|
Actually, can someone elaborate for me on how DS3 poise is functionally different from DS2 poise? As far as I can tell they are almost exactly the same: if you are not in the middle of an attack animation, any attack will stagger you, and if you are in the middle of an attack animation, all but the very weakest attacks will stagger you anyway, unless it's a really heavy weapon you're using.
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 12:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 00:39 |
|
|
Azuth0667 posted:This game needs tranquil walk of peace. The effect actually still exists and has an updated graphic from what I can see. It might get implemented as a DLC miracle again.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 13:03
|
|
|
Tallgeese posted:The effect actually still exists and has an updated graphic from what I can see. It might get implemented as a DLC miracle again. Is the stone sword that did it from ds1 anywhere to be found?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 13:04
|
|
|
skasion posted:Actually, can someone elaborate for me on how DS3 poise is functionally different from DS2 poise? As far as I can tell they are almost exactly the same: if you are not in the middle of an attack animation, any attack will stagger you, and if you are in the middle of an attack animation, all but the very weakest attacks will stagger you anyway, unless it's a really heavy weapon you're using. In DS2, getting hit with any weapon while not attacking will lower your movement speed, but with enough poise you can still attack or roll away immediately. Successful hits fill a meter just like Bleed, and when that meter is full, you're staggered and can't roll away or attack. In DS3, getting hit with any weapon when not attacking will stagger you, and no matter how much poise you have you cannot attack or roll away immediately. Both games have a "hyperarmor" system, where in DS2 you get extra poise while attacking with certain weapons, while DS3 gives poise and extra armor to certain attacks.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 13:18
|
|
|
I never even noticed the changes to poise, since I play half-naked dodge-happy madmen most of the time anyway. I started DS3 fresh from Bloodborne, after all. I only ever wore heavy armor if I could keep the fast roll. PLUS I'm not all that enthusiastic for PvP, so that right there pretty much invalidated the biggest issues with DS3 for me (and Bloodborne, for that matter). I think DS3, as an offline experience, is the best of the Souls series. Sure, getting stunlocked is kinda bothersome with small and fast enemies (so... dogs), but it was never an issue for me. Levels are great. Bosses are varied, fun to fight and hella impressive. And personally, I like the NPC stories very much, plus Aldrich is so amazingly hosed up. That's simply it. Still, I think Bloodborne is better in every way that matters to me, except for some little convenient additions like how warping works, and I think it will stay that way. Nonetheless, I'm sure the DLC will make DS3 even better. We're not even close to being done with this game. I hope we get another take on the Souls formula, like Bloodborne was: very similar game, but lots of mechanics revisions to change playstyles into a certain direction. Who knows! I'm sure everyone agrees that Dark Souls does not need another sequel when we could have a new take.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 14:09
|
|
|
My ranking order goes: Bloodborne > DS1 > DS3 > Demon's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DS2 Bloodborne is kind of an outlier so I will save it for last. DS1 was the first one I played and perhaps that's why it's my favorite. I didn't play completely blind as I did for all the other games, but I wish I had. Making new discoveries about the lore and your specific role in the "plot" was always amazing. I can distinctly remember feeling sort of an existential dread upon finding out that - at least as far as the NPCs go - YOU are the worst thing that happens to almost all of them. Despite the fact that you felt like you were trying to help. My opinion on multiplayer has changed over time. I used to hate being invaded. So much so that I would just jump off a cliff if it got invaded. Once I sacked up and started fighting invaders it got somewhat better. Having done a recent DS1 playthrough - PvP is still too laggy for me to ever really get the hang of, timing wise. I did an SL1 run and built a super low-level ganker invader, but that got boring quickly. I like fair fights, and DS1 PvP was