Preview Microsoft Gamescom 2015 Conference: Dark Souls III Gameplay Trailer

[karnak]

Please, enlighten the novice by proving that Call of Duty isn't a RPG.

Of course Call of Duty has RPG elements!
Look below:

 

[Fenix]

How you can recognize Japanese game? By strange shit that going on in trailers, that's for sure.
Jokes aside - DS isn't an RPG, it has RPG flavour, RPG elements, interesting world, but...
Part RPG, part something else, just like Bethesda games.

 

[meanwhileInPoland]

How you can recognize Japanese game? By strange shit that going on in trailers, that's for sure.
Jokes aside - DS isn't an RPG, it has RPG flavour, RPG elements, interesting world, but...
Part RPG, part something else, just like Bethesda games.

Kind of like Pillars of Eternity. Part Infińity engine games clone part absolute shit.

 

[Tuco Benedicto Pacifico]

I can't believe that several years later you people are still wasting time with this autistic-friendly argument about what should be considered a proper RPG.
Who cares? At very least Dark Souls is an astonishingly good game, which is more that could be said for a lot of other titles.

 

[Bonerbill]

I can't believe that several years later you people are still wasting time with this autistic-friendly argument about what should be considered a proper RPG.
Who cares? At very least Dark Souls is an astonishingly good game, which is more that could be said for a lot of other titles.

I know there isn't one clear definition on what's an RPG, but DS is clearly not an RPG. It's an action game.

 

[VladimirK]

I can't believe that several years later you people are still wasting time with this autistic-friendly argument about what should be considered a proper RPG.
Who cares? At very least Dark Souls is an astonishingly good game, which is more that could be said for a lot of other titles.

The site isn't called "astonishingly good games codex".

 

[Tuco Benedicto Pacifico]

I know there isn't one clear definition on what's an RPG, but DS is clearly not an RPG. It's an action game.

There's probably as misunderstanding. I'm not trying to discuss how much of a RPG it is.
I'm saying I don't give a flying fuck.

The site isn't called "astonishingly good games codex".

I'll take note of this important issue on my invisible typewriter.
If even Bethesda garbage can be discussed here, than I have absolutely no problem with paying attention to some ACTUALLY good ARPG.

 

[Jaesun]

The site isn't called "astonishingly good games codex".

 

[Crooked Bee]

It's a dungeon crawler, aka the best kind of RPG.

 

[GreyViper]

Dark Souls is as good an RPG series as the Witcher.
Just look at those tits!

Now that's what I call +2 Tits of Mental Domination

Its trap, she is a he, RUN!!

Still hyped for 3rd part, I can see a lot of Bloodbourne in it.

 

[Jedi Master Radek]

Make this as one of these everchanging subtitles

 

[Jaesun]

I wish, I'm not an admin though.

 

[Metro]

Dark Souls gets a pass because it has the best combat of any action RPG in recent history.

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

Dark Souls gets a pass because it has the best combat of any action RPG in recent history.

Well, for poor PCbros unable to play Dragon's Dogma...

 

[Cowboy Moment]

Well, for poor PCbros unable to play Dragon's Dogma...

Better Dark Souls at 60 FPS than Dragon's Dogma at the shitty framerate it runs on PS3. Generally speaking, I find DD's combat overrated, but it's possible that it's the framerate making it feel worse than it actually is.

 

[Crescent Hawk]

I really gotta love their art department. They can infuse such power in their ambients and monsters. If they decided to, I dont know make a more adventurish, immersive fps it would rival Thief atmosphere.

 

[Sceptic]

RPG just stands for Rogues, Paladins and Goblins. I though everybody knew that by now.

The entire Might & Magic series isn't a RPG?

MM7 has all 3

 

[Jaesun]

I only remember the Knight class.

 

[Jasede]

Impressions from an early build:

 

[Zeriel]

I only remember the Knight class.

Spoiler

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

Better Dark Souls at 60 FPS than Dragon's Dogma at the shitty framerate it runs on PS3. Generally speaking, I find DD's combat overrated, but it's possible that it's the framerate making it feel worse than it actually is.

Technical aspects aside (Dragon's Dogma does have some serious framerate issues) it is so far beyond Demon's/Dark Souls in terms of design that anyone who says otherwise comes across as just plain silly. Let's just do a few comparisons here.

Souls combat is mostly two dimensional; there's no real use of elevation or the air. Dragon's Dogma allows for jumping attacks, has mountable surfaces in many combat arenas (which enemies can jump up on too), and allows the player to clamber up larger enemies (avoiding the goofy sort of "heelcutting" fights against larger foes.

