Can someone explain Dark Souls?

#51 Posted by Dark (378 posts) -

@Sisyphean: Here's the one thing anyone needs to know about the story ....... DAYMN Seath was one lucky dragon, lucky lucky dragon.

#52 Posted by mordukai (7150 posts) -

@Animasta said:

@mordukai: there are quite a few NPC's in anor londo, plus you aren't done meeting new ones after that either

So far the only note worthy NPC I've met is...

That giant chick after the double boss.

As Iv'e mentioned before. Demon's Souls did NPC's and storytelling better.

#53 Posted by Hrothdane (12 posts) -

Sisyphean above makes some great points, and I would like to add one.

I think one of the reasons so many people have such a negative reaction to these games lies in their fundamental design philosophies. Dark Souls and Demons Souls are action RPGs designed for defensive players that are deliberate in every action, while almost all other action RPGs are designed for offensive players that prefer action to planning. In many ways, the Souls games are not designed for the standard action RPG crowd at all and appeal more to turn-based RPG fans (like myself). All the action RPG fans expecting a faster and come into the game expecting to play it like their other games and soon find themselves frustrated because the game is designed to incentivize a gameplay style they do not enjoy.

#54 Posted by golguin (3874 posts) -

@Dark said:

@Sisyphean: Here's the one thing anyone needs to know about the story ....... DAYMN Seath was one lucky dragon, lucky lucky dragon.

Who knew you could get such a great result from the pairing. The best female in the game is their little crossbreed.

#55 Posted by Beaudacious (927 posts) -

I enjoy how half the people are insulting people who are asking for clarification. I never said it was a bad game, the gameplay isn't hard I agree, the game in general is hard for having to deal with its inefficiencies. If you gave me more control over melee in 3rd person the way WotR or any other melee based game does it would be fine. Instead of being locked into a few animations I'd simply like more control over my weapon, and in a game where this is the main mechanic I think rightfully so. Animation based puzzle combat was ok in 2002, but even Indie developers now can make intricate gameplay systems.

I get the feeling unless I claim this game to be Jesus I won't get anywhere.

#56 Edited by kerse (2111 posts) -

@Beaudacious said:

I enjoy how half the people are insulting people who are asking for clarification. I never said it was a bad game, the gameplay isn't hard I agree, the game in general is hard for having to deal with its inefficiencies. If you gave me more control over melee in 3rd person the way WotR or any other melee based game does it would be fine. Instead of being locked into a few animations I'd simply like more control over my weapon, and in a game where this is the main mechanic I think rightfully so. Animation based puzzle combat was ok in 2002, but even Indie developers now can make intricate gameplay systems.

I get the feeling unless I claim this game to be Jesus I won't get anywhere.

This game probably just isn't for you then, many people will disagree with you on the combat.

Online
#57 Edited by benspyda (2033 posts) -

It's a bit like learning to ride a bike. The first time you might fall off and say how can anyone do this, this sucks! But learn how to do it right and get good at it and it becomes second nature. Then you start NG+ and fall off your bike again.

#58 Edited by golguin (3874 posts) -

@Beaudacious said:

I enjoy how half the people are insulting people who are asking for clarification. I never said it was a bad game, the gameplay isn't hard I agree, the game in general is hard for having to deal with its inefficiencies. If you gave me more control over melee in 3rd person the way WotR or any other melee based game does it would be fine. Instead of being locked into a few animations I'd simply like more control over my weapon, and in a game where this is the main mechanic I think rightfully so. Animation based puzzle combat was ok in 2002, but even Indie developers now can make intricate gameplay systems.

I get the feeling unless I claim this game to be Jesus I won't get anywhere.

I would say that Bayonetta is the smoothest 3rd person action game on the market. It gives you complete freedom of movement, the ability to chain move in a big variety of ways with various weapons, and you can dodge out of any combo. All the mechanics of that game serve that style of play. Being able to counter attack with the moon of mahaa-kalaa requires a confidence in your ability to pull off your timing down to the tenths of a second.

The combat in Dark Souls requires the same finesse. The only difference is that animation priority replaces the ability to dodge out of any combo chain. Bayonetta lets you react to any dangerous situation at the drop of a dime. Dark Souls forces you to plan out your reaction in case of a dangerous situation.

