in the game with Iron Giant-esque bosses: giant (i.e. slow) humanoid bosses that are oh so predictable and not very fun to fight when facing the close to that same boss for the umpteenth time. Probably forgetting some other stuff, but yeah, I'd rate the entire experience as being pretty awful.

 

 

That is because like i said before, they make games just to grab money, they just make maps with filler enemies, that's why. I am an Asian you know, i know what is in their head....maybe they can fool western players, but they can't fool me... i am used to this kind of bull**** they are making, this is not the first time i am playing Asian games...(there are a lot of Asian products here, i know the quality of Asian products)

 

But let us see how DS3 will turn out to be...

Edited December 3, 2015 by Qistina

[Majek]

 

Dark Souls 2 was fine, look at Lords of the Fallen if you want to see how can a Dark Souls-like game fail. Then again I suppose DS2 bore the name of Dark Souls franchise...

Yeah, I don't really care how Dark Souls-y or not a non-Dark Souls game is...

 

And I would very much disagree with Dark Souls 2 being "fine": Dark Souls 2 was like...if you took the combat of Dark Souls 1, slowed it down like 25-33%, made most every weapon shorter and slower and consequently more difficult and unfun to use (so much so that I literally never found a single weapon I actually enjoyed using like I did in Dark Souls 1), and you replaced what felt like roughly half of the bosses in the game with Iron Giant-esque bosses: giant (i.e. slow) humanoid bosses that are oh so predictable and not very fun to fight when facing the close to that same boss for the umpteenth time. Probably forgetting some other stuff, but yeah, I'd rate the entire experience as being pretty awful

Combat slower? Weapons shorter? Yeah, i'm never taking you seriously. It's not like i ever did, but this post just seals it forever. You're just another troll now, just like Qistina.

[Darkpriest]

O wish every game had such a simple level design as doom and DS series. I mean asid of quake and system shock those are easily the top ones when it comes to FPP/TPP design.

[Bartimaeus]

Combat slower? Weapons shorter? Yeah, i'm never taking you seriously. It's not like i ever did, but this post just seals it forever. You're just another troll now, just like Qistina.

Like Qistina? The person I put on my block list after reading like two of their posts? Hmm, that's not exactly a comparison I like. Yes, I felt that combat was significantly slower in Dark Souls 2, though, of course, my impression could be totally wrong: I was very busy not enjoying the game, after all. Nevertheless, I did have the constant feeling of, "Holy crap, why are my attacks so slow, why does it take a million years to recover from doing a light attack to be able to move/roll again - or to do anything besides another light attack, as even trying to do a heavy attack afterwards is significantly delayed for no apparent reason - why does it feel like I gotta be at point blank range to be able to hit any of my opponents with any of my swords, what happened to the visceral feeling of combat that I loved that was present in the first game". I couldn't even begin to count the amount of times I died because I did a light attack while an enemy was in the middle of doing their own attack, and I had to sit there for a second realizing that my character was about to get hit/die because the delay in between doing an attack and being able to move again was so much greater than it was in DS1 and I could simply never, ever get used to it. It was quite maddening to me: in DS1, you could chain light and heavy (and, I guess, the forward light and heavy attacks, too) as you please, and you could roll so, so much quicker after an attack, particularly with lighter weapons...in fact, I stopped bothering using lighter weapons in DS2 by the end of the game, because it made me so stinking mad: at least using a greatsword (I was particular to Lost Sinner's Blade, to be specific), I felt like I deserved the slow movement.

 

I'm not arguing anything else Qistina may or may not be saying: I'm not even reading what they're saying! Just trying to explain why I really, really, really did not enjoy DS2, and really regretted making myself play through all of it in what was evidently a futile attempt to do so. I'm glad so many other people apparently enjoyed it, but I did not.

 

Also...do I know you? Though you're not completely wrong: I can definitely be a bit of a troll. Just...uh...not really about this.

