Best Souls game ?

[Jezal_k23]

Besides I think in games with as many bosses as these, it's obvious some won't hit the right notes. The ones they get right easily make up for it.

 

[Wunderbar]

The real problems like balance, the most over powered magic in the series, large list of poo poo monsters and more would need an overhaul for the game.

Agree, magic is OP but From cannot do magic to save their lives. So in DaS3 we got the natural conclusion of their balancing - which they also can't do for shit - and magic is useless unless you're a masochist.

From should hire Josh Sawyer to balance things out.

 

[sullynathan]

Besides I think in games with as many bosses as these, it's obvious some won't hit the right notes. The ones they get right easily make up for it.

There's more misses in demons souls and souls 2 but the latter just has a very large amount of bosses in total. It has high highs and low lows.

You disliked them. Latria 3-1 is, arguably, the best level From ever did. The only "bad" level is 5-2 and your beloved DaS3 doubled down on the bullshit of that one with Farron Keep. Other than that, at most you could argue that the levels are short.

I particularly dislike World 4 & 5. World 4 opens with the shrine of storms with really annoying enemies that will stun lock you to near death. Demon's souls doesn't have poise as you know, unlike Dark Souls 3 & Bloodborne your character is much slower in that game and the tracking in this area is particularly bad.

World 5-1, the valley of defilement is actually a pretty good level. As you know, it's blighttown before blighttown. It has shortcuts that also work as traps/falls against unexpecting players. I have replayed this level a bunch and I liked it, there are certain chokepoints on bridges that force you to have quick reflexes or quick thinking. This level ends with the first boss that's pretty much a mass of shit mixed together in one body.
World 5-2, again another level that starts out very well. It's large and you can get lost in it, very dangerous with a hidden enemy figure, poisons, and items that gets spoiled because the game world broke. I and enemies fell right through the ground, World tendency stopped working properly in this entire area. It ends with the shitty colossus.

See, you could've had a point if you referred to the lurkers who actually do shoot you through walls. The Storm Beasts at most somewhat home in on your location. They are also few in number, encountered in a couple of locations and if you would have actually bothered to git gud you could have prepared to dodge their attacks based on sound cue alone because they sound like a fucking cannon just fired.

So I should dodge spam all the time as the stupid cannon noises are blaring? Isn't this a complaint leveraged against Dark Souls 3? Because I was doing a lot of that in Demon's souls when even after dodging a storm beasts shot, it will still track you and has an AOE damage effect. The stupid things can still hit you directly through walls and even worst of all, right after you defeat the Adjudicator, walking to the entrance of the next level will leave you to be constantly spammed by these beasts.

The entire area culminates to the bad Storm King that becomes much worse in NG+. He's an easy boss in NG because you get stormruler and kill him in 3 hits, it's a short boss fight to the point. Not easy to die, like you say they "tried something else". When you fight this boss again in NG+, because no one plays a souls game once, you will fight the same boss with the exact same moveset with a ridiculous health boost. What was a short novelty "epic" boss, becomes a 10 minute chore hitting him with stormruler or an arrow every once in a while he enters the arena.

broken it's not

It is. I have played the game 4 times now, I expected certain evil actions I took to culminate in the low world tendency yet events that were supposed to happen never did because World Tendency is glitched and broken. FROM never fixed it.

Poo poo monsters is some shit you've thrown around every time DeS was mentioned, but I've yet to see a proper explanation of what exactly is a poo poo monster

Leechmonger, Dirty Colossus, king allant & Phalanx are all relatively the same boss. They're a large brown or black slow moving blob that all attack the player in nearly exact same patters with each just having one different gimmick. Phalanx has shields and will shoot spears, leechmonger shoots leeches, dirty colossus flings poop at your player. These bosses don't really pose any challenge, aren't special and are repeated. The second time you go through this game, and you will, with Northern Regalia on NG++++++ or whatever, you'll be killing them in about 2 - 5 hits.

The best bosses in Demons Souls are the progenitors of Artorias. The best bosses in later games are still the ones people have claimed are "artorias clones"

magic is useless unless you're a masochist.

Magic is worse in Demon's Souls than the other Souls games I used it in because it is OP and nearly every enemy & boss are weak to magic. It's easier to just shoot them than engage them in Melee. FROM would have to change everythign for Demon's Souls to get it right.

 

[Kruno]

I played NiOh, never beat it. It's combat is better than every other game on this list by far.

Really? Nioh? That game had the most boring boss fights, and it felt like Souls light. I was utterly disappointed.

Nothing comes close to DS3 when it comes to boss fights. I have never even seen a game that can come close.