pretty short on those. Dark Souls feels like a sandbox to me now. I know it well enough that coming up with fun challenge runs is easy. In fact I was watching a No Estus/Miracles Only run yesterday and that looks like fun, so I may try it. I like DS3 because the PvP feels so much better. What I see on screen is usually what's actually happening, and the timing for anticipating strikes is something I have a much better feel for in this game. The lack of build variety is somewhat sad, but even that has been good AND bad. Since I have been using the Lucerne on my latest build, my win percentage is probably close to 90% - and approaching 100% in 1v1 situations. Straight sword spammers simply can't figure out how to avoid it. I also have decent success landing Lightning Stake, since people tend to roll WAY early thinking I'm tossing a Lightning Spear. The covenants need serious fixing/tweaking. I still have yet to get a single Darkmoon summon, and if I take a character above 40, Farron summons completely dry up. Aldritch summons are super spotty. Had maybe 7 total. That would all be well and good if there weren't achievements gated behind them. I have NEVER been summoned as a Blue Cop. I have the most fun as a PurpleBro or just plain old Red Eye Orb invading. I think prioritizing hosts with summons is a mistake. Or at least, it shouldn't be as heavily prioritized as it is. The fight already isn't that fair - since the invader has half estus. Making it 3v1 is just sort of a "gently caress you". PvE wise - most of the bosses are fun fights, and even the regular enemies make for some interesting puzzles to solve. I think DS1 did miniboss enemies much better. Think about Undead Burg. It was 95% average mooks. But it had the optional Black Knight and Havel if you wanted to challenge yourself a bit more. Now contrast that with High Wall - basically the first area of the game. Average mooks are practically a minority. 2 Pus of Man enemies, 6(7?) Lothric Knights and the Winged Knight. The area between Vordt and Dancer has what? 3 mooks and 4 Black Knight Level enemies. You can skip 2 of those, but it seems a little harsh for the first area of the game, since you likely haven't upgraded a weapon at all. Dark Souls 2 started that annoying trend, methinks. I like a challenge, don't get me wrong, but ultimately I am the Hero. It's okay to let me feel like it a little bit. Undead Settlement is a good example of something which feels about right in terms of difficulty vs what level/upgrade I have. There are a couple of challenges, but for the most part, it feels like "trained combatant vs untrained farmers/laborers with only numbers on their side". Even the Fire Demon miniboss feels like an appropriate level of challenge at that point. My biggest complaint is probably with the game being really tuned around straight swords, so much so that like RyokoTK pointed out: certain weapon choices might as well be challenge runs. I can recall when people would come into the Dark Souls thread and ask about which build was good for PvE and the answer was always the same: pretty much ANYTHING will work for PvE. Not so in DS3. Some things are just flat out crippled. I don't want Sorcery to be Easy Mode like it was in DS1 but "absolutely sucking until the last 4th of the game" isn't a better solution. Miracles are similarly pointless for the most part. The really useful ones are gated behind such late game content that by the time you get them you already have 8 other better options (7 of which are a straight sword with some kind of infusion/buff). It's not good that nearly every game starts with "rush to Astora Straight Sword, grab the Raw Stone from the Crystal Lizard in High Wall, and Infuse it". Even the scaling doesn't seem to rectify this. In DS1, if I chose a Str weapon, and literally put EVERY point in Str, I was a menace. A menace made of glass, but at least my damage output was solid - even with the weapon only upgraded to +5. In 3, it seems like stat scaling hardly matters, and most weapons don't start to shine until +6 or so, which is basically mid-game at that point, and some weapons never start to shine. Mid-game is a little late to find out your weapon basically sucks, since you aren't quite drowning in upgrade materials at that point. Since I am such a fan of the series - the little throwbacks to previous games are nice, and not overdone to the point where I feel like they're going "remember this? do ya? remember? see?" constantly. Demon's was the 2nd one I played and I like it. it's just.....unrefined. You can tell they were still trying to figure