Edited December 3, 2015 by Bartimaeus

[Qistina]

Calling other people troll is trolling

 

I have given my opinion, like it or not up to you, but calling me a troll because you don't agree make you a troll

[Bartimaeus]

No...I would definitely call you a troll, or at least troll-like. But hey, if that means I can troll a troll by saying that (which, by your own admission, is exactly what I'm doing), I'm all for it. (edit): Though I will definitely say that I won't be pleased if Majek doesn't at least acknowledge the semi-legitimateness of my complaints in the context that I have voiced them: I didn't write out that long...or...uh...moderately-sized post that very coherently explained what I specifically didn't like about the game just to be ignored, and for his last word on the matter to be him babbling about how I'm sort of troll when I actually adequately explained my position whereas he immediately resorted to ad hominem...not exactly my idea of a good conversation.

 

And stop...branding my posts with your silly "like"s, Qistina! I don't deserve the punishment of actually bothering to read your posts.

Edited December 3, 2015 by Bartimaeus

[Qistina]

I don't say about you, i am saying about the person 2 level above you. And i like your post, so i like it, is there a problem?

Edited December 3, 2015 by Qistina

[Cyseal]

Let's be more constructive.

Personal opinion war could go indefinitely. I'll start discussion about lore.

 

This is mildly a spoiler because devs said this beta could change in final version.

 

Seeing gameplay videos, did you notice that humanity mechanic is gone? After you use ember, on your character there is a charring tinder texture.

My first thought is, as this is soul game, that fire is somewhat connected  to purifying the soul.

 

So, what could be implications of this gimmick ?

Edited December 3, 2015 by Cyseal

[Qistina]

I think we going back into the past, how far i am not sure, but maybe it is at the first time the curse break...in DS1 intro it says "and now there' are only embers...", then showing a woman holding a small fire in her hand

 

In DS1 embers are used to upgrade weapons, and they are rare....maybe they become rare because people use the embers to save themselves from becoming undead before using humanity?

 

From the video, the main character seems not to be undead

 

And DS3 is supposed to give explanation on the origin of bonfire and i think explanation on everything, so maybe we are going back into the past before everything happen

Edited December 3, 2015 by Qistina

[Majek]

Yes, I felt that combat was significantly slower in Dark Souls 2, though, of course, my impression could be totally wrong: I was very busy not enjoying the game, after all. Nevertheless, I did have the constant feeling of, "Holy crap, why are my attacks so slow, why does it take a million years to recover from doing a light attack to be able to move/roll again - or to do anything besides another light attack, as even trying to do a heavy attack afterwards is significantly delayed for no apparent reason - why does it feel like I gotta be at point blank range to be able to hit any of my opponents with any of my swords, what happened to the visceral feeling of combat that I loved that was present in the first game". I couldn't even begin to count the amount of times I died because I did a light attack while an enemy was in the middle of doing their own attack, and I had to sit there for a second realizing that my character was about to get hit/die because the delay in between doing an attack and being able to move again was so much greater than it was in DS1 and I could simply never, ever get used to it. It was quite maddening to me: in DS1, you could chain light and heavy (and, I guess, the forward light and heavy attacks, too) as you please, and you could roll so, so much quicker after an attack, particularly with lighter weapons...in fact, I stopped bothering using lighter weapons in DS2 by the end of the game, because it made me so stinking mad: at least using a greatsword (I was particular to Lost Sinner's Blade, to be specific), I felt like I deserved the slow movement.

Now this is different.  But i still disagree on the speed. There was command lag in non patched game, but the feel of the combat  and especially the weapons was the same to me, though of course different and yes slower on critical attacks, that i admit.  Though new badly needed animations for different weapons changed combos, other than command lag ( which was already present in DS1 ) i got used to immediately.  Power stance took some time to figure out without resorting to internet but it brought a whole new style into play.  I will admit that the weapons did not feel as heavy as in DS1, but i could easily overlook that. Also i'm talking about the 30 fps console version which for me were the version to play, despite their shortcomings in both games.