 

[sullynathan]

I played NiOh, never beat it. It's combat is better than every other game on this list by far.

Really? Nioh? That game had the most boring boss fights, and it felt like Souls light. I was utterly disappointed.

Nothing comes close to DS3 when it comes to boss fights. I have never even seen a game that can come close.

I only played the demo and the game controls far better than the other souls games with little things here and there that add depth to the mechanics already existing in the souls games. Backstab isn't easy, parrying is much more difficult and requires better timing, the weapon types overall we're a great treat. I expected nothing less from the developers of Ninja Gaiden. I'm sure others who played the full game can tell you more than I can

 

[Wunderbar]

Really? Nioh? That game had the most boring boss fights, and it felt like Souls light. I was utterly disappointed.

for the first few hours, combat in NiOh is absolutely great.
However, in the late game it devolves into your typical diablo, where stats on your weapon is more important than your skill.

 

[funkadelik]

When I got out of the Army I heard about Demon Souls. I had a year or two prior purchased a PS3 and some games as a Christmas gift for my younger sister and step-brother. Since they still had the PS3 at my Mom's place, I bought Demon Souls and stayed for a few days just to play it. I beat the first level in one run. I found a knight I couldn't beat, and knowing its a Japanese game, figured that meant I needed to grind. I grinded that first level til about lvl 30.

After I had to go back to work, I didn't play for a few days. I came back a week later and my step-brother was ranting about Demon Souls and how he couldn't even get past the first boss. He rage quit after being stuck for 5 hours. This is what happens when you play WoW with your friends for years, you expect games to cave in to your will.

And thus, I fell in love with Demon Souls. And yes, I loved the hub, reminded me of old action platformers where there were 4 levels per zone or so and a big baddie at the end.

 

[Silva]

Yeah DS1 is full of cheesing options.

Playing the remastered and spellcasters, pyros, eagle/tower shields, hi-poise etc. builds simply make the game easy mode from start. I never really noticed this because when I've finished DS1 in the past I played as a Dex/parry/dodge build.

It's making me appreciate what they did to Bloodborne combat even more. I think the series evolved somehow in this respect. Even DS3 turned less cheesy by the absences of poise and OP casting. This is a positive imo.

 

[Ninjerk]

 

[TheHeroOfTime]

All the Souls games are broken by definition. Because they are games that reward experience, knowledge and skill. The things you need to broke them.

Take Dark souls 1 for example. You can be OP with pyromancies, with magic, with pure dex or strength build... and this extrapolates to any other Souls game.

PD: Yes, you can be OP in Bloodborne with a bloodstinge build.

 

[Jack Of Owls]

I bought a PS3 last week off ebay in a great deal ($40 shipped) and have also been bargain hunting for good PS3 games too. Latest acquisition: Demon's Souls - $10 shipped, after I haggled with the ebay seller. Really looking forward to playing it since the Dark Souls series has completely revolutionized the way modern gamers that like it hardcore play by cock-blocking every attempt to exploit, cheese and save scum your way through. Say what you will about them thar nipponese game developers, but they can be brilliant innovators. Looking forward to Demon's Souls which I'll probably get around to playing in a few months after a playthrough of Yakuza 4 (which I also recently snagged from eBay for a good price - $19 shipped). Lots of goooood shit in gaming ahead for me, boys n girls. I am a happy cunt this month :D

 

[L'Montes]

Demon's Souls has been my favorite over time because it's the most original of the set. I remember playing it all night because I couldn't take time off, and it was just that engrossing to me at the time.

I don't want to say the rest of the series is "bad". But you get a distinct feeling of repeating ideas and character roles. Did Demon's, Dark 1, 2, and 3 all need a "crestfallen" character back at base? The odd fanservice bits like having an exact copy of Sieg in 3 with the same voice actor/armor/origin, but a slightly different name? I don't know, the recycling plots, a Patches that always betrays you, etc.? It feels like that sort of thing is to the detriment of the series. Or at least, it takes characters that could possibly be ambiguous, and removes the surprise.

In watching the series evolve its reputation over the years, it's been interesting to see how people think of it. Hardest games ever? Tough but fair? Magic is for no-skill asshats? PvP keeps the game alive, so they should cater to those players! Or... whatever.

I was a bit disappointed in some things across the series as well. I think the platforming elements were almost always awkward and "not-great". They never really got the AI polished well with respect to handling ranged attacks, I suspect their inability/unwillingness on that front is part of the reason ranged/magic saw nerfs in BB and DS3.

