|
Waverhouse posted:If this is true then the Lords of Cinder you kill in the game can't have linked the flame, or they would have been tied to the Kiln of the First Flame to defend it. The only people to have truly linked the flame are player characters; this seems further backed in the previous games when the player character inevitably takes their seat near the Kiln, transfixed on the first flame. There's definitely more to being a lord of cinder. Each one is a two-phase fight where the 2nd phase gets all fiery like the player's own embered mode, including the last boss. The Princes' Cinders refer to the act of linking the fire as being on the path of becoming a lord as well. quote:It would seem that the title Lord of Cinder is prospective; as in, these guys are strong enough to be Lords of Cinder but haven't done that quite yet. In fact the Prince is said to have refused to link the fire outright in his item descriptions, but gets the title anyway. Since they didn't want to sacrifice their souls willingly, now you come along to do it by force. It sort of seems like Ludleth might be lying to you; at the very least what he says is at odds with the description of a pretty important Soul item. The Princes, however, were never woken up by the bells of awakening, and people like Emma refer to them as the Lords that should have been.
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 18:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 00:18 |
|
|
I just did my fourth playthrough of Farron's Keep and the level design has really grown on me. FK and the Catacombs were two places that, the first time through, I got murdered by the tall goatmans and dual wield skelingtons, so I decided to try to panic-sprint through/past everything. Now that I'm comfortable with the game and killing those things, I've been able to play them as intended. FK has this great deceptive simplicity to it. It's more or less a linear path from fire to fire to bonfire to watchdog/fire, but if you freak out, go for swamp treasure, or get turned around, it feels like this massive area with too many side paths. It's not visually very appealing, but it has that Blighttown oppressiveness that makes it profoundly unpleasant in an intentional way and the FK -> Catacombs -> Irithyll progression is very satisfying because of it. tl:dr - FK is no Cathedral/Archives/Undead Settlement, but it's actually a nicely put-together annoyance area that is shorter and easier than you think at first. I rate it a Solid out of Great
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 18:05
|
|
|
TGLT posted:The darksign eclipse doesn't leave after you link the flames. It's also just way way weaker that the original explosion of fire in the original "link the flames" ending. Plus it fits much better with the game's general emphasis on endings and inevitability, and we've been told since the first game linking the fire is only temporary anyways. If it's going to be sputter out might as well be the probably last Dark Souls game. True, but I take most things that happen post game with a grain of salt, especially since the first thing the game asks after you beat the game is whether you want to start NG+. I don't think the flame is temporary, I think the relinking of it is since someone can always choose not to; I think people have conflated the flame and the act of relinking it. The whole 'the flame is temporary and will die' idea also is upended in a weird eay in the End of Fire ending, where the Firekeeper says that she sees other fires on the horizon, which implies that all this will start again but with the second or third flame, instead of the first one. If the flame is truly temporary and is meant to die, then I feel like the End of Flame ending should have no additional fires showing up elsewhere. quote:Someone already said that Ludleth says as much, but the soul of Twin Princes hints very much as well that being a Lord of Cinder means linking the flames: "The two princes rejected their duty to become Lords of Cinder, and settled down far, far away to watch the fire fade from a distance. A curse makes their souls nearly inseparable." Which also goes along well with their cinder description: "Suffice it to say, the path to linking the fire is a cursed one indeed." That's what I'm saying tho, the Princes get called Lords of Cinder but they don't link the flame. Why do they get the title if they didn't do it? quote:I don't remember the interview, but Miyazaki has explained that the Unkindled are undead that attempted to link the flames but failed. Hence they are "unfit even to be cinder." I feel like the 'Unfit even to be cinder' line is this iterations version of the NPCs all throwing shade on the player character (in 1 and 2 NPCs are generally dismissive of you and of the notion of some rando undead linking the flame, at least until you start knocking out the big dudes). I didn't read that interview; does he say how exactly it is they failed? If failing just means 'died as they were trying to collect souls' then I don't know how that makes them different from any other undead doing the same thing. I guess it could mean 'tried to link the flame but didn't have enough souls to do so' but how would they do that, if they would need to be strong enough to defeat the Soul of Cinder?.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 18:10