things out, so as a result it doesn't hold up all that well, so many years later. It's still fun for an occasional run through, but I don't go back to it anywhere near as often as DS1. The World/Character Tendency stuff is an amazing idea, but poorly realized. And having a weapon specifically designed to do nothing more than troll the poo poo out of other players isn't going to endear anyone to playing PvP in your game. The upgrade system is bizarre, arcane and somewhat tedious in cases. And that brings us to Dark Souls 2. The level design doesn't bother me at all. Let me get that out of the way. While the Earthen Peak elevator is dumb - to be sure - it's completely beside the point for me personally. First - the combat - it just feels wrong to me. I love the feel of DS1/3 combat. DS2 feels like Lords of the Fallen or any other "souls clone" game in that it feels like it was made by someone who didn't quite "get" it. I didn't play much PvP - so little that I can't really speak to it's merits or lack thereof. I do know that Soul Memory was perhaps the most hamfisted way to address the balance problems which DS1 PvP had. PvE wise - ugh - where do I start? Remember the nerdrage prompted by one of the producers saying really early on that they were trying to make the game "more accessible to new players" and nearly the whole community exploded with a lot of "DONT WANT GAME FOR CASULS!! GIVE ME HARRRRRRRRD"? Enemy placement feels exactly like they took those comments directly to heart as a personal insult. "oh you want hard? We'll give you hard!" For all the nonsensical complaints with DS1 about "artificial difficulty", DS2 actually does feel guilty of this. "Hard for the sake of being Hard" does not translate to "fun". The entire point of these games is balancing Risk vs Reward. "do I want to try to get to the next bonfire carrying 30k souls? or should I play it safe and go back?" "do I want that item bad enough to fight the miniboss guarding it?" Dark Souls 2 seems to be saying "well. you wanted it HARD, didn't you? see how HARD it is? We are HARD'ng you so HARD right now!" So that means Risk usually so far outweighs the Reward that you just don't bother. The other problem is why it's difficult. It's not difficult because of interesting enemy designs or tricky puzzles to unravel. It's difficult because of bullshit. Every single time I see a Turtle Knight rotating in place while winding up a weapon swing I cringe. C'mon From - you're better than that. You guys complain about Poise - but a 500 lb heavily armored opponent should NOT be able to rotate (in place, without moving its feet) at the same speed a lightly armored 200 lb opponent can jog around it. It feels so cheap and artificial. "Well we had to thwart backstab fishers!" Great. But there are plenty of enemies in the other games which can't be backstabbed which do not apparently stand on magical invisible turntables. It's extremely rare across the entire series to feel like dying was for bullshit reasons. 9 times out of 10, you know exactly what you did wrong, or you made some sort of mistake. In DS2, bullshit deaths felt extremely common to me. The positives are stuff people have already outlined. Weapon/Build variety is great. I did 4 complete playthroughs, including a fisticuffs run - which was by far the most fun. Small quality of life improvements to menus and things were also really good. Being able to use more than one of a given item at a time is worth its weight in gold. (I'm looking at YOU, donating 30 Humanity to the Spider Lady to save Solaire in Dark Souls 1) Still 4 playthroughs for the game I like the least in the series still puts it way above other games. For comparison's sake, my other playthrough counts were something like: Demon's Souls: 5 Dark Souls: seriously too many to count. 50? at least that. Dark Souls 2: 4 Dark Souls 3: 5 and counting. Bloodborne: 7ish. And finally the big thing that Bloodborne did right was: weapons. I would rather have 20 weapons total - ALL of which are good, than 200 weapons, 95% of which are worthless. Bloodborne does a ton of things right, which is why it's my favorite game in the series, but "no filler" seems to be the best thing. I also prefer the faster, dodgier combat style - but I always fast roll in the Souls games, since even mid roll feels like swimming in molasses to me. Having to grind out vials from time to time is annoying, but that's mostly fixed by spending your leftover echoes on them plus a healthy dose of gitting gud. There you go - my dumb effortpost discussing pros/cons of my favorite series of games ever. Ta da!
