Discuss the latest Dark Souls Title!
1 
Reply  

Wes

Regular
Battle Tested

Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2016 7:45 am
Souls: 583.00
Posts: 86
Reputation: 10
#1
The following is an excerpt of a blog article.  Read Full Article

The following post is this author’s opinion and does not reflect the thoughts and feelings of Fextralife as a whole nor the individual content creators associated with the site. Any link that goes outside of Fextralife are owned by their respective authors. After over 600 hours in Dark Souls 3, nothing could be more painfully clear to me that it's nothing more than the mainstreamed bastard child of Dark Souls and Bloodborne forced into existence like the lords to their thrones.“A thing that feeds on souls,” the Gael within me chain-rolled and R1’d his way through the loops of the final Souls painting ...
VIP
Avatar

Fexelea

Webmistress
Webmistress

Fire Keeper

Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2012 10:00 pm
Location: Japan
Souls: 236,578.49
Bank: 7,418.71
Posts: 12067
Reputation: 707
Wiki Edits: 18572
#2
Nicely written article! That I pretty much entirely disagree with haha. But great writing nonetheless :P
Shop IconShop IconShop IconShop IconShop IconShop IconShop IconShop IconShop Icon
Avatar

IgnusKnavery

Caffeinated
Guardian

Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 9:00 pm
Souls: 5,284.00
Posts: 939
Reputation: 62
#3
It's very well written, but anytime someone says they put 600 hours into a game, I can't really take any criticisms of a game seriously. I guess in comparison to the other Souls games, it may fall flat in the author's opinion, but it should be noted that it's still one of the best games out there when compared to everything that came out that year. Just my two cents. If I hadn't played the game, I'd be very apprehensive about buying it after reading that article. There needs to be some kind of baseline so readers can tell that while it may not be the best in the series, it's a stellar game worth the money.
“I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours.”
― Hunter S. Thompson
Avatar

announakis

Compulsory Poster
Champion

Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2013 9:00 pm
Location: UTC+1
Souls: 19,952.50
Posts: 3038
Reputation: 185
Wiki Edits: 18
#4
I have put probably way more than 600 hours is this game to finally rage quit three months ago. I indeed played it so much because this is still one of the best games ever but I pretty much fully agree with your analysis on the mechanical aspects: the fast pace of bloodborne was an interesting experiment that turned out great (love the game maybe even more than DkS1) but adapting it to Dark souls was a huge mistake that resulted in what you describe very well: spam roll and R1 is enough to go through the game without the need to ever actually learn the specific behaviour of the mobs. The same mechanistic default plagues PvP too in many aspects.
Whatever FROM is working on, I hope they will reconnect with the weighty, calculated and eventually more strategic aspect of the game.

Poutsos

Obsessed
Commander

Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2014 12:14 pm
Souls: 3,316.00
Posts: 537
Reputation: 51
#5
I totally agree with the article. I enjoyed the game but for me the overall feel is just not there. I adored DkS, i adored DS2 but i never got off DS3. I never liked Japanese Hack n Slash games before. They feel too fast, too spammy and not very deep on the RPG element. DS was the first Japanese IP that did not give me that impression, and with Bloodborne and DS 3, i felt like it was moving towards that direction.

I know i am the minority, but my favourite combat was in DS2. The slowdown was a good thing for me. Shields were no more OP, healing was slower, stamina consumption is huge and there is penalty. Overall it feels like playing chess. When EpicNameBro was saying that DS is not about reflexes but about knowledge+trial and error, for me that was most true in DS2 than any other game. Also for me DS2 had by far the best balance, the best infusion system, the best dual weilding and the best leveling, and also felt the most RPG of all of them(which for me is a great thing). Still the first game is my favourite though, and the only one in the franchise that i would really call a masterpiece. The only thing i liked in DS3 was the more extented movesets on the weapons (weapon arts, charges R2s etc.).

PS. I totally disagree with his comment on Ygwie Malmsteen.
Avatar

lordnoah

Hollowed
Redeemer

Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2015 1:38 pm
Souls: 12,488.00
Posts: 1657
Reputation: 26
#6
announakis wrote:I have put probably way more than 600 hours is this game to finally rage quit three months ago. I indeed played it so much because this is still one of the best games ever but I pretty much fully agree with your analysis on the mechanical aspects: the fast pace of bloodborne was an interesting experiment that turned out great (love the game maybe even more than DkS1) but adapting it to Dark souls was a huge mistake that resulted in what you describe very well: spam roll and R1 is enough to go through the game without the need to ever actually learn the specific behaviour of the mobs. The same mechanistic default plagues PvP too in many aspects.
Whatever FROM is working on, I hope they will reconnect with the weighty, calculated and eventually more strategic aspect of the game.