I believe the parry/riposte system in Dark Souls is an excellent example of this. You need to plan before an enemy attack the moment you'll need to parry. To do this you need to know the speed with which the enemy attack will connect (their unique attack animation) and the window (tenths of a second) for a successful parry. If you're too early or late you'll eat the whole attack. If you're a bit off you'll take a bit of damage. If you land it just right you'll deliver the most damaging physical attack in the game. Some attacks animate so fast that you actually have to parry the moment you believe your enemy will attack.

People who have played the game enough to successfully parry with a high degree of accuracy will tell you how much you need to know to be really good at the combat.

EDIT: Dodge rolling (slow, medium, fast, and flip) through attacks and spells requires the same type of precision, but the window for success is much larger when compared to the Parry, but still small enough that it has to be learned over a good amount of time.

#59 Posted by Ares42 (2620 posts) -

@mordukai: Demon's Souls puts it more out there. Dark Souls probably relies a tad too heavily on "you have to do this before speaking to this guy" and some environmental stuff. You can probably go through the entire game and miss almost everything if you don't speak to people at the right moments.

#60 Posted by cmblasko (1191 posts) -

@Beaudacious said:

I enjoy how half the people are insulting people who are asking for clarification. I never said it was a bad game, the gameplay isn't hard I agree, the game in general is hard for having to deal with its inefficiencies. If you gave me more control over melee in 3rd person the way WotR or any other melee based game does it would be fine. Instead of being locked into a few animations I'd simply like more control over my weapon, and in a game where this is the main mechanic I think rightfully so. Animation based puzzle combat was ok in 2002, but even Indie developers now can make intricate gameplay systems.

I get the feeling unless I claim this game to be Jesus I won't get anywhere.

If you don't like it, then you just don't like it. Clearly you gave it enough of a chance to change your mind and it just didn't. No one is faulting you for that. I just take issue with you acting like there is something wrong with the game when there isn't anything wrong, just differences that don't gel with your personal preferences. I don't want this game to be Batman and neither should you because Batman already exists and so do tons of other game that ape its formula.

#61 Posted by gogosox82 (424 posts) -

@Beaudacious said:

I enjoy how half the people are insulting people who are asking for clarification. I never said it was a bad game, the gameplay isn't hard I agree, the game in general is hard for having to deal with its inefficiencies. If you gave me more control over melee in 3rd person the way WotR or any other melee based game does it would be fine. Instead of being locked into a few animations I'd simply like more control over my weapon, and in a game where this is the main mechanic I think rightfully so. Animation based puzzle combat was ok in 2002, but even Indie developers now can make intricate gameplay systems.

I get the feeling unless I claim this game to be Jesus I won't get anywhere.

Well I'm sorry you feel attacked but i think people were just responding to your original post and question. You wanted someone to explain dark souls to you and plenty of people have told you why they like dark souls so much. You don't like the gameplay so maybe the game isn't for you. Not everyone can like every game but i would say it seems a little silly to say the game should control like all other 3rd person action games. You want all games to play and feel exactly the same gameplay wise? Wouldn't that get boring and stale after a while? I think we need games that broaden the idea of what a good 3rd person action game is and dark souls does that.

#62 Posted by envane (1162 posts) -

i love dark souls exactly as is , just face the fact that the only interest you have in dark souls is due to some weird peer pressure / jealousy from all the other ppl who play it and enjoy it and praise it so much. You dont like the game and somehow its existence challenges the fabirc of your world in which you tell your parents and friends "im the best person at video games that I know" , now you have to say , "i didnt get into dark souls , i found it too difficult and frustrating and i didnt have the patience to try and learn how the game worked so i quit" .. this obviously isnt as cool to admit, so people like you then have to draw other fence sitters into this ridiculous argument which alwasy ends up in "dark souls is too hard " , " no its not its too easy" blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

</inchoherent rant>

and now watch my really boring pvp video

#63 Edited by colorbrandon (160 posts) -

Dark souls is definitely a game where if it immediately clicks, you're in love. I've tried introducing it to my friends who have great technical skills in gameplay mechanics. They tried it and realized they didn't have the patience to learn the skillset. It's a scholarly game for sure.

#64 Posted by Ravenlight (8040 posts) -

@envane said:

What is the music playing in the background? It's... compelling.

#65 Posted by granderojo (1778 posts) -

To be fair to the OP, as someone who loved Dark Souls, I mean I was a total naysayer going in and it hooked it's claws into me, the PC port is horrible. I say that as someone who primarily plays on PC. And to all you people who will respond to me saying it's fine and I should be happy with what I got, I am happy with what I got. A great 360 version. That PC port was garbage, and a decidedly worse version of that game than the consoles as far as I'm concerned.