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 14:16
|
|
|
its great that ppl say DS2 was the easiest and the hardest.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 14:41
|
|
|
Yeah, weapon selection for DS3's PVP is pretty limited. They really need to balance things in an upcoming patch. But let's not pretend that DS2 PVP was balanced out of the gate either. It took a ton of patches for the games PVP to end up where it was. Including to poise. Tons of Havel Mages. One shotting you with great resonant soul. Dark buffed twin blades. And if you manage to parry them you do like 200 damage due to their crazy defense. Then when you manage to actually hurt them a bit they'd run away to estus while wearing Gower's. The best way to combat them was to stack resistances like they did. Which turned these battles into a slog. Grinding out red eye orbs against these try hards in the arena was the worst thing ever. I'll take DS3's PVP with its non cracked orb any day of the week over that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 14:56
|
|
|
Guess my experience with the series is pretty different! I probably would put it at DS1>DS2SotFS>>DS3>>>DS2 Vanilla. I'm only on NG+ in DS3 and, while I still like the pvp, I'm not sure I'll run through it as much with this char or others as I did in previous games, including BB. I'm not quite sure what it is about the game, but I just haven't enjoyed it as much as SotFS. Generally dislike the weapon arts, even if the speed of the game is better, and I think that overall mechanical balance is pretty rough. As far as level design is concerned, I think it tends to be as good or better than DS2 for the most part, but there are some areas that I just don't think are all that interesting. Anor Londo, and the stuff directly after Sulvyahn, the Smouldering Lake, Demon Ruins, Profaned Capital, and the Untended Graves all ranged from boring to dull for me. I definitely enjoyed the early areas and felt that, at its best, the levels were tightly designed and densely packed, but they weren't perfect. Admittedly, I think they tend to fit together better than DS2 and probably didn't hit the dullness of the lows of DS2, but I still think DS2, and its DLCs, have some solid level design throughout. Also, I think DS1 and 2(DLCs included) have higher points in the sound track, even if 3 does have some really good individual tracks. And as for PvP specifically, I feel like it's a mixed bag in this one. The speed is really nice, but there seem to be more issues with phantom range and, in my experience, few build varieties being used than in SotFS. I also do like the fact that parrying is, more or less, like DS1. I felt that the parrying system in 2 was a bit too tight for its own good, even if some people really appreciated the timing required for it. Just seemed to clash with the overall flow of the game in my opinion. Guess this one doesn't click with me as it does for other people. Still, not a bad end to one of my favorite series. That said, I think Bloodborne may also be coloring my opinion a bit, though, since I felt the gameplay and world design was so on point in that one. Music was really good too. Edit: Overall, though, I think this Souls games and Bloodborne are all really solid and great example of what you can do with gameplay-centric action rpgs. Fire Barrel fucked around with this message at 15:08 on Jun 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 15:04
|
|
|
Bananasaurus Rex posted:Yeah, weapon selection for DS3's PVP is pretty limited. They really need to balance things in an upcoming patch. Oh my god I just rembered the DS2 arenas - 500 win/lose ratio in order to max your covenant, no way did anyone do that legitimately! The maxed out darkwraith aura could just as well be a HACKER stamp to the forehead
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 15:07
|
|
|
I really don't understand people saying that DS2 is hard for hard's sake. The turntable thing is definitely pretty lazily executed but DS3 does the exact same poo poo, it's just animated better (and they couple it with enemies violently arcing throughout charging or leaping attacks). There is certainly a running motif of being on a journey of adversity, but that's only realized in the Covenant of Champions and Bonfire Ascetics, which are completely optional mechanics. Otherwise, what honestly is a bullshit death in DS2?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 15:08
|
|
|
I like DS3, but....I have been kind of bored with it. I've had it since launch and still only have the Abyss Watchers for boss souls. It's not a bad game, but as someone else said hopefully it gets the SotFS treatment. I didn't like DS2 until then either. I don't understand people calling DS1 "clunky". Sure, it feels slow compared to 2 and 3 but the control is still spot on. Perfectly placed strikes and rolls still make me feel like an action hero. I wish more games could do that - so many games seem to "auto-steer" your character toward enemies, and it's kind of like I don't even need to be involved.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 15:12
|
|
|