agreed although i would make a case that the problem is the speed of heavy weapon and spells that make it so hard to hit it is true that in the pve the rolls don't help either i feel like i got through most enemies by staggering them to death or roll spamming with the exception of those who cant like the black knights

its important to think about the amount of iframes you get at 70% weight combined with the distance of the roll and the speed that is what makes it so hard to roll catch people, but since they made pve with thing like pointiff sulyvan it nearly impossible to fix now

another thing to note is poise, yeah i know nobody wants to hear it again but the fact is that getting hit twice no matter what essentially doubles the ar of all weapons making fights twice as short and making trades(mistakes much scarier) since nobody wants to lose half their hp to a guaranteed second hit of a greatsword they all play passive as hell and this makes the game boring
Avatar

Rizen

Addicted
First Warden

Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2016 11:34 pm
Souls: 1,754.00
Posts: 229
Reputation: 4
#7
lordnoah wrote:
announakis wrote:another thing to note is poise, yeah i know nobody wants to hear it again but the fact is that getting hit twice no matter what essentially doubles the ar of all weapons making fights twice as short and making trades(mistakes much scarier) since nobody wants to lose half their hp to a guaranteed second hit of a greatsword they all play passive as hell and this makes the game boring

Adding to this parries can one shot you on certain builds. Lag and deceptive hitboxes don't encourage you to fight close either.

As someone who's only played one souls game, DS3 is balanced great for offline runs. My first three times through were completely offline; it starts stupidly hard then gets to the point of still being challenging enough to keep the game from being mindless. Using different weapons and spells helps keep it interesting. It would be nice if there was better explanation of how things work in the game; I always play blind at first and everything is convoluted and cryptic.

The problem is poor PvP balancing due it it being secondary to PvE. It really does reward spamming, partially due to lag. Unless you're part of a gank you're always at risk of being ganked. All this encourages lame play: you more or less are forced to. Invasions can happen at inconvenient times, like after I beat the Wyvern on Arch Dragon Peak I got invaded before I could even rest at the bonfire. An easy fix would be to have invasions only happen when you equip a special banner item, sort of like covenants but allow Co-op without it. Then they could cut loose and not worry about it being too hard for players to get through the levels and have invasions in areas you've cleared.

With all that said DS3 is a great RPG and PvP being poorly balanced doesn't ruin the experience. You have to take it for what it is.
Disposition shift has its benefits. If you can't hit play cause the button sticks, ignorance is bliss I can't say. There's a compass raised with familiar tone, a voice that needles you to the bone. You're left with chaos, static and delay.
-REM

thflame

Addicted
First Warden

Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 3:13 pm
Souls: 1,960.00
Posts: 272
Reputation: 17
#8
I agree with this article wholeheartedly.
Avatar

Wark

Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 12:44 pm
Souls: 135.00
Posts: 13
Reputation: 0
#9
I feel like the only one who seamlessly enjoys all three games in the series and treat it like one single, great adventure. I find myself playing DS3 for a few days, then quitting for a few weeks before playing it again, starting a new character to try out different ways to play the game. Although I usually just go melee because I love rolling and close combat. I'm not into magic at all.
DS2 I enjoy slightly lesser, I usually just play it to reach smelter demon and the Ruin Sentinels. I also love Sinh.

If I had to pick one thing I love most per game, I'd have to put it this way:
Dark Souls: the World
Dark Souls 2: the Bosses
Dark Souls 3: the Visuals and the overall feel of control (I feel like most of the time I'm in control of what's happening) and, unpopular opinion, the speed of the game. I love how they increased the tempo of the combat. I remember when I picked up Lords of the Fallen because I couldn't wait for the DS3 release and found it to be extremely heavy and slow paced, although it was a great game, and extremely beautiful. But too slow for my taste. Then I picked up Dark Souls again and felt almost the same because of how slow it seemed. Then DS3 came and it was just perfect for me.
Avatar

Nahztek-Shadowpath

Caffeinated
Guardian

Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2016 1:39 pm
Souls: 5,797.50
Posts: 994
Reputation: 42
#10
@Wark

Oh, I absolutely loved all three titles. I just feel burnt out on it all, from gameplay to lore.
This is a problem I'm having with action rpgs in general, not just DS. That's why I'm mainly just playing tactical strategy games these days. More thinking and less mindless hacking. And if it's turn-based, I can walk away at any time and do something else.

@op
It's a good article, but I agree with other posters who mentioned how one-sided it is. You aren't accounting for burn-out at all. And this is the main factor why old schoolers might complain. They might make this point or that point, but at its core, the problem is that they have probably played since DeS, and can no longer ignore the cons of the game.

However, the article makes it sound like no real effort was put into DS3 and it sold on reputation alone. If anything, the biggest problem was that many players played in this order-
DeS
DS1
DS2
BB
DS3

BB was an evolution. So it felt different enough. DS3 was refinement of the original game that tried just a bit too hard to make it more BB-like in terms of speed and mobility. And like others mentioned, and like the article mentions, the result was spam roll and R1 stagger-to-death gameplay.
1