Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
News Content Gallery About Donate Discord Contact
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

From Software The Dark Souls Discussion Thread

Sunri

Liturgist
Joined
Apr 16, 2020
Messages
1,547
Location
Poland
Yeah, this vulnerability was discovered RIGHT before the release of Elden Ring. How convenient.

It's certainly not because they wanted to squeeze everything for Elden Ring and move everyone from other games there.

Just when I was about to start my DS2 walkthrough.

They STILL haven't fixed that shit?

It sure did seem mighty suspicious to me.

No but they deleted co=op tags from steam, so they may not fix it at all.
 

NJClaw

OoOoOoOoOoh
Patron
Joined
Aug 30, 2016
Messages
7,139
Location
Pronouns: rusts/rusty
Pathfinder: Kingmaker
I'm Ridin' with Biden I'm Ridin' with Biden
Yeah, this vulnerability was discovered RIGHT before the release of Elden Ring. How convenient.

It's certainly not because they wanted to squeeze everything for Elden Ring and move everyone from other games there.

Just when I was about to start my DS2 walkthrough.

They STILL haven't fixed that shit?

It sure did seem mighty suspicious to me.
Coming up with "the code that we used in our old games and that we will reuse in our upcoming game has a backdoor that allows hackers to steal your money" just before your new game releases doesn't sound like a great move. Still, they put a fucking giant turtle pope in their game, can't trust their mental sanity,
 

SumDrunkGuy

Arcane
Shitposter
Joined
Feb 2, 2015
Messages
6,533
I bought the remaster of this a few years back and gave it a go. Could not finish. After Dark Souls 2 this game, while amazing for it's time, just feels inferior in most ways. The typical Dark Souls nerd will bring up trivial bullshit like "muh interconnected world" or "muh Artorias and Sif broship". That is nothing more than window dressing. Dark Souls 2 is better at everything that matters most.

All of 2's DLCs alone trump anything in og Dark Souls.
 

Silva

Arcane
Joined
Jul 17, 2005
Messages
4,011
I bought the remaster of this a few years back and gave it a go. Could not finish. After Dark Souls 2 this game, while amazing for it's time, just feels inferior in most ways. The typical Dark Souls nerd will bring up trivial bullshit like "muh interconnected world" or "muh Artorias and Sif broship". That is nothing more than window dressing. Dark Souls 2 is better at everything that matters most.

All of 2's DLCs alone trump anything in og Dark Souls.
I have the opposite view. While I agree DS2 improved almost everything from a pure mechanical standpoint, it lost part of what made DS1 so memorable and elevated it from a good videogame to a masterpiece: atmosphere and sense of wonder. And yes, the interconnected world was a big factor, as it gave Lordran a unique character that's rare to see in the vidya industry. DS2 world (what's its name again?) pales in comparison.

Bloodborne was the game that managed to bring back that DS1 vibe. Yharnam and its suburbs, physical, onirical or otherwise, are a treat to explore and experience.
 

SumDrunkGuy

Arcane
Shitposter
Joined
Feb 2, 2015
Messages
6,533
I bought the remaster of this a few years back and gave it a go. Could not finish. After Dark Souls 2 this game, while amazing for it's time, just feels inferior in most ways. The typical Dark Souls nerd will bring up trivial bullshit like "muh interconnected world" or "muh Artorias and Sif broship". That is nothing more than window dressing. Dark Souls 2 is better at everything that matters most.

All of 2's DLCs alone trump anything in og Dark Souls.
I have the opposite view. While I agree DS2 improved almost everything from a pure mechanical standpoint, it lost part of what made DS1 so memorable and elevated it from a good videogame to a masterpiece: atmosphere and sense of wonder. And yes, the interconnected world was a big factor, as it gave Lordran a unique character that's rare to see in the vidya industry. DS2 world (what's its name again?) pales in comparison.

Bloodborne was the game that managed to bring back that DS1 vibe. Yharnam and its suburbs, physical, onirical or otherwise, are a treat to explore and experience.

I thought 2's world was pretty memorable. Obviously not as consistent in the interconnectedness (like the elevator that turds like to whine about) but it more than made up for it in branching paths and sheer size. Some people claim it sacrificed quality for quantity and I think that's complete horseshit.