Souls games occasionally have weak points on their enemies and different elemental resistances/weaknesses. Dragon's Dogma has enemies with dynamic weakpoints and behaviors that trigger when afflicted by different status effects (e.g. bandits/goblins panicking when set aflame, dragonkin canceling attacks into roars of pain when they lose a horn, cockatrices going berserk when their waddle is punctured).

Souls games boast a robust melee combat system (even if it is mostly a dodge/block -> jab affair) but completely flounder when they expand to other avenues like ranged attacks and magic; how many folks enjoy the riveting gameplay of lock on -> fire Soul Arrow when they are playing a caster? Dragon's Dogma more fully realizes different playstyles. Mages have a ton of spells at their disposal, many of which have a lot of "play" in them. Not only do spells have a timing component, but they also have different aiming requirements; an Ingil, Frazil, Levin, Brontide, Frigor, Fulmination, Glicel, and Maelstrom all are targted differently...and this is only the direct-damage magicks. And even archers have a lot more fun, with all sorts of trick-shot moves and specialty arrows that the Souls games can only dream about. Playing these character types is a lot more fun and rewarding.

And this is to say nothing of the Pawn mechanics which, while a bit opaque and unintuitive, can be some of the best and most interesting AI companions in gaming.

I understand why the Souls games, and their combat, have a strong foothold in the public consciousness. They're accessible, competently-made, and slick. And similarly I can see why Dragon's Dogma isn't afforded much respect critically; it's a little clunky and it's brilliance isn't readily apparent. It's the same sort of gaming critique that exalts games like Skyrim, Final Fantasy, God of War, or The Last of Us while pillorying Arcanum, Dragon Quarter, God Hand, and Vanquish. Most people just don't give a damn about the nuances of mechanics and progressive (not in the political sense) game design, preferring easily delivered fun.

Still disappointing, though. Imagine what we could be seeing if gaming critique was pushing other games to follow the example of Dragon's Dogma when it came to action-RPGs.

 

[Declinator]

Technical aspects aside (Dragon's Dogma does have some serious framerate issues) it is so far beyond Demon's/Dark Souls in terms of design that anyone who says otherwise comes across as just plain silly.

While I can understand your arguments I disagree. The archers and the magicians in Dragon's Dogma may very well be greatly superior to that of Dark Souls's archers and magicians but that does not diminish the melee combat in Dark Souls. The basic melee combat in Dragon's Dogma is not even close but setting that aside, Dragon's Dogma is also a very different sort of game.

While they may both be classified as action RPGs, Dragon's Dogma is a much slower game where accurate placement of attacks and managing your resources (especially special attacks and pawns) has a much bigger impact than it does in Dark Souls in which timing of attacks/dodge rolls/blocks is everything. In Dragon's Dogma you have all day to react to the enemy's movement and more often than not, your pawns take the heat.

A big factor in differentiating the two is also the fact that both you and the enemy have a ton of HP in Dragon's Dogma whereas you may very well be one-shotted in Dark Souls and the bosses take about ten hits instead of a hundred. (yes yes, your Magical whatchamacallit hybrid takes care of all the bosses in one hit with his special attack X.)

By all this I mean that they offer vastly different experiences and aren't necessarily games that should be directly compared.

I understand why the Souls games, and their combat, have a strong foothold in the public consciousness. They're accessible, competently-made, and slick. And similarly I can see why Dragon's Dogma isn't afforded much respect critically; it's a little clunky and it's brilliance isn't readily apparent. It's the same sort of gaming critique that exalts games like Skyrim, Final Fantasy, God of War, or The Last of Us while pillorying Arcanum, Dragon Quarter, God Hand, and Vanquish. Most people just don't give a damn about the nuances of mechanics and progressive (not in the political sense) game design, preferring easily delivered fun.

Still disappointing, though. Imagine what we could be seeing if gaming critique was pushing other games to follow the example of Dragon's Dogma when it came to action-RPGs.

You condescending bastard So the only reason they didn't like it was because "they couldn't understand?" Dragon's Dogma isn't a very complex game and in fact I'd say it is in fact in many ways more accessible than Dark Souls. The difficulty curve isn't as steep and most things are thoroughly explained. The game wasn't even particularly badly received by the critics: Metascores close to 80 across the board.

What exactly is so progressive about its game design anyway? Its multi-classing system certainly isn't anything new for one familiar with Wizardries and the like. The weak points and climbing on enemies is also something that games like Shadow of the Colossus explored far earlier. Pawn system? Give me a break. That is not to say that Dark Souls is progressive either.

(Vanquish has a Metascore of 84 and Arcanum has a Metascore of 81 by the way.)

 

[Cowboy Moment]

Technical aspects aside (Dragon's Dogma does have some serious framerate issues) it is so far beyond Demon's/Dark Souls in terms of design that anyone who says otherwise comes across as just plain silly. Let's just do a few comparisons here.