[Bartimaeus]

I own the game on Steam, and tried to play it somewhere between half a year and a year after release, I think, so presumably, it wasn't because of the unpatched business. For me, it was like...I was trying to use a normal longsword, like the Sword of Heidi (or whatever it's called), or the Fire Longsword, or...just any longsword at all...and they're just...so sluggish-feeling to me, and so short-feeling to me. My favorite sword to use in DS1 was the Balder Side Sword, personally, which had a great moveset (in my opinion), great speed, good length, O.K. damage - not good damage, but O.K. damage. I also loved the Great Scythe and the Lifehunt Scythe if I needed something a bit more heavy duty...and it's like, I spent the entire game (Dark Souls 2) trying to find something I liked like I did those two weapons, and I never stinking did. It was instead weapon after weapon that I felt was too slow, that was not fun at all to use. It drove me crazy, and it really just did not feel like the same game at all to me. This was also compounded by the shorter i-frames from rolling: I mean, the amount in Dark Souls 1 was admittedly pretty ridiculous, but you compound my weapon troubles with the severely shortened i-frames and the fact that I basically never even once used a shield in Dark Souls 1, and it just became...so much frustration for me. I beat the game...and the DLC...but I tell you, I didn't enjoy it one bit. You think somebody who was able to beat Dark Souls 1 at SL1 on NG7 (with the exception of Four Kings: I was able to do literally everything else) would've been able to adapt to the slightly different intricacies of the Dark Souls 2 combat system, but I really just couldn't. Just hated it.

[Majek]

Your choice of weapons explains a lot. There is indeed nothing like those in the game. 

And i don't think highly of SL1 gameplays. I will not deny it takes quite an amount skill , but on the other hand it's more about memorizing patterns than anything else, although there are some annoying random unfair attacks here and there. And you limit yourself much more than with any other build, so you miss on all the fun you could have had. With me, once the fun is gone, even challenging repetition becomes too dull to continue.

SO yeah, that would not have given you any benefit in adapting to DS2 anyway. 

 

 

oh and Four Kings after NG+2 are just painful, doable but not really fun. i don't venture beyond Ng+3 on any character, i make a new one instead. In all Souls games.

 

and Souls games should have stayed on playstation.  Would be bad for From money wise, but i think they would have been far more creative than under NamcoBandai and their  politics. THis is what our troll got right, there are money-grabbing people around Souls games, but it's not FROM.

Edited December 3, 2015 by Majek

[Qistina]

I always wonder why they hate archery so much...archery always suck. This is no one can deny. You see, magic is also ranged attack, and they are varried, also powerful. They can make magic like that, but why they still thinking archery will be overpowered and they cripple the whole archery mechanic? I just don't understand that.

 

They also remove Hunter class of DS1, they make Bandit have bow as starting weapon. Means you have to be a Bandit if want to play archer at the very begining. They don't even make specific archer class.

 

There are lack of bows compared to melee weapons

 

Arrows are so expensive, and it is almost not worth it. I mean for archers you have to spent souls to kill, while for magic users and melee you don't need to. Magic user only need to buy magic then can refill magic freely and bonfires. Melee fighters don't really need to buy weapons. But archers will spend souls to buy arrows and took forever to kill enemies, while others killing for free. Let say you spend 1000 souls to buy arrows, you need to kill and collect more than 1000 souls to make it worth it. While 1000 souls spend to buy magic is more worthwhile because you have to buy once, it's powerful and it refill free at bonfire.

 

They make archers can move around while shooting in DS2, thats nice but still it is just broken mechanic.

 

I hope they do something for archery in DS3, but i don't see any archer class in the video....

Edited December 3, 2015 by Qistina

[Bartimaeus]

SL1 on NG1 was a pretty fun challenge: really requires you to know how to recognize every single attack by every enemy and boss, and what to do when they use them. I just decided to take it to the next level. It...actually wasn't all that much more difficult for the most part, because even on NG1, you basically need to have absolute mastery of most every enemy and boss. It did take the few non-insta-kill hits that you could survive in NG1 to now being almost all insta-kill on NG7. I wouldn't recommend Ornstein and Smough or Kalameet at SL1 on NG7: that crap was pretty hard. Ornstein and Smough are very difficult for obvious reasons, but Kalameet is awful, awful to play against because once in a great while, he uses attacks that he shouldn't at close range that you just cannot dodge - wouldn't be a problem if you had normal damage output with normal life, but at SL1 on NG7, you're literally instantly dead if he decides to use one of those attacks at the wrong time. And he SO much life...

 

Yeah, I didn't enjoy Four Kings on NG7 @ SL120 (or so): took bloody forever to beat them with my Great Scythe. Not even gonna bother at SL1, haha.