There were plenty of areas in 2 that were well designed and memorable. I even loved that one area that got shit on a lot. Shrine of Amana I think it was. It also had the best hub area imo.

Oh and I totally agree about Bloodborne. That had the best world and atmosphere of all these games.
 

Lyric Suite

Converting to Islam
Joined
Mar 23, 2006
Messages
51,124
Yeah, this vulnerability was discovered RIGHT before the release of Elden Ring. How convenient.

It's certainly not because they wanted to squeeze everything for Elden Ring and move everyone from other games there.

Just when I was about to start my DS2 walkthrough.

They STILL haven't fixed that shit?

It sure did seem mighty suspicious to me.

No but they deleted co=op tags from steam, so they may not fix it at all.

So what, they just broke all their previous games forever?
 

Sunri

Liturgist
Joined
Apr 16, 2020
Messages
1,547
Location
Poland
Yeah, this vulnerability was discovered RIGHT before the release of Elden Ring. How convenient.

It's certainly not because they wanted to squeeze everything for Elden Ring and move everyone from other games there.

Just when I was about to start my DS2 walkthrough.

They STILL haven't fixed that shit?

It sure did seem mighty suspicious to me.

No but they deleted co=op tags from steam, so they may not fix it at all.

So what, they just broke all their previous games forever?

Who knows, this article explains fairy well what happened https://www.videogameschronicle.com...that-took-servers-offline-has-been-published/
 

Max Damage

Savant
Joined
Mar 1, 2017
Messages
445
So, I was gifted a copy of this game a while ago, had fun with first part, but now I've been basically just running through Tomb of Giants and Archives because I don't like anything after Sen's Fortress (except Old Londo Ruins), considering just dropping it alltogether. How do sequels compare?
 

Ryzer

Erudite
Joined
May 1, 2020
Messages
671
So, I was gifted a copy of this game a while ago, had fun with first part, but now I've been basically just running through Tomb of Giants and Archives because I don't like anything after Sen's Fortress (except Old Londo Ruins), considering just dropping it alltogether. How do sequels compare?
Avoid Dark souls 3.
 

mediocrepoet

En français: poètemédiocre!
Patron
Joined
Sep 30, 2009
Messages
5,296
Location
Combatfag: Gold box / Pathfinder
Codex 2012 MCA Project: Eternity Divinity: Original Sin 2
So, I was gifted a copy of this game a while ago, had fun with first part, but now I've been basically just running through Tomb of Giants and Archives because I don't like anything after Sen's Fortress (except Old Londo Ruins), considering just dropping it alltogether. How do sequels compare?

I guess it really depends on why you don't like it. Many people think Dark Souls is the best game, but a few prefer the sequels and/or Demon's Souls / Bloodborne.
 

RoSoDude

Arcane
Joined
Oct 1, 2016
Messages
675
So, I was gifted a copy of this game a while ago, had fun with first part, but now I've been basically just running through Tomb of Giants and Archives because I don't like anything after Sen's Fortress (except Old Londo Ruins), considering just dropping it alltogether. How do sequels compare?

Dark Souls 2 is weird and experimental, which makes it fresh and exciting if you ask me and many others here, or clunky and inconsistent in quality according to the contrarians who decided that deviating from the first game was sacrilege. Dark Souls 3 is polished but safe, arguably having the tightest combat but with more quotidian level design and pared down RPG systems, not to mention coming across like fanfiction for DS1 rather than coming up with a new setting and story elements. Both games were rushed and had a lot cut during development, but with entirely different views on what was good about Dark Souls and what could be improved.
 

Wunderbar

Arcane
Joined
Nov 15, 2015
Messages
7,338
How do sequels compare?
Demon's Souls is consistently great (doesn't have a single bad/unfinished location, starts strong, ends strong). Has the best atmosphere in series. The only negatives are a short playtime (it's like thrice shorter than Dark Souls 1), and rather unrefined mechanics (for an obvious reason).