On the note of magic, separate from "power", I feel like there was a lot untapped potential in the various schools there. You can look at how varied the Wizard spells are in the first few levels of DnD, but it feels like the lion's share of innovation with magic in Dark Souls happened in DS2 while Miyazaki was making his wolf-game. Also, Dark Souls 2 Network test put first-person aiming on staves with a regular cast/slower-strong cast - the most innovation the weapons/attacks themselves ever got in the whole series.... and that didn't even make it to the final release. Cue DS3 with "Weapon Arts for endless variety" with even fewer aiming options, and where 90% of staves have the same short-term damage buff.

It seemed like there was a failure of imagination there, which is disappointing for how novel many aspects of the series were back in Demon's.

 

[Damned Registrations]

I don't want to say the rest of the series is "bad". But you get a distinct feeling of repeating ideas and character roles. Did Demon's, Dark 1, 2, and 3 all need a "crestfallen" character back at base? The odd fanservice bits like having an exact copy of Sieg in 3 with the same voice actor/armor/origin, but a slightly different name? I don't know, the recycling plots, a Patches that always betrays you, etc.? It feels like that sort of thing is to the detriment of the series. Or at least, it takes characters that could possibly be ambiguous, and removes the surprise.

This was the biggest problem with the series, there was really no need for all this stuff. Sure, maybe a nod here or there for some recurring characters, but not such a large proportion.

On the subject of magic... utility magic was actually pretty good in the series. Silence and invis tended to be very effective, distraction spells were a thing, and greater magic shield is pretty much broken. People just ignored all that shit because it's a huge investment and you don't invest in being a squishy wizard so you can have an OP shield, you do it so you can rain hellfire on your enemies. This was especially a problem in the first two games, where grabbing chameleon meant less attack spells before you had to start spamming consumables. And most of the more creative damage spells were tuned into utter garbage in all three games. Basically all you ever wanted was soul spear or whatever equivalent. Well, soul greatsword was pretty decent too. But all that fancy shit where you rain shit from the sky or whatever was garbage and there was no reason for it to be except people crying about it in pvp.

 

[Gentle Player]

Demon's Souls has been my favorite over time because it's the most original of the set ... I don't want to say the rest of the series is "bad". But you get a distinct feeling of repeating ideas and character roles. Did Demon's, Dark 1, 2, and 3 all need a "crestfallen" character back at base?

From Software are fond of certain recurring motifs throughout their games. I personally have no problem with it as long as it's done well. Many of the alleged original ideas and character roles of Demons' Souls and Dark Souls 1 made an appearance over a decade earlier in FromSoft's King's Field games. The crestfallen soldier archetype, for example, first appeared in the original King's Field, and then again in King's Field 3 and 4 - typically with the same despondent pose. The entire story of Ostrava in Demons' Souls is virtually the same as that of the player character in KF3.

There are several more examples. One of my favourites is tough skeleton enemies that can potentially be encountered very early on, sometimes as one of the first encounters, or first encounters after a tutorial, whom often guard things of worth. They had something of this sort in all KF games, as well as in the first Shadow Tower.

DeS of course had very original gameplay mechanics, and much else about it was original. As with DS1 and BB (DS2 and DS3 being almost entirely derivative, but by no means bad).

 

[Arnust]

Agree, even if I believe 2 to be a way worthier sequel. In a way it derivates more from DeS more often than not.

 

[Dickie_Anderson]

I've only heard people shit on DaS 3 but from what I've been watching on YouTube, in terms of cool looking boss fights it beats them all. FromSoft RPGs have always had relatively slow player characters with gaps between the player's input and the character's attack animations, but the faster speed of Bloodborne and 3 seems to have freed them up to make more interesting combat. Is Gael as cool to fight as he looks?

 

[L'Montes]

From Software are fond of certain recurring motifs throughout their games. I personally have no problem with it as long as it's done well. Many of the alleged original ideas and character roles of Demons' Souls and Dark Souls 1 made an appearance over a decade earlier in FromSoft's King's Field games. The crestfallen soldier archetype, for example, first appeared in the original King's Field, and then again in King's Field 3 and 4 - typically with the same despondent pose. The entire story of Ostrava in Demons' Souls is virtually the same as that of the player character in KF3.

There are several more examples. One of my favourites is tough skeleton enemies that can potentially be encountered very early on, sometimes as one of the first encounters, or first encounters after a tutorial, whom often guard things of worth. They had something of this sort in all KF games, as well as in the first Shadow Tower.

DeS of course had very original gameplay mechanics, and much else about it was original. As with DS1 and BB (DS2 and DS3 being almost entirely derivative, but by no means bad).