 

And yeah, I would hardly classify Dark Souls 2 or Bloodborne as "cash grabs"...at worst, Dark Souls 2 could've use some more development time, but when you're working for other companies, ya' gotta do what ya' gotta do, as I'm sure we're all very pointedly aware of as Obsidian fans...

[Vaeliorin]

While I enjoy the combat in Souls games/Bloodborne, the level design has always bothered me.  The areas that supposedly once housed (or currently houses, maybe, in the case of Bloodborne) living people just aren't designed in a way that's even remotely believable.  Between that and the occasional "it's hard because you're trapped in a really small area!" fights (I hate you Capra demon) it's certainly not something I love, but is still something I'm glad to play.

[Cyseal]

Capra demon and small area is designed to intentionally troll you (Bed of Chaos also). But once I figure it out I can beat him with zweihander.

[Qistina]

Capra demon and small area is designed to intentionally troll you (Bed of Chaos also). But once I figure it out I can beat him with zweihander.

 

There are many ways...yes it's a troll, it's shock value only toward new players, but still it is unfair...the two dogs can jump awkwardly off the screen and they also can block our path (jumping mechanic is sad in this game, we can't jump over things)

 

And Bed of Chaos is totally unfair because they show it's health bar making us thinking we must kill it like all other bosses, we got frustrated when shooting with bow don't effect it's health bar at all, (depends on players) we could think it's a bug (turn out to be it's really a BUG), it is better if they not showing the health bar indicating it must be deafeted in other way or we must do something...

Edited December 4, 2015 by Qistina

[Fenixp]

While I enjoy the combat in Souls games/Bloodborne, the level design has always bothered me.  The areas that supposedly once housed (or currently houses, maybe, in the case of Bloodborne) living people just aren't designed in a way that's even remotely believable.  Between that and the occasional "it's hard because you're trapped in a really small area!" fights (I hate you Capra demon) it's certainly not something I love, but is still something I'm glad to play.

That's because the areas are not designed to be believable - they're designed to be strange, unsettling, to tell you a story and, of course, to provide the best and most varied gameplay possible. Remember, not all games strive to be realistic and I believe level design of Dark Souls serve well to give you a feeling of something alien and bizarre, which I do believe was the primary goal all along.

[Qistina]

In simple word, it is a bad level design....

[Qistina]

Here is my theory about DS1...

 

All the Gods are fake...Gwyn, Gwyndolin, Gwynevere, Nito, Witch of Izalith...they are all fake...they somehow found a source of power out of a catastrophy, meteor hit earth maybe...they abuse the power to become Gods. But their power is fading, the Witch try to replenish it by using experiment with the power source and the result is disastrous...Gwyn also doing the same and the result is the curse of undead. Maybe Gwyn know the effect but he done it with a plan...Gwyndolin carry out his/her father plan to fool the Chosen Undead, with Frampt help the Chosen Undead is lured to kindle the flame

 

What Gwyn doing is open up dimensions...all other players are Chosen Undead in alternate reality. The bonfire is a switch to jump through dimensions. The player character is THE ONLY chosen undead it is because no one revive if we kill them, the one who revived at bonfire after death is just ourself....Gwyn allow this to make a strong Chosen Undead, he also allow all alternate Chosen Undeads to fight eachother or help eachother, the main purpose is to make a strong Chosen Undead to kindle the fire

 

Kaathe in other way want to stop the madness, should we join Darkwraith he teach us to steal humanity from other players, meaning we steal humanity from our alternate self, the reason is to make us human again. By that ending the Age of Fire and starting the Age of Men

 

Things about Arthorias and manus are not really happen, it just illusions made real, some kind of revived memories, it maybe true memory or corrupted one by Gwyndolin. take a note that we are going to the past but there are bonfires in Oolacile, it should not be...because we are going into Arthorias time. The bonfire indicate that they are not real, just illusions of a long past memory.

 

The threat of the Dark is not related to the curse of Undead, the threat of the Dark is a threat to the God pretenders, because they are the Light...maybe it is merely symbolic where human rebel against these God pretenders, that's why there are occult weapons specifically to against the Gods, and Velka who want to punish the Gods...the painted world of Ariamis is where Velka hide herself and the Occult ember.

 

Out of these God pretenders, only Nito don't care, because he's dead already. But he know Gwyn plan, that's why he hide the Divine ember and guard it with giant skeletons, this ember can make weapons to kill him easily.