Dark Souls 2 is more consistent than Dark Souls 1 - it never reaches heights of the early DaS1 (Blighttown, Sen's fortress, high level of interconnectedness, etc), but it also doesn't have shit levels like Izalith. With DLCs it's also the longest of Dark Souls games, and has the biggest amount of content (spells, weapons, armor sets, locations, enemy types, bosses, etc). It also has the best char-gen/rpg system in all of the Dark Souls games.

Dark Souls 3 is a mediocre cashgrab that rehashes massive amounts of ideas from previous games. It is also the most linear game in the series (you basically just progress from A to B for the duration of the entire game), and has the worst rpg system/build variety in the series.
 

Lutte

Dumbfuck!
Dumbfuck
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Messages
1,726
While DS2 has too many mediocre bosses (both mediocre from a gameplay perspective and from an atmosphere perspective, where it's "ah, another X again") I much prefer the combat over ds3 actually as it doubled down on what souls games are really good at, action commitment. Everything costs a ton of stamina, stamina regens slowly, drinking estus is slower than DS1, on a mechanical level I see DS2 as the perfected interpretation of souls games, it just needed more time in the kitchen to get a few more cooler bosses (still, there's some lovable ones in there, like Darklurker). In DS3 you never give a shit about your stamina while spamming rolls after rolls. It's an unsound game.
 

Max Damage

Savant
Joined
Mar 1, 2017
Messages
445
Thank you everyone for the replies. My problem with post-Sen's is that levels look wide open and boring, for the most part, and enemy placement is like MMORPG. I'm now in Crystal Cavern, and it's like the opposite of what was before: long, easy corridor to boss that kills you in 1-2 hits.
 

Lutte

Dumbfuck!
Dumbfuck
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Messages
1,726
Thank you everyone for the replies. My problem with post-Sen's is that levels look wide open and boring, for the most part, and enemy placement is like MMORPG. I'm now in Crystal Cavern, and it's like the opposite of what was before: long, easy corridor to boss that kills you in 1-2 hits.
Wide open and boring is pretty much DS3's level design motto. I caught cancer doing the Road of Sacrifice-Cathedral-Farron loop. Unlike DS1, DS3 pulls this shitty design from the start.
 

Silva

Arcane
Joined
Jul 17, 2005
Messages
4,011
Thank you everyone for the replies. My problem with post-Sen's is that levels look wide open and boring, for the most part, and enemy placement is like MMORPG. I'm now in Crystal Cavern, and it's like the opposite of what was before: long, easy corridor to boss that kills you in 1-2 hits.
Wide open and boring is pretty much DS3's level design motto. I caught cancer doing the Road of Sacrifice-Cathedral-Farron loop. Unlike DS1, DS3 pulls this shitty design from the start.
While I agree, it's worth noting that DS3 improves somewhat in the later half/from Irithyl forward. Even in world design which actually branches out (one usually has Anor Londo, Irithyl Dungeon, Archdragon Peak, Lothric Castle, Ariandel Painted World as possible paths at any time). Not to say the game becomes great though, by that time the shittiness of the first half already "Tarnished" the experience, and the BB mechanics has no place here, so it's still a contender for worst Souls game.
 
Last edited:

cvv

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 30, 2013
Messages
16,554
Location
Kingdom of Bohemia
Many people think Dark Souls is the best game, but a few prefer the sequels

Because there's no such thing as "the best game". It's all subjective.

Even tho a few select things can be objective - the healing mechanics of Dark Souls 1-3 is clearly better than that of Demon's Souls or Bloodborne, PvP in DS2 is objectively better than in Bloodborne and bosses in BB are way better than anything in any DS game.

At least I've never seen anyone claiming otherwise in those points.
 

RoSoDude

Arcane
Joined
Oct 1, 2016
Messages
675
While DS2 has too many mediocre bosses (both mediocre from a gameplay perspective and from an atmosphere perspective, where it's "ah, another X again") I much prefer the combat over ds3 actually as it doubled down on what souls games are really good at, action commitment. Everything costs a ton of stamina, stamina regens slowly, drinking estus is slower than DS1, on a mechanical level I see DS2 as the perfected interpretation of souls games, it just needed more time in the kitchen to get a few more cooler bosses (still, there's some lovable ones in there, like Darklurker). In DS3 you never give a shit about your stamina while spamming rolls after rolls. It's an unsound game.
Thank you everyone for the replies. My problem with post-Sen's is that levels look wide open and boring, for the most part, and enemy placement is like MMORPG. I'm now in Crystal Cavern, and it's like the opposite of what was before: long, easy corridor to boss that kills you in 1-2 hits.
Wide open and boring is pretty much DS3's level design motto. I caught cancer doing the Road of Sacrifice-Cathedral-Farron loop. Unlike DS1, DS3 pulls this shitty design from the start.