Souls combat is mostly two dimensional; there's no real use of elevation or the air. Dragon's Dogma allows for jumping attacks, has mountable surfaces in many combat arenas (which enemies can jump up on too), and allows the player to clamber up larger enemies (avoiding the goofy sort of "heelcutting" fights against larger foes.

Souls games occasionally have weak points on their enemies and different elemental resistances/weaknesses. Dragon's Dogma has enemies with dynamic weakpoints and behaviors that trigger when afflicted by different status effects (e.g. bandits/goblins panicking when set aflame, dragonkin canceling attacks into roars of pain when they lose a horn, cockatrices going berserk when their waddle is punctured).

Souls games boast a robust melee combat system (even if it is mostly a dodge/block -> jab affair) but completely flounder when they expand to other avenues like ranged attacks and magic; how many folks enjoy the riveting gameplay of lock on -> fire Soul Arrow when they are playing a caster? Dragon's Dogma more fully realizes different playstyles. Mages have a ton of spells at their disposal, many of which have a lot of "play" in them. Not only do spells have a timing component, but they also have different aiming requirements; an Ingil, Frazil, Levin, Brontide, Frigor, Fulmination, Glicel, and Maelstrom all are targted differently...and this is only the direct-damage magicks. And even archers have a lot more fun, with all sorts of trick-shot moves and specialty arrows that the Souls games can only dream about. Playing these character types is a lot more fun and rewarding.

But what use is all of this added complexity if it doesn't result in any compelling gameplay? The climbing fucking sucks, it's tedious and clunky. The world being vertically traversable is cute, but doesn't really affect the majority of combat encounters in any way. Dynamic weakpoints and more elaborate enemy behaviours are cute, but they really don't make that much of a difference in the end. Magic is cool, but what it comes down to is standing clear and hoping to finish your spell cast before something interrupts you randomly - you can also try spell synching if you like raging at pawn AI, I suppose, another thing that could've been nice if you could actually have a modicum of control over what your pawns do.

DD's systems are certainly more ambitious than Souls', but their execution leaves much to be desired.

And this is to say nothing of the Pawn mechanics which, while a bit opaque and unintuitive, can be some of the best and most interesting AI companions in gaming.

"a bit opaque and unintuitive" , come on. By far the most ridiculous flaw in DD's combat system is the inability to directly customize the pawn AI behaviour, and the inability to give them more sophisticated direct commands. At least the designers seemed to have realized this and took care not to have encounters where pawn target choice, for instance, would become an issue. It's still pretty bad though.

I understand why the Souls games, and their combat, have a strong foothold in the public consciousness. They're accessible, competently-made, and slick. And similarly I can see why Dragon's Dogma isn't afforded much respect critically; it's a little clunky and it's brilliance isn't readily apparent. It's the same sort of gaming critique that exalts games like Skyrim, Final Fantasy, God of War, or The Last of Us while pillorying Arcanum, Dragon Quarter, God Hand, and Vanquish. Most people just don't give a damn about the nuances of mechanics and progressive (not in the political sense) game design, preferring easily delivered fun.

Still disappointing, though. Imagine what we could be seeing if gaming critique was pushing other games to follow the example of Dragon's Dogma when it came to action-RPGs.

Oh, please. You're better than this.

 

[Shadenuat]

It's a shame that Souls series went for the evolution and more of the same path like most JRPGs do, but I think restricted movement and grounded melee combat actually add to the atmosphere and the spirit of the game.

As for magic and ranged, it's a cancer of DS and I wish they made that stuff as rare as estus flasks.

 

[DawnrazorDCLXVI]

It's a dungeon crawler, aka the best kind of RPG.

Crooked Bee has this straight. It has a retro-90's dungeon crawl feel, much like the Lands of Lore series after #1, or Ultima Underworld, or multitudes of others.

Considering Diablo had less sophistication, yet is within the RPG genre, it not exactly up for debate what genre Dark Souls fall into.

However, the graphics. Seriously? These look just as shittily drawn as Dark Souls 1, except with MOAR REFLECTION!!11!

The animations are still less fluid than any Source engine game, like Dark Messiah, and considerably less smooth than Alice, which was last gen. Even worse, Alice got panned on its graphics by several prominent gaming magazines, and that is on prior tech consoles.

Also, textures are blotchy, at best, and I can barely tell the wall from stacks of crates in the distance, as both look flat, blocky, and without natural texture, instead substituting a rubber look.

They also ought to work on natural physics! I am betting they still use decals to mark walls that have been scratched, just to cut development costs. Milking it much?

EDIT: Yes, I know. I will probably own this game and love it! Other than that, it looks and feels great.

Salute,

Dawnrazor