RyokoTK posted:I really don't understand people saying that DS2 is hard for hard's sake. The turntable thing is definitely pretty lazily executed but DS3 does the exact same poo poo, it's just animated better (and they couple it with enemies violently arcing throughout charging or leaping attacks). There is certainly a running motif of being on a journey of adversity, but that's only realized in the Covenant of Champions and Bonfire Ascetics, which are completely optional mechanics. Otherwise, what honestly is a bullshit death in DS2? I never got that either. I mean, some enemies hit very hard and a lot of bosses are basically dodge or die, but I didn't find the game terribly difficult or arbitrary. Maybe the big cat monsters in the Ivory King DLC come close. And, as a rule, I tend to dislike hard for the sake of being hard unless it is done quite well, so I actually try to look for this stuff as I'm running through certain types of games. Also, I will agree that the multiplayer covenants were tedious in DS2, especially with the ridiculous numbers involved, but I still enjoyed those more since they worked more regularly for me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 15:12
|
|
|
Having played some Demon's Souls now (sadly only a few levels in though, don't have regular access or anything) I'm going to put it at DS1 > Scholar > DS2 > DS3 > Demon's > BB. DS3 would top that but DS2's pvp is far and away better than how it ended up in 3, and the online bullshit really turned me off from replaying too much. It's a pretty close race between DS1, 2, and 3 though. Demon's is cool but pretty dated, and BB is what it is. I didn't buy its dlc though. Actually out of curiosity with BB's dlc, did that shield trick weapon's shield form they were showing off in screenshots actually amount to anything useful? RBA Starblade fucked around with this message at 15:18 on Jun 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 15:15
|
|
|
RBA Starblade posted:Having played some Demon's Souls now I'm going to put it at DS1 > Scholar > DS2 > DS3 > Demon's > BB. DS3 would top that but DS2's pvp is far and away better than how it ended up in 3, and the online bullshit really turned me off from replaying too much. It's a pretty close race between DS1, 2, and 3 though. Demon's is cool but pretty dated, and BB is what it is. I didn't buy its dlc though. No shield trick weapons in the DLC, but if you mean the Whirl-a-gig saw, I've seen some people use it to great effect. Also, I agree that Demon's is quite dated at this point, even if it is still fun to spool up every now and then. BB seems to be more of a successor toe DeS, with a more pronounced emphasis on horror and things like consumable items. The warp points (the lanterns) are even separated by distinct areas, even if the world is all connected. Fire Barrel fucked around with this message at 15:23 on Jun 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 15:18
|
|
|
"All I have is a spear, a weapon that does one thing, and when I got attacked by three guys at once I got overwhelmed! This game is not designed for fighting multiple enemies! B-TEAM!!!!!!!"
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 15:19
|
|
|
Fire Barrel posted:No shield trick weapons in the DLC, but if you mean the Whirl-a-gig saw, I've seen some people use it to great effect. Oh maybe I mistook it for one then. Never mind!
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 15:20
|
|
|
Bloodborne also had some really cool themes with blood, eyes, werewolves and the whole birth thing. Dark Souls themes of life/death, light/dark and abyss/chaos aren't quite as disturbing and evocative. But I think most of all Dark Souls is missing a fully orchestrated soundtrack with a vivid sound mixing, because man did Bloodborne do that right.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 15:28
|
|
|
Tight thematic consistency is something Bloodborne does extremely well in pretty much every way.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 15:30
|
|
|
RyokoTK posted:Tight thematic consistency is something Bloodborne does extremely well in pretty much every way. It was fun when the thread figured out what the pebbles were.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 15:31
|
|
|
RBA Starblade posted:It was fun when the thread figured out what the pebbles were. I actually really liked that the thread relived that epiphany when they figured out what the weird moon in The Old Hunters was supposed to be.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 15:33
|
|
|
RyokoTK posted:I really don't understand people saying that DS2 is hard for hard's sake. The turntable thing is definitely pretty lazily executed but DS3 does the exact same poo poo, it's just animated better (and they couple it with enemies violently arcing throughout charging or leaping attacks). There is certainly a running motif of being on a journey of adversity, but that's only realized in the Covenant of Champions and Bonfire Ascetics, which are completely optional mechanics. Otherwise, what honestly is a bullshit death in DS2? going from vanilla to sotfs, it seems like a lot of the enemy placement changes are just there to as gotcha moments to catch you off guard not a huge fan of a lot of things they did in sotfs tbh but I do appreciate the effort put into it
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 15:34
|
|
|
I am ultimately hoping that the DLC for 3 is SotFS-levels of rebalance, with Old Hunters/Artorias of the Abyss-levels of content.RBA Starblade posted:It was fun when the thread figured out what the pebbles were. My big "whoa." moment in BB was learning what the Brundlefly guys in Byrgenwerth were really called and why they are called that. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 15:35
|
|
|