Indeed; Demon's Souls, Dark Souls, and Dark Souls 2 all have a heavy emphasis on tactical stamina management and careful movement in treacherous and cramped combat arenas. From Bloodborne onwards (with Dark Souls 3 being the worst offender, though even Elden Ring is in this mold) FromSoft seemingly gave up on these elements, preferring instead flashier combat focused primarily on dodge roll timing with minimal importance to stamina or tactical positioning. As far as boss design I think this is fine, as Dark Souls 3's bosses are mostly very well-crafted, challenging, and varied. However, even in the boss arenas you can see the problem infecting the general level design, being that nearly every combat locale is a flat arena or wide corridor. With some rare exceptions that make up the best parts of the game (e.g. Irithyll Dungeon, Grand Archives, Archdragon Peak), you have ample space to fight enemies who attack straight on, which becomes rote as Dark Souls was interesting as a matter of complex level and encounter design rather than its raw mechanical depth, which was always more simplistic than in action brawlers like Devil May Cry or Ninja Gaiden.

Compared with the environmental awareness required by e.g. the thin walkways of Sen's Fortress, the vertical boardwalk structures of Blighttown, the dizzying labyrinth of traps in the Catacombs, the claustrophobic pincer ambushes in New Londo Ruins in Dark Souls, or the spellcaster/bruiser/anklebiter arrangement in the watery trenches of Shrine of Amana, the conga line of knights backed up by distant archers on the bridges of Iron Keep, the quicksand pits of Brightstone Cove Tseldora in Dark Souls 2, most of the level design in Dark Souls 3 seems wholly uninterested in creating challenging combat scenarios due to the intersection of local geometry and enemy placement. Central Irithyll, Anor Londo rehash, Lothric Castle, Catacombs of Carthus (even fan-favorite Cathedral of the Deep, despite its concealments) are scarcely more than corridors with enemies.
 

Elwro

Arcane
Joined
Dec 29, 2002
Messages
11,629
Location
Krakow, Poland
Divinity: Original Sin Wasteland 2
Thank you everyone for the replies. My problem with post-Sen's is that levels look wide open and boring, for the most part, and enemy placement is like MMORPG. I'm now in Crystal Cavern, and it's like the opposite of what was before: long, easy corridor to boss that kills you in 1-2 hits.
So you've not enjoyed the Archives? I'd expect figuring out the secrets in the cells to be fun and the archives themselves to be among the better post-vessel locations...
 

Max Damage

Savant
Joined
Mar 1, 2017
Messages
445
Thank you everyone for the replies. My problem with post-Sen's is that levels look wide open and boring, for the most part, and enemy placement is like MMORPG. I'm now in Crystal Cavern, and it's like the opposite of what was before: long, easy corridor to boss that kills you in 1-2 hits.
So you've not enjoyed the Archives? I'd expect figuring out the secrets in the cells to be fun and the archives themselves to be among the better post-vessel locations...
Now that I've long passed the entrance, I actually liked the Archives, one of the better levels! It's just that being greeted by barrage of arrows after coming out of Tomb of Skeledogs soured my initial vibe.
 