It's an issue I take with various franchises. Having a running joke or gag is fine. Having similar thematic content is fine, as you'd expect some consistency within a franchise.

I don't dislike any of the Souls' games. In each year that I played them (Demon's, Dark 1/2/3, Blood), they were one of my favorite if not my favorite game of that year. In picking a favorite, I'm ultimately picking from among a set of games I enjoyed, but perhaps enjoyed different elements of within in each game. I feel I have to reiterate this sometimes because it seems like stating an ultimate preference for X over Y is equivalent to stating X was perfect and Y was shit, and I feel like there's more nuance there. For me, originality excuses a lot of rough edges.

Originality is a huge mark in favor of any game, and despite having played the old King's Field games - by the time Demon's rolled around it was novel in the context of both From's output for me (the really old, and the games like Otogi 1/2) and the games that were being released at the time. I don't really mind things like the Moonlight Greatsword or Seath hopping franchises for a reference either, because I think it's possible to repurpose those things in a way that makes sense.

To me, it's not just that the series repeated itself in some self-referential ways though, it's that the content used effectively deprived veterans of novelty they may have received from an otherwise new approach.

The Crestfallen isn't that bad in this context. Actually, if the extent of the self-reference/motif in the franchise had stopped at the Crestfallen warrior, I don't think I would've cared at all. He gets a bit stale as narrative/exposition vehicle for the hubs, but that's not some horrible game design sin taken by itself.

I think I was more frustrated by things like Patches because the new player that runs across him (say in Demon's), won't know what he's about, right? Maybe they don't trust him, maybe they're curious. There's an interaction with the player's gameplay experience that is something more than exposition at that point. A veteran player that runs across him again is deprived of the novelty of the experience (even if they thought he was obviously untrustworthy at first meeting). So, a Demon's player hits Dark Souls, and discovers Patches in the Tomb of Giants mentioning shiny things, and waiting to kick you down next to a stranded miracle-trainer. It's also pretty much the only scripted/dialog-containing event in that area. It's a way that fanservice or motifs can make your game less satisfying.

It's the difference between being able to get a copy of an armor set that references Dark Souls 1, or having a similar character that matches the plot beats of a prior one 1:1. I don't think the former is likely to have any negative impacts on story/structure/choices/options of player, but is fanservice. The latter isn't game-breaking, but it is game diminishing to some extent (imho) - in the way it supplants content that could've been constructed out of whole cloth rather than wink-nod. I suspect a player's opinion of it likely hinges to a large degree on their feelings about fanservice.

 

[Lutte]

I've only heard people shit on DaS 3 but from what I've been watching on YouTube, in terms of cool looking boss fights it beats them all. FromSoft RPGs have always had relatively slow player characters with gaps between the player's input and the character's attack animations, but the faster speed of Bloodborne and 3 seems to have freed them up to make more interesting combat. Is Gael as cool to fight as he looks?

Gael is one of the most well designed fight in any of the games. His phase 2 has some of the most punishing attacks for mistimed rolls because of the lingering hits from the cape thing, the fight is very dynamic and besides rolling, the fight pushes you heavily into sprinting things like his crossbow so it feels something more than "press roll, hit, press roll" routine.

DS3 bosses are well worth the experience. Don't expect the excitement until you reach Irithyll or kill dancer early though.

L'Montes
While fanservice has always existed in From's games, I feel it broke DS3 the most. The game went way past the "here's some reference" into full blown fanboy dick sucking as it permeates most of the game once you hit Farron swamp.

 

[L'Montes]

While fanservice has always existed in From's games, I feel it broke DS3 the most. The game went way past the "here's some reference" into full blown fanboy dick sucking as it permeates most of the game once you hit Farron swamp.

Yeah. I can recall thinking to myself that some of the fanservice/reference material in Dark Souls 2 was just a result of Miyazaki being gone and Namco-oversight being hacky or something like that. Then.... Dark Souls 3 came along and sort of threw that explanation out the window. Dark Souls 3 winds up super-jarring in context of how everyone in DS2 can "not even remember their names" in reference to DS1 stuff.

Honestly, before Dark Souls 2 actually released, I just assumed every game in the Dark-"series" would have a completely new setting/backstory. Like a Final Fantasy-style bit where the world is new, but the mechanics/conventions are similar?

 

[Lutte]

Honestly, before Dark Souls 2 actually released, I just assumed every game in the Dark-"series" would have a completely new setting/backstory. Like a Final Fantasy-style bit where the world is new, but the mechanics/conventions are similar?