|
|
|
Melanion posted:Isn't that every catalyst? Nope, that's not the buff I'm talking about. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CFb_Vv-9RpA Effect is minimal at 99INT due to the superior scaling on court staff, the closer you are to 60INT the better it is I suppose, but having to chug slightly more or constantly raise your rickety arm up into the air every 30 seconds is still a killer in boss fights and PVP. You could sacrifice a ring and HP for dusk crown if you wanted to help with the MP, but it's the constant need to use chant that's the most annoying. e: sage's crystal staff not crystal sage staff turtlecrunch fucked around with this message at 18:32 on May 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 18:11
|
|
|
So is there no rusted iron ring equivalent for the swamp? Oh, and I can't resist adding "you bastard" to every one of my notes now.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 18:11
|
|
|
Waverhouse posted:True, but I take most things that happen post game with a grain of salt, especially since the first thing the game asks after you beat the game is whether you want to start NG+. I don't think the flame is temporary, I think the relinking of it is since someone can always choose not to; I think people have conflated the flame and the act of relinking it. The whole 'the flame is temporary and will die' idea also is upended in a weird eay in the End of Fire ending, where the Firekeeper says that she sees other fires on the horizon, which implies that all this will start again but with the second or third flame, instead of the first one. If the flame is truly temporary and is meant to die, then I feel like the End of Flame ending should have no additional fires showing up elsewhere. That's not upending it at all. The flame explicitly dies. It's just that life is cyclical - there will be another flame, there will be another world. There will be another Souls video game. Also the very opening of Dark Souls states "soon the flames will fade and only Dark will remain." It just doesn't make sense for a game series that has been fundamentally about inevitability and mortality to decide "But nah this one thing gets to live forever and ever and ever." Also the darksign eclipse is in the cinematic. It's very explicitly still around, not just "eh gently caress resetting state flags." It even focusses in on it to make sure you know how important it is. Waverhouse posted:That's what I'm saying tho, the Princes get called Lords of Cinder but they don't link the flame. Why do they get the title if they didn't do it? Serious soul magic. Something to do with Aldia, probably. Waverhouse posted:I feel like the 'Unfit even to be cinder' line is this iterations version of the NPCs all throwing shade on the player character (in 1 and 2 NPCs are generally dismissive of you and of the notion of some rando undead linking the flame, at least until you start knocking out the big dudes). I didn't read that interview; does he say how exactly it is they failed? If failing just means 'died as they were trying to collect souls' then I don't know how that makes them different from any other undead doing the same thing. I guess it could mean 'tried to link the flame but didn't have enough souls to do so' but how would they do that, if they would need to be strong enough to defeat the Soul of Cinder?. Here's the best link to the translation I could find: http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/168566-dark-souls-iii/73647265/850075446 Q: Previously, the protagonist was called 'Undead', in Dark Souls 3 he/she is called 'Unkindled'. What is the difference between the two? A: Dark Souls 1's protagnist is Undead, its story is about linking the fire. But Dark Souls 3 depicts the Undeads who didn't succeed in linking the fire and become cinder, but failed and burned to nothing. Unkindled is born out of their remaining ashes. Unkindled exist to inherit the past and put an end to this cumulative tale. As for beating the Soul of Cinder, it's the projection of a nearly dead thing. Probably not in top form. TGLT fucked around with this message at 18:28 on May 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 18:18
|
|
|
Is dual wielding super poo poo in this game or is it just me? All you can do with an offhand weapon is R1. No roll attack, no jump attack, no strong attack.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 18:18
|
|
|
Waverhouse posted:That's what I'm saying tho, the Princes get called Lords of Cinder but they don't link the flame. Why do they get the title if they didn't do it? It's likely they are the ones who extinguished the fire in the untended Graves, rather than linking it, which means that technically they are Lords of Cinder (they gathered the souls and entered the Kiln of the first flame) but they didn't light the fires and instead smothered them out. Ludleth says that he and others tried to save the Fire Keeper form seeing what she saw and doing what she did, but were unable to save her (her eyes are also walled in in the untended graves, perhaps a punishment after snuffing out the flame in the Twin Princes game? Maybe that shrine has all Seats because the Princes were going to claim their throne, and it was their decimation of the flame that called up the unkindled in the first place?