Manatee Cannon posted:going from vanilla to sotfs, it seems like a lot of the enemy placement changes are just there to feel like gotcha moments to catch you off guard I mean, wasn't that kind of the point of SOTFS? People had been playing the game nonstop for a year, so mixing all that poo poo up so dramatically seems like a neat idea to me. I've never played DS2 vanilla, and even then, the placement of enemies never bothered me. There are tough enemies all over the place, but figuring out how to (for example) handle that Guardian Dragon in Heide's Tower at level 20 or whatever seemed like a fair challenge to me, especially since that area is completely optional. The enemy placement is definitely devious -- it's traps within traps within traps. But they're the same traps as in every other game, you can outsmart them if you're clever and patient enough, and if you're not patient, well that trap will be there again on your second go-around and you know how to handle it now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 15:37
|
|
|
I enjoy that there is an animation for knocking the Pursuer on his rear end, and that the first time I saw it was when he smacked the explosive barrels next to Belfry Luna and sent us both flying.quote:My big "whoa." moment in BB was learning what the Brundlefly guy in Byrgenwerth were really called and why they are called that. Just looked that one up, nice. If there's one thing BB did right it was atmosphere. That's DS2's biggest failing I think, it doesn't really hit one beyond "this land is dead and everything is recycled, faded or a pale imitation, and no ones knows which is which any longer". DS1's Arthurian mythic vibes and BB's Van Helsing/Cthulu ones just totally outclass it there. DS3's doesn't hit quite those high notes there either but it does a way better job than 2 as well. I've played 2 the most just because it's so accessible compared to the others (and I love the belfries so much), but it has that little something missing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 15:39
|
|
|
there wasn't much to figure out about the dragon since either you got it right in one try or you couldn't do it anymore because it didn't go back to sleep (maybe if you left the area and came back but that's a bad solution to a dumb problem). when it's awake, it'll just breath fire to stunlock you and you can't hide behind anything along the way so lol just bring a bow I guess sotfs was a lot less fun overall compared to vanilla for me. the remixed scenarios weren't harder in a way that felt fun or interesting to me, they just made the game more of a slog. the only notable exception being the pursuer encounters they added; that was cool
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 15:43
|
|
|
My experience with the Dragon was that it killed me, so I left and came back later.  But yeah, there's a Short Bow right in Lenigrast's hut and a Light Crossbow in FOFG so it's not unreasonable to assume you have a bow for that part.I guess if I had known beforehand that Old Dragonslayer and the Leo Ring were behind it, I would have been more annoyed, but I figured I was just supposed to come back later with a bigger shield or something. RyokoTK fucked around with this message at 15:49 on Jun 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 15:46
|
|
|
Manatee Cannon posted:there wasn't much to figure out about the dragon since either you got it right in one try or you couldn't do it anymore because it didn't go back to sleep (maybe if you left the area and came back but that's a bad solution to a dumb problem). when it's awake, it'll just breath fire to stunlock you and you can't hide behind anything along the way so lol just bring a bow I guess That's the word I should have used. Slog. DS2 is a slog, to me. Almost all of it. It's not hard in the sense that I can't do it, it's just tedious in a way that makes me not want to.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 15:46
|
|
|
Manatee Cannon posted:there wasn't much to figure out about the dragon since either you got it right in one try or you couldn't do it anymore because it didn't go back to sleep (maybe if you left the area and came back but that's a bad solution to a dumb problem). when it's awake, it'll just breath fire to stunlock you and you can't hide behind anything along the way so lol just bring a bow I guess Yes it does, I died the first time because I tried running past one Heide knight too many, and the second time it had to stand up and do the whole thing again. quote:That's the word I should have used. Slog. DS2 is a slog, to me. Almost all of it. It's not hard in the sense that I can't do it, it's just tedious in a way that makes me not want to. I wonder how many people went through the game just using a mace or the craftsman's hammer because my last run was that and it was so boring I just rushed to the end to stop because I blew all my upgrade materials on armor and shields because I figured I wouldn't care early on.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 15:48
|
|
|
it was absolutely still awake when it killed me the first time even after resting at a bonfire
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 15:50
|
|
|
I think Dark Souls 3 should have made more out of the torture and beheading imagery, since I think it would fit in the medieval castles and general Berserk influence. You have the torture rooms and devices, and the caged hollows, but it's all scenery, just like the statues of the Lothric Knight cutting their own heads off. Maybe some more enemies and NPCs alluding to those themes and more weapons like the branding iron. I'm just wondering who was being tortured and why, and why the Lothric Knights are cutting their head of - and why that is a central theme for their order. And why is called "soldering iron" and not branding iron?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 15:58