Bullshit aside I just walked out of my second viewing of The Hobbit and I have to say guys, you fuckers talking about lore need to stop. Shit is making me want a developer to make a methodical action RPG in the style of a souls game but in the Lord of the Rings universe. Who's got the license for Húrin? It doesn't have to be From Software, CD Projekt was able to pull off a half descent iteration of Demon Souls with The Witcher 2. Make this shit happen.

#66 Posted by Animasta (14672 posts) -

@Beaudacious said:

I enjoy how half the people are insulting people who are asking for clarification. I never said it was a bad game, the gameplay isn't hard I agree, the game in general is hard for having to deal with its inefficiencies. If you gave me more control over melee in 3rd person the way WotR or any other melee based game does it would be fine. Instead of being locked into a few animations I'd simply like more control over my weapon, and in a game where this is the main mechanic I think rightfully so. Animation based puzzle combat was ok in 2002, but even Indie developers now can make intricate gameplay systems.

I get the feeling unless I claim this game to be Jesus I won't get anywhere.

now you're just being excessively defensive.

more control over your weapon? if you don't like how your weapon works than get a different one; they all pretty much control slightly differently. I had a giant butcher knife, and I upgraded to a bigger version of that weapon, but it had a completely different animation set and I had to learn a different one.

and dark souls HAS intricate gameplay systems, sorry if you don't like them but they are there.

#67 Posted by colorbrandon (160 posts) -

@thabigred said:

To be fair to the OP, as someone who loved Dark Souls, I mean I was a total naysayer going in and it hooked it's claws into me, the PC port is horrible. I say that as someone who primarily plays on PC. And to all you people who will respond to me saying it's fine and I should be happy with what I got, I am happy with what I got. A great 360 version. That PC port was garbage, and a decidedly worse version of that game than the consoles as far as I'm concerned.

Wait, what's wrong with the PC version?

The only thing I can really knock it for is the GFWL and the occasional hacker in pvp, but that's about it.

I've been playing with DSfix 1.9 on windows 8 and I've crashed once in 100 hours of gameplay.

#68 Posted by Animasta (14672 posts) -

@colorbrandon said:

@thabigred said:

To be fair to the OP, as someone who loved Dark Souls, I mean I was a total naysayer going in and it hooked it's claws into me, the PC port is horrible. I say that as someone who primarily plays on PC. And to all you people who will respond to me saying it's fine and I should be happy with what I got, I am happy with what I got. A great 360 version. That PC port was garbage, and a decidedly worse version of that game than the consoles as far as I'm concerned.

Wait, what's wrong with the PC version?

The only thing I can really knock it for is the GFWL and the occasional hacker in pvp, but that's about it.

I've been playing with DSfix 1.9 on windows 8 and I've crashed once in 100 hours of gameplay.

ATI cards in general have been fucked

I get a decent framerate (prolly 30) on high with witcher 2 and I can barely run dark souls in places like lost izaleth, crystal caves, etc. with DSfix.

#69 Posted by colorbrandon (160 posts) -

@Animasta: Try playing this game on a PS3 then. Single digit frames in blight town. I didn't get far enough on my friend's PS3 to check out other notoriously bad places. I haven't tried the 360 version but I think its a problem with the game in general.

#70 Edited by Animasta (14672 posts) -

@colorbrandon said:

@Animasta: Try playing this game on a PS3 then. Single digit frames in blight town. I didn't get far enough on my friend's PS3 to check out other notoriously bad places. I haven't tried the 360 version but I think its a problem with the game in general.

yeah I am literally getting 5 frames per second fighting against seath, I literally checked with fraps on

the 360 was never this bad. I never fought Seath on the 360 but I honestly doubt players were getting 5 FPS

#71 Posted by granderojo (1778 posts) -

@colorbrandon: @Animasta: I actually have a GTX680 so yeah I have a rather beefy rig. It runs like ass due to poor optimization. It has to do with how they ported it, just shoddy port work.

#72 Posted by Animasta (14672 posts) -

@thabigred said:

@colorbrandon: @Animasta: I actually have a GTX680 so yeah I have a rather beefy rig. It runs like ass due to poor optimization. It has to do with how they ported it, just shoddy port work.

if ass is more than 20 frames per second then you can fuckin deal with it you big baby D:

you haven't played dark souls until it gets so laggy that it doesn't read your controller inputs

THE REAL DARK SOULS STARTS HERE.