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 18:26
|
|
|
Gwyn is no different than the other Lords of Cinder except he went hollow, right? He broke up his lord soul before trying to link the fire I think.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 18:28
|
|
|
RyokoTK posted:Is dual wielding super poo poo in this game or is it just me? All you can do with an offhand weapon is R1. No roll attack, no jump attack, no strong attack. Dual wielding is pretty much only good with the explicitly made to be dual wielded weapons, the drang stuff, onikiri and other name I don't remember, the gotthards and all that jazz.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 18:34
|
|
|
Lothric went through the entire game cooping with his brother, what a casul.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 18:36
|
|
|
RyokoTK posted:Is dual wielding super poo poo in this game or is it just me? All you can do with an offhand weapon is R1. No roll attack, no jump attack, no strong attack. Yeah, I don't think you're meant to wield two normal weapons in DS3. There's not really much to do with them this time around. That's why they have the specifically dual wield weapons like twinblades or the Drang Hammers, which I still don't really like as much as the Blade of Mercy and Rakuyo from Bloodborne. With those, the R1s changed in dual wield mode, too.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 18:40
|
|
|
RyokoTK posted:Is dual wielding super poo poo in this game or is it just me? All you can do with an offhand weapon is R1. No roll attack, no jump attack, no strong attack. Well, that's because dual wielding proper was baked into various weapons, wherein you get two of them when you two-hand them and get a special L1 combo. That said, there are circumstances where offhanding a weapon is still beneficial. Namely, the R1 of polearms typically provide a really nice poke that will generally provide enough stagger to follow up with your main hand weapon. You could also offhand various weapons for their passive effects, of which there are a few. I do wish they didn't bother with the useless guard on most weapons though, taking up a valuable button that could've gone to allowing you to strong attack as well or to have access to the offhand weapon art.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 18:41
|
|
|
Waverhouse posted:Regarding the Linking of the Fire: Is there any indication that the linking of the fire this time around is weaker besides the fire aesthetics in the ending? I feel like a lot of lore speculation is built around this cycle being the last one, but I am not sure if there is anything in NPC/Item text that supports this. Considering the revelation that Oceiros was meant to have a baby model that was cut, I'm willing to believe that the fire effects after the linking the flame may just have been due to developer time cut short or some other weird decision, rather than an intentional hint at lore. My doubt is aided by the earlier screenshots of the game having more mist-type effects, so maybe when those effects were toned down so was the fire effect in the end? From seems like they might do that kind of thing on accident. You really need to base your thoughts on what is in the game rather than what is not. We have no idea why they removed or changed up various things, so basing lore on what might have been is a fool's errand. Aside from the "link the fire" cutscene, the death of everything fire-related is also reinforced by so many monsters turning to ash, and the demons based on the experiment with the First Flame dying out. e: To expand on this, the reason things are changed are removed isn't always technical issues, even with FROM. They probably went through every environment in the game with different skyboxes/lighting scenarios to see what best fit the concept they had for the game and for that area in particular, and just because they took a screenshot of one (that was then leaked, not released by them officially) does not mean that was the original, "ideal" environment - it was just a work-in-progress. turtlecrunch fucked around with this message at 18:57 on May 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 18:48
|
|
|
Obligatum VII posted:Well, that's because dual wielding proper was baked into various weapons, wherein you get two of them when you two-hand them and get a special L1 combo. I don't really like those though. I don't want to dual wield two of the same weapon, I want to use two weapons that have complementary moves rather than just one big L1 swipe. Mostly I'm trying to force myself not to use a shield this playthrough. I could just two-hand a weapon but I'm not a fan of the increased stamina usage most of the time. It just seems like it makes having a dagger offhand even more useless before since you can't thrust with it 