|
|
|
Soldering iron is probably a mistranslation.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 15:59
|
|
|
Jordbo posted:I'm just wondering who was being tortured and why, and why the Lothric Knights are cutting their head of - and why that is a central theme for their order. Because self-sacrifice is the core of their entire society. Lothric is a castle/nation/society based on making suicide (linking the fire) into something heroic. That's why their ideal of Knighthood is self-decapitation - it was supposed to make people want to be the guy who kills himself to save the world because that's what being a Knight is all about.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 16:06
|
|
|
HaB posted:That's the word I should have used. Slog. DS2 is a slog, to me. Almost all of it. It's not hard in the sense that I can't do it, it's just tedious in a way that makes me not want to. Yeah it's what I just used to describe the PVP arenas but it goes for some areas of the main game as well. My main gripe is the way they throw the larger, more powerful enemies at you two at a time. The mammoths leading up to the steps to Drangleic are a great example of this. I had to resort to hit and run tactics as taking both on at once was suicide. The two Giants in the gutter were the same. Then there's segments where the game throws a bunch of annoying enemies at you, all at once. And the best approach is to kite them. Those royal soldiers when you open that door in the Bastille. The Allonne Knights in the lava room. It's a slog at times. For me Bloodborne's enemy placement was spot on. Central Yharnam is just one of the best designed areas in the series for me. And the most annoying enemy encounter in that game had to be those two shark guys in the well. God that was terrible.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 16:07
|
|
|
You would think that after 3 games FROM would figure out how to make the blue covenants work.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 16:49
|
|
|
DatonKallandor posted:Because self-sacrifice is the core of their entire society. Lothric is a castle/nation/society based on making suicide (linking the fire) into something heroic. That's why their ideal of Knighthood is self-decapitation - it was supposed to make people want to be the guy who kills himself to save the world because that's what being a Knight is all about. Oooh, right. Yeah, that is pretty fundamental. Good point. Is there other imagery of glorifying self-sacrifice? I know it's referenced in a lot of item descriptions, but I'm thinking scenery. All I can think of is all the bodies in cages and on breaking wheels, but I hardly think that's self-sacrifice, and the Road of Sacrifices aren't related to that kind of sacrifice... man, I need more lore videos soon, I can't wrap my head around this game.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 16:49
|
|
|
I've only seen it in the environment design of Lothric castle itself - various statues and the headless knights everywhere. Plus the item descriptions as you mentioned. That theme doesn't really continue beyond lothric from what I've seen - Cathedral of the Deep doesn't seem to the have the same self-sacrifice cult - just plain old human/undead sacrifice to appease the "Deep" and then the Aldrich nihilism when he takes over. Something unrelated I realized when going over some Spells is that there's an explanation for the back-in-time dark shrine in the game. Light is literally Time. Reversing Time means reversing Light - turning something utterly lightless turns back time. Although as with every lore thing that depends on a single item description, you gotta wonder how much of that is actually there or just exists in the english translation. Edit:vvv True I forgot about those. Not sure what they are about. I take them as going "hey Dark Souls 2 - THIS is how you do kamikaze hollows". DatonKallandor fucked around with this message at 17:50 on Jun 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 17:24
|
|
|
DatonKallandor posted:I've only seen it in the environment design of Lothric castle itself - various statues and the headless knights everywhere. Plus the item descriptions as you mentioned. That theme doesn't really continue beyond lothric from what I've seen - Cathedral of the Deep doesn't seem to the have the same self-sacrifice cult - just plain old human/undead sacrifice to appease the "Deep" and then the Aldrich nihilism when he takes over. Well, there are undead who light themselves on fire and run at you.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 17:43
|
|
|
Toady posted:Well, there are undead who light themselves on fire and run at you. I'm glad that someone finally got a use out of Immolation. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 17:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 00:39 |
|
|
The evangelists do the same thing, and the notched whip's description says that the Cathedral's religious practice involves self-flagellation. I wouldn't say Irithyll or the Capital really have the same theme, the Capital in particular seems to be kind of the opposite. A super decadent society full of nobles who couldn't be bothered to link the fire.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 17:52
|
|