#73 Edited by colorbrandon (160 posts) -

@thabigred: Actually curious about what resolution you're running it on.

On my GTX660 TI, I only drop below the 30 FPS cap in 3 places: Blight town (at a certain angle in the swamp), Lost Izalith (Between centipede demon and Bed of Chaos), and Chasm of the Abyss. The only thing I changed in DSfix was the resolution (to 1920x1080)

#74 Posted by granderojo (1778 posts) -

@colorbrandon: same resolution as you. it's not so much frame rate drops as it is that it just doesn't feel smooth like the other versions.

#75 Posted by Hungry (165 posts) -

@Beaudacious said:

I enjoy how half the people are insulting people who are asking for clarification. I never said it was a bad game, the gameplay isn't hard I agree, the game in general is hard for having to deal with its inefficiencies. If you gave me more control over melee in 3rd person the way WotR or any other melee based game does it would be fine. Instead of being locked into a few animations I'd simply like more control over my weapon, and in a game where this is the main mechanic I think rightfully so. Animation based puzzle combat was ok in 2002, but even Indie developers now can make intricate gameplay systems.

I get the feeling unless I claim this game to be Jesus I won't get anywhere.

You know it is really hard to explain Dark Souls to you when we explain Dark Souls, and you say it is an inefficiency of the game. It is like complaining that you don't have enough control over how your characters punch in a fighting game, because light, medium, and heavy punches just don't fit to the specific parameters you wish they did.

#76 Posted by Turambar (6733 posts) -

@thabigred said:

To be fair to the OP, as someone who loved Dark Souls, I mean I was a total naysayer going in and it hooked it's claws into me, the PC port is horrible. I say that as someone who primarily plays on PC. And to all you people who will respond to me saying it's fine and I should be happy with what I got, I am happy with what I got. A great 360 version. That PC port was garbage, and a decidedly worse version of that game than the consoles as far as I'm concerned.

Bullshit aside I just walked out of my second viewing of The Hobbit and I have to say guys, you fuckers talking about lore need to stop. Shit is making me want a developer to make a methodical action RPG in the style of a souls game but in the Lord of the Rings universe. Who's got the license for Húrin? It doesn't have to be From Software, CD Projekt was able to pull off a half descent iteration of Demon Souls with The Witcher 2. Make this shit happen.

That's not Hurin you got in that picture. The Dragon Helm of Dor-lomin was only worn by one human.

#77 Posted by granderojo (1778 posts) -

@Turambar said:

@thabigred said:

To be fair to the OP, as someone who loved Dark Souls, I mean I was a total naysayer going in and it hooked it's claws into me, the PC port is horrible. I say that as someone who primarily plays on PC. And to all you people who will respond to me saying it's fine and I should be happy with what I got, I am happy with what I got. A great 360 version. That PC port was garbage, and a decidedly worse version of that game than the consoles as far as I'm concerned.

Bullshit aside I just walked out of my second viewing of The Hobbit and I have to say guys, you fuckers talking about lore need to stop. Shit is making me want a developer to make a methodical action RPG in the style of a souls game but in the Lord of the Rings universe. Who's got the license for Húrin? It doesn't have to be From Software, CD Projekt was able to pull off a half descent iteration of Demon Souls with The Witcher 2. Make this shit happen.

That's not Hurin you got in that picture. The Dragon Helm of Dor-lomin was only worn by one human.

I know this, I picked it because it's was used for the most recent cover of The Children of Hurin and is pretty badass.

#78 Posted by Turambar (6733 posts) -

@thabigred said:

@Turambar said:

@thabigred said:

To be fair to the OP, as someone who loved Dark Souls, I mean I was a total naysayer going in and it hooked it's claws into me, the PC port is horrible. I say that as someone who primarily plays on PC. And to all you people who will respond to me saying it's fine and I should be happy with what I got, I am happy with what I got. A great 360 version. That PC port was garbage, and a decidedly worse version of that game than the consoles as far as I'm concerned.

Bullshit aside I just walked out of my second viewing of The Hobbit and I have to say guys, you fuckers talking about lore need to stop. Shit is making me want a developer to make a methodical action RPG in the style of a souls game but in the Lord of the Rings universe. Who's got the license for Húrin? It doesn't have to be From Software, CD Projekt was able to pull off a half descent iteration of Demon Souls with The Witcher 2. Make this shit happen.

That's not Hurin you got in that picture. The Dragon Helm of Dor-lomin was only worn by one human.

I know this, I picked it because it's was used for the most recent cover of The Children of Hurin and is pretty badass.