Silva

Arcane
Joined
Jul 17, 2005
Messages
4,011
While DS2 has too many mediocre bosses (both mediocre from a gameplay perspective and from an atmosphere perspective, where it's "ah, another X again") I much prefer the combat over ds3 actually as it doubled down on what souls games are really good at, action commitment. Everything costs a ton of stamina, stamina regens slowly, drinking estus is slower than DS1, on a mechanical level I see DS2 as the perfected interpretation of souls games, it just needed more time in the kitchen to get a few more cooler bosses (still, there's some lovable ones in there, like Darklurker). In DS3 you never give a shit about your stamina while spamming rolls after rolls. It's an unsound game.
Thank you everyone for the replies. My problem with post-Sen's is that levels look wide open and boring, for the most part, and enemy placement is like MMORPG. I'm now in Crystal Cavern, and it's like the opposite of what was before: long, easy corridor to boss that kills you in 1-2 hits.
Wide open and boring is pretty much DS3's level design motto. I caught cancer doing the Road of Sacrifice-Cathedral-Farron loop. Unlike DS1, DS3 pulls this shitty design from the start.

Indeed; Demon's Souls, Dark Souls, and Dark Souls 2 all have a heavy emphasis on tactical stamina management and careful movement in treacherous and cramped combat arenas. From Bloodborne onwards (with Dark Souls 3 being the worst offender, though even Elden Ring is in this mold) FromSoft seemingly gave up on these elements, preferring instead flashier combat focused primarily on dodge roll timing with minimal importance to stamina or tactical positioning. As far as boss design I think this is fine, as Dark Souls 3's bosses are mostly very well-crafted, challenging, and varied. However, even in the boss arenas you can see the problem infecting the general level design, being that nearly every combat locale is a flat arena or wide corridor. With some rare exceptions that make up the best parts of the game (e.g. Irithyll Dungeon, Grand Archives, Archdragon Peak), you have ample space to fight enemies who attack straight on, which becomes rote as Dark Souls was interesting as a matter of complex level and encounter design rather than its raw mechanical depth, which was always more simplistic than in action brawlers like Devil May Cry or Ninja Gaiden.

Compared with the environmental awareness required by e.g. the thin walkways of Sen's Fortress, the vertical boardwalk structures of Blighttown, the dizzying labyrinth of traps in the Catacombs, the claustrophobic pincer ambushes in New Londo Ruins in Dark Souls, or the spellcaster/bruiser/anklebiter arrangement in the watery trenches of Shrine of Amana, the conga line of knights backed up by distant archers on the bridges of Iron Keep, the quicksand pits of Brightstone Cove Tseldora in Dark Souls 2, most of the level design in Dark Souls 3 seems wholly uninterested in creating challenging combat scenarios due to the intersection of local geometry and enemy placement. Central Irithyll, Anor Londo rehash, Lothric Castle, Catacombs of Carthus (even fan-favorite Cathedral of the Deep, despite its concealments) are scarcely more than corridors with enemies.
Agree with your point, but you're wrong about Cathedral of the Deep. It's among the best levels From ever designed. And I say that as someone who hates its ocre palette.
 

Lyric Suite

Converting to Islam
Joined
Mar 23, 2006
Messages
51,124
Did they fix the servers or are they still pretending they totally didn't shut down their old games to boost sales on Meme Ring?
 

Lyric Suite

Converting to Islam
Joined
Mar 23, 2006
Messages
51,124
So, I was gifted a copy of this game a while ago, had fun with first part, but now I've been basically just running through Tomb of Giants and Archives because I don't like anything after Sen's Fortress (except Old Londo Ruins), considering just dropping it alltogether. How do sequels compare?

Don't bother. If you couldn't even stand DS1 forget about it.
 

Lutte

Dumbfuck!
Dumbfuck
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Messages
1,726
So, I was gifted a copy of this game a while ago, had fun with first part, but now I've been basically just running through Tomb of Giants and Archives because I don't like anything after Sen's Fortress (except Old Londo Ruins), considering just dropping it alltogether. How do sequels compare?

Don't bother. If you couldn't even stand DS1 forget about it.
That isn't necessarily the case. I also dropped DS1 like him after anal londo, played ds2 on release.. and replayed it a lot, then went back to DS1 later and forced myself to finish it.

It's common to shit on DS2 like it's the worst thing From released but it was the first From game I enjoyed from start to finish without any element I truly hated. Bloodborne and Demon's Souls were the other games, which I both played later. DS3 is dogshit, Elden Ring is a mixed bag of some good and some bad, Sekiro's only good content is bosses and the world exploration is dogshit.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Top Bottom