 

Seath betray everyone and even want to betray Gwyn, Havel know this after meeting with a surviving Dragon at Ash Lake, Havel try to kill Seathe but Gwyn don't believe him and locked him up in the tower.

 

Well, that's what i thought...come out from "story" in DS1 that could make sense, if there is any sense at all....

[Fenixp]

In simple word, it is a bad level design....

Do you really want to argue about this again? Either present actual arguments to back up *why* is the level design bad or stop trolling, please. Last time I checked your knowledge of level design ended with "I make rooms and put big enemies in them". And levels not being realistic is not a good argument as long as you have enjoyed just about any videogame in your life.

 

I mean, you're fully capable of creating a story which is by a large part told trough the level design yet you claim it's got a bad level design.

Edited December 4, 2015 by Fenixp

[Majek]

 

oh look, they still hate archers

[Vaeliorin]

 

While I enjoy the combat in Souls games/Bloodborne, the level design has always bothered me.  The areas that supposedly once housed (or currently houses, maybe, in the case of Bloodborne) living people just aren't designed in a way that's even remotely believable.  Between that and the occasional "it's hard because you're trapped in a really small area!" fights (I hate you Capra demon) it's certainly not something I love, but is still something I'm glad to play.

 

That's because the areas are not designed to be believable - they're designed to be strange, unsettling, to tell you a story and, of course, to provide the best and most varied gameplay possible. Remember, not all games strive to be realistic and I believe level design of Dark Souls serve well to give you a feeling of something alien and bizarre, which I do believe was the primary goal all along.

I realize it's designed for gameplay as opposed to realism, but it still bothers me. It's distracting when I'm going through the areas wondering who on earth was actually supposed to have used these areas for anything, as opposed to picking up on story hints, or just enjoying the combat. It's hard to care about a place that feels so fake.

 

It's not inherently bad (I've been playing From games since the first King's Field, so I obviously enjoy their work), I'd just prefer that the areas were designed well from both a gameplay and a realism angle.

 

I could do without the forced multi-player, too, but that's a separate issue entirely as I pretty much hate all forms of PvP.

[Qistina]

 

In simple word, it is a bad level design....

Do you really want to argue about this again? Either present actual arguments to back up *why* is the level design bad or stop trolling, please. Last time I checked your knowledge of level design ended with "I make rooms and put big enemies in them". And levels not being realistic is not a good argument as long as you have enjoyed just about any videogame in your life.

 

I mean, you're fully capable of creating a story which is by a large part told trough the level design yet you claim it's got a bad level design.

 

 

In today world when we mentioned something obvious, people still demand an evidence...

[Qistina]

i. They put in invisible path blocker at narrow path such in The Great Hollow and Blighttown, you walk upon it and fall with no reason. You must walk slow bit by bit on it to get past, or jump over if you already know the spot

 

ii. It's a third person view game but they limit your view bbecause most area iare small and the enemy is too big, you often find out your view blocked by things and the enemy itself

 

iii. most areas force you to change your weapon because of your weapon will hit walls, even though your weapon logically can give thrust attack but the game say otherwise, broadsword cannot thrust but long sword can, so you must change from broadsword to longsword in those areas

 

iv. weapon attacks will make you move a bit mostly, that could lead you to fall in narrow path, unless you change your weapon to range or use magic you will get problem and often causing death when fighting enemies at those area such as in Blightown levels

 

v. some enemies just throw you off the area giving instant death such as Iron Golem, and most enemies have a very big hit box making you cannot escape, they often placed at small areas

 

vi. fire breathing dragon will burn the whole area, the only way is get out from it's area effect if you can, blocking done nothing because it will push you and breaking your poise

 

vii. some enemis can jump in blink off screen and when they do that your attack missed, and if you lock on them in narrow path it will make you fall because your attack following them such as in the catacombs

 

viii. the catacomb is pitch dark and have ledges, the only way is to find light source, using magic or items giving light, if using lantern you must sacrifice your defense while enemies in that areas can ravage you in tight dark area like those giant dog skeletons, they can jump offscreen too

 

ix. those giant skeletons can simply kick you of ledges

Edited December 5, 2015 by Qistina