I'd prefer this one. Takes giant brass balls to take no shits from Melkor.

#79 Posted by laserbolts (5317 posts) -

I can understand people not enjoying the priority on animation gameplay or the lack of storytelling. I agree the camera can be pretty bad in spots. But to say the game has poor level design is straight up crazy. I question if you have any idea what makes level design good or if you are very far in the game to even judge it. B AC has some variety in the combat with the quick gadget stuff but none of it is required to beat new game plus. All you do is mash x or square and counter when needed through the whole game.

#80 Posted by MikkaQ (10283 posts) -

Having finally played a couple hours of it for myself, I'm actually having fun, but I still don't see why it gets so much praise from certain pockets of the internet.

It has it's share of problems, like I can see that the combat is really fun but when I was told that the shitty starting axe that takes an hour to swing was one of the game's faster weapons, I got really discouraged. It would be totally fine if the game had cancelling, but you can't cancel, so you're just stuck watching your guy flail around like an asshole if you screw up your timing just a little bit. Also I feel like I have to cheese my way out of a lot of situations which never feels right.

Basically if this game had animation cancelling like most other games of this sort, I'd be shouting the praises like anyone else. But it feels really clunky to me.

#81 Posted by Hailinel (24394 posts) -

@MikkaQ: In Dark Souls, as in life, you can't just cancel out momentum. I appreciate the fact that the game takes weapon weight into account as it does.

#82 Posted by ImmortalSaiyan (4676 posts) -

@Hailinel said:

@MikkaQ: In Dark Souls, as in life, you can't just cancel out momentum. I appreciate the fact that the game takes weapon weight into account as it does.

As do I. You have to plan out every strike. The game would not be the same if you could cancel moves. It never felt clunky to me at all.

#83 Posted by Terramagi (1159 posts) -

Masochistic? I Wanna Be The Guy is masochistic. Dark Souls simply doesn't care whether you live or die, complete the game or not. If you fall, it will let you fall. If you don't learn its gameplay systems, it will let you be crushed.

The thing about it is that it doesn't care the other way too. If you learn its systems, approach situations with a cool head and knowledge of your own capabilities, it will let you run a train on everything in the game. It doesn't give a fuck either way. It's very Lovecraftian in that respect. The world doesn't care about you, but it doesn't care about that huge ass lava demon over there either, so go fucking overpower it if you want/need to.

#84 Posted by MikkaQ (10283 posts) -

@Hailinel said:

@MikkaQ: In Dark Souls, as in life, you can't just cancel out momentum. I appreciate the fact that the game takes weapon weight into account as it does.

I know it's a deliberate choice, but I struggle to see the justification. If the game was supposed to be like life you wouldn't be encountering gigantic crows that fly you off to cool looking medieval castles. I mean.. I wish life was like that, but hey.

Weakening a really fun combat system to make the game's pace more deliberate just really strikes me the wrong way. I'm not too bothered by over-animation in games as long as you can cancel to some degree. I'm totally cool with watching that slow-ass ladder animation every time, and I don't mind the huge wind up on my axe, but I should at least be able to drop out of the animation mid-wind-up, that would be more realistic, really.

I mean how fun would it be if you could like trick the enemies and invaders by raising your axe, but then pivoting away at the last second? That was probably a legit tactic back when axes were common anyway.

#85 Posted by Azteck (7449 posts) -

Honestly, you're missing the point entirely if you even call the gameplay terrible. Really, the gameplay is the best part about it

#86 Posted by DeF (4855 posts) -

@Beaudacious said:

I adore difficult games, but difficulty for Dark Souls seems due to poor design and badly implemented gameplay. Maybe it will grow on me, but I definitely feel like this game was way over-hyped.

It's actually the complete opposite. To use the example of the Batman games you mentioned, the way the difficulty ramps up is in the traditional "you take more damage and the enemies take longer to knock out"/"more enemies with late-game enemies appearing earlier" ways which is both not very creative and doesn't take any "designing" to implement really. The difficulty in the Souls-type games comes from thought-out design that gives you a lot of room to experiment and conquer the challenges presented to you, forcing you to think on your feet and plan ahead and take a lot of risks.

#87 Posted by Hailinel (24394 posts) -

@MikkaQ said:

@Hailinel said:

@MikkaQ: In Dark Souls, as in life, you can't just cancel out momentum. I appreciate the fact that the game takes weapon weight into account as it does.