This wasn't possible because Bandai Namco funded DS1 on the basis of a trilogy of games. DS as a game license / intellectual property actually belongs to them and not From Soft. Just like how Demon's Souls and Bloodborne belong to Sony and those games will only ever have sequels, remake or remaster IF sony wants them to happen rather than whether From cares or not, and of course there is absolutely no chance in hell for those games to ever leave Sony's platforms.

Bamco is heavily into milking shit to death.
Activision isn't a good place to be either, but it's likely that From might have found a better contract for their future games if they went with a foreign publisher instead of glorious nippon. If they were happy with Bamco why would Sekiro not be published by bamco?

 

[Bigg Boss]

Picked Bloodborne because I like the setting and Dark/Demon Souls has been whored out so much already it all looks the same.

Next game in the series is Blood Souls.

 

[L'Montes]

Bamco is heavily into milking shit to death.
Activision isn't a good place to be either, but it's likely that From might have found a better contract for their future games if they went with a foreign publisher instead of glorious nippon. If they were happy with Bamco why would Sekiro not be published by bamco?

Reference: Every Namco franchise.

My uninformed assumption is that the contract for Dark Souls 1-3 was something Namco was eager to get into after they pulled in all the cash off the EU publishing arrangement of Demon's, and it was early enough in the game that From's star as a "popular" publisher hadn't quite risen yet (Miyazaki was still new to directing, different company president, pre-buyout from Kadokawa).

I have to wonder what Miyazaki's relationship was like with Namco. I wonder if they were pushy with him, before he became company president? That could've made things awkward.

 

[toro]

I've only heard people shit on DaS 3 but from what I've been watching on YouTube, in terms of cool looking boss fights it beats them all. FromSoft RPGs have always had relatively slow player characters with gaps between the player's input and the character's attack animations, but the faster speed of Bloodborne and 3 seems to have freed them up to make more interesting combat. Is Gael as cool to fight as he looks?

Gael is one of the most well designed fight in any of the games. His phase 2 has some of the most punishing attacks for mistimed rolls because of the lingering hits from the cape thing, the fight is very dynamic and besides rolling, the fight pushes you heavily into sprinting things like his crossbow so it feels something more than "press roll, hit, press roll" routine.

DS3 bosses are well worth the experience. Don't expect the excitement until you reach Irithyll or kill dancer early though.

Nahh. I never died to Gael and that's fucking retarded considering that Nameless King was an absolute nightmare for me.

Gael fight is the most anime boss fight from the entire franchise: just form without substance. Despite his flashy moves you are never in real danger as long as you obey the fight script.

The main issue with anime fights is that they "castrate" you as an offensive player: the boss is so insanely over-powered that you have no choice except to run/roll away most of the time and only hit it when it allows you to hit it. I know that all DaS boss fights are more or less scripted but Dancer, Friede and Gael are the boss fights where the script goes full-retard/anime: there is no way to counter the bosses when they become spastics. Except getting very lucky there is no way to counter Dancer 6+ spins or Gael's jumps: you have to roll, roll, roll, roll, hit, run, wait for stamina to increase and start again. Deviate from the script and you die (or lose precious healing resources).

In the context of the game: after hours of playing the game and mastering the combat system you are reduced to the status of a mouse running around a cat just because the game designer still wants to pretend that the game is difficult. However the fights are completely trivialized if you follow a specific script but with which you might not agree with. And that's an issue considering that the script is more flexible for the rest of the boss fights.

In my opinion Nameless King, Champion Gundyr or Incest Brothers are superior fights because you have to learn their movesets and you can actually engage with them while they go ballistic. Maybe that's why I died so much fighting these bosses because they allowed me to be greedy ... while for Gael, after fighting Friede, I knew that the final boss will be retarded and by sticking to a no-risk strategy I simply won the fight first try. I did not learn anything from that fight and my excitement for winning it was exactly null because I was not allowed to win the fight in my own terms. I only did what the game expected me to do and that's not great design in my opinion. Gael fight disgusts me in the same manner Bed of Chaos disgusts me. It's a shitty fight but quite fitting for an underwhelming game.

Now if you like constrained fights like this then it could be great for you but for me it was one of the most boring fight of the entire game. The same for Dancer and Friede.

 

[Damned Registrations]

When I fought Gael I was using a fuckoff huge hammer and trading hits with him during the parts of his spazzing that did the least damage and let me get in enough hits for a stagger. Shit was awesome. I feel bad for you if you used the open area to cheese him by sprinting away constantly. Sounds like you had a similar experience to what I had with Manus in DS1, who many people seem to think was a great fight.

 

[Wunderbar]

I feel bad for you if you used the open area to cheese him by sprinting away constantly.

since when avoiding damage is considered cheesing?