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 18:56
|
|
|
Gologle posted:Lothric went through the entire game cooping with his brother, what a casul. I heard his brother carried him through the entire game.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 19:07
|
|
|
It almost makes me wonder if the way they tweaked left hand weapons was because going back to the demon's souls hit stun system brought back the demon's souls infinite r1/l1 combo when dual wielding.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 19:08
|
|
|
RyokoTK posted:I don't really like those though. I don't want to dual wield two of the same weapon, I want to use two weapons that have complementary moves rather than just one big L1 swipe. Mostly I'm trying to force myself not to use a shield this playthrough. I could just two-hand a weapon but I'm not a fan of the increased stamina usage most of the time. It just seems like it makes having a dagger offhand even more useless before since you can't thrust with it You could try a parrying dagger in your left hand, or a Caestus.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 19:14
|
|
|
Wrapped up my sorcerer playthrough, albeit without touching the Dragon Shrine. Not sure if I want to roll a third character or take a break.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 19:15
|
|
|
NK is one of the bosses sorcerer is really good at tho
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 19:17
|
|
|
WarpedLichen posted:It almost makes me wonder if the way they tweaked left hand weapons was because going back to the demon's souls hit stun system brought back the demon's souls infinite r1/l1 combo when dual wielding. Eh, more likely it's because they used Dark Souls as a base as opposed to Dark Souls II.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 19:20
|
|
|
RyokoTK posted:I don't really like those though. I don't want to dual wield two of the same weapon, I want to use two weapons that have complementary moves rather than just one big L1 swipe. Mostly I'm trying to force myself not to use a shield this playthrough. I could just two-hand a weapon but I'm not a fan of the increased stamina usage most of the time. It just seems like it makes having a dagger offhand even more useless before since you can't thrust with it Hopefully they give us some more interesting dual weapon combos in the DLC. It's certainly possible, the Farron Greatsword has two different weapons when dual wielding.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 19:21
|
|
|
I miss power stance majestic greatsword
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 19:22
|
|
|
Manatee Cannon posted:I miss power stance majestic greatsword I'd give anything to be able to powerstance smough's hammer in this game.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 19:24
|
|
|
Power stancing and duel wielding in general was super great in DS2, it gave you so much flexibility with your weapon choices and led to a ton of build diversity. Bloodborne didn't have dual wielding at all but the trick weapon idea was just as good because it gave every weapon an absolutely massive move set. DS3 doesn't do either of these things and doesn't have a very good replacement for it (the dual wield weapons are absolutely not as good as either).
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 19:29
|
|
|
RyokoTK posted:Power stancing and duel wielding in general was super great in DS2, it gave you so much flexibility with your weapon choices and led to a ton of build diversity. Bloodborne didn't have dual wielding at all but the trick weapon idea was just as good because it gave every weapon an absolutely massive move set. DS3 doesn't do either of these things and it's super baffling to me. bloodborne did have dual wielding in the same way that this game does the blade of mercy and rakuyo could alternate between dual and single weapons
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 19:31
|
|
|
"Dual wielding" in the sense that you equip one of a very limited selection of weapons, and two-handing it splits it into another copy of the same weapon with one different attack, is not really dual wielding in a gainful sense. Blades of Mercy and Rakuyo at least have transformation attacks so you could segue between one-hand and two-hand in a combo for some crazy poo poo. Bloodborne weapons are so loving good.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
Manatee Cannon posted:bloodborne did have dual wielding in the same way that this game does I got my dick in one hand and my evelyn in the other. Dual wield babyyyyyyyyy!!
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 19:35
|
|
|
it is because you are literally dual wielding the weapon. like that is the one qualifier for dual wielding. you not liking the way it works doesn't change what it is e: magicking a second copy of the weapon out of thin air is kinda disappointing after bloodborne's rad transformation animations, but I guess they wanted that to be something unique to that game Manatee Cannon fucked around with this message at 19:38 on May 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 19:35
|
|
|
Grant us ears, grant us ears 
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 19:35
|
|
|
Manatee Cannon posted:it is because you are literally dual wielding the weapon. like that is the one qualifier for dual wielding. you not liking the way it works doesn't change what it is you know drat well what I was talking about from the very beginning of this conversation, but thanks for your contribution
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 19:40
|
|
|
Also, I can't believe I'm saying this, but I really miss something akin to the chalice dungeons. Yeah they were repetitive and kinda boring, but it gave me something to farm, and something to mess around with on characters I really enjoyed playing, but didn't want to just do the endless, changeless NG+ grind.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 19:42
|
|
|
HOW DO I MAKE THE FISTS NOT SUCK?!?  Seriously, I can't even beat invading reds with them. At this point in the game when I got invaded on my pike build, I killed the reds before they landed a single hit. Now I dance around with them for 5 minutes before I finally lose. Pretty much the only way I can see myself ever winning a fight is comboing someone low and then parrying them, but even with the hornet ring the parries don't do enough damage. Its damage. The damage is god awful and driving me crazy. Is there some way to actually get good damage out of these lovely things?!?
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 19:44
|
|
|
RyokoTK posted:you know drat well what I was talking about from the very beginning of this conversation, but thanks for your contribution apparently I don't? like I've been awake since midnight so I might have missed your point here
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 19:46
|
|
|
Internet Kraken posted:HOW DO I MAKE THE FISTS NOT SUCK?!? No, not really. I had a decent time with the boss soul weapon Dragon Fists, but they're just so subpar compared to everything else that they're not worth using unless you want a challenge run, or just really love punching. One of the very disappointing things to me about DS3 is that weapon variety is very very lovely. Sure there are four thousand weapons, but there are only three good ones, and the others are just lesser versions of those with worse scaling and lower damage ceilings.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 19:47
|
|
|
edit: double post
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 19:47
|
|
|
Do we know when the first DLC is scheduled yet? I ask because I don't want my 100% attempt to get hosed like with DS2 where they add spells gated behind tough-rear end bosses that I don't want to fight on NG+++++
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 19:49
|
|
|
Genocyber posted:You can't be invaded in an area after killing the boss. Wait a sec...you mean like forever? That would explain a few things. I was talking about killing a boss and then deciding going to the next area. Not a lot if free time to enjoy the ember as it were. I feel like invasions happen frequently. I'd like to take my time exploring solo to the next bonfire but it seems I either need to summon or be ready to face the invader solo. The guy who invaded me last night I couldn't put a dent in. A full combo on him had zero stagger and took maybe 5% of his health. Probably I should just finish the game so I can enjoy mp more. Co-op kills a lot of the challenge, and invasions are just an interruption at this point. I think I'd like all the pvp stuff more if that's what I was focused on while playing the game.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 19:49
|
|
|
Manatee Cannon posted:apparently I don't? I was talking about dual wielding as in equipping two weapons. As in having two different weapons in your inventory, equipped. Not just the visual graphic of having two things in your hands. That's what I mean by Bloodborne not having dual wielding. Yeah you can "dual wield" the BoM but that's still one item with one moveset, you can't do any sort of moveset mixing like you could in DS2. It wasn't really a big deal in Bloodborne that you couldn't dual wield because transformed weapons have dramatically different moves and you had special moves just for transforming from one state to the other, so you still had a huge amount of flexibility with one weapon. If you equip an offhand in DS3 you can use it for exactly one attack, its R1 (which you activate by hitting L2  ).
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 19:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 00:18 |
|
|
Chard posted:Do we know when the first DLC is scheduled yet? I ask because I don't want my 100% attempt to get hosed like with DS2 where they add spells gated behind tough-rear end bosses that I don't want to fight on NG+++++ First one is Autumn of this year We're about a month out from E3 where they may preview a bit of it and more importantly announce their next game
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 19:51
|
|