I know it's a deliberate choice, but I struggle to see the justification. If the game was supposed to be like life you wouldn't be encountering gigantic crows that fly you off to cool looking medieval castles. I mean.. I wish life was like that, but hey.

Weakening a really fun combat system to make the game's pace more deliberate just really strikes me the wrong way. I'm not too bothered by over-animation in games as long as you can cancel to some degree. I'm totally cool with watching that slow-ass ladder animation every time, and I don't mind the huge wind up on my axe, but I should at least be able to drop out of the animation mid-wind-up, that would be more realistic, really.

I mean how fun would it be if you could like trick the enemies and invaders by raising your axe, but then pivoting away at the last second? That was probably a legit tactic back when axes were common anyway.

Why does the design choice to make weapon weight and momentum matter as it does require justification? It's the way they chose to make the game play. Rather than be a hack and slash like Dynasty Warriors or a character-action game like Bayonetta, the combat is deliberately paced in such a way that pounds you into the dirt if you try playing the game as either of the aforementioned styles.

#88 Posted by Animasta (14672 posts) -

@MikkaQ said:

Having finally played a couple hours of it for myself, I'm actually having fun, but I still don't see why it gets so much praise from certain pockets of the internet.

It has it's share of problems, like I can see that the combat is really fun but when I was told that the shitty starting axe that takes an hour to swing was one of the game's faster weapons, I got really discouraged. It would be totally fine if the game had cancelling, but you can't cancel, so you're just stuck watching your guy flail around like an asshole if you screw up your timing just a little bit. Also I feel like I have to cheese my way out of a lot of situations which never feels right.

Basically if this game had animation cancelling like most other games of this sort, I'd be shouting the praises like anyone else. But it feels really clunky to me.

do you mean the pyromancer's hand axe? there are plenty of weapons that are as fast or faster.

#89 Posted by MURDERSMASH (251 posts) -

I agree with all of the positive aspects people are pointing out here. The combat, the world, the playstyles...everything about it is amazing. The only thing I can't get past (and it's a deal breaker for me) is how everything respawns when you die. I'm fine with challenge. Please, by all means, make the game hard. But please don't make me have to fight through the same 5 mobs over and over and over and over just to get back to the one part i'm stuck at. It's not fun. It's a time-wasting grind, and that isn't what I want from a game.

#90 Edited by Animasta (14672 posts) -

@MURDERSMASH: it's not like mobs will automatically take off the same amount of health each run through, though. Once you figure out everything (and upgrade your weapons and stats) you can just sweep everything up no problem (it takes me like 2-3 minutes to get from the bonfire in undead burg to the wall where the taurus demon is, compared ot the 25 I had when I first played).

and if they didn't respawn, there's a good possibility you can end up fucked and having to restart the game over due to the losing of souls or even leveling up the wrong thing.

#91 Posted by Canteu (2821 posts) -

Here, let me try:

S ranked it, pre wiki.

It's not hard.

Have you played a video game before?

If you like mashing x, perhaps try something like dynasty warriors? It might be more your thing.

#92 Posted by Gahzoo (361 posts) -

@MikkaQ said:

Having finally played a couple hours of it for myself, I'm actually having fun, but I still don't see why it gets so much praise from certain pockets of the internet.

It has it's share of problems, like I can see that the combat is really fun but when I was told that the shitty starting axe that takes an hour to swing was one of the game's faster weapons, I got really discouraged. It would be totally fine if the game had cancelling, but you can't cancel, so you're just stuck watching your guy flail around like an asshole if you screw up your timing just a little bit. Also I feel like I have to cheese my way out of a lot of situations which never feels right.

Basically if this game had animation cancelling like most other games of this sort, I'd be shouting the praises like anyone else. But it feels really clunky to me.

I guess the reason it feels good to me is because like most fighting games, you press the input and if you whiff, you're going to get punished, it's pretty much the same thing in Dark Souls.

#93 Posted by MURDERSMASH (251 posts) -

@Animasta said:

@MURDERSMASH: it's not like mobs will automatically take off the same amount of health each run through, though. Once you figure out everything (and upgrade your weapons and stats) you can just sweep everything up no problem (it takes me like 2-3 minutes to get from the bonfire in undead burg to the wall where the taurus demon is, compared ot the 25 I had when I first played).

and if they didn't respawn, there's a good possibility you can end up fucked and having to restart the game over due to the losing of souls or even leveling up the wrong thing.

Well, the bonfires respawns them, don't they? Why not just have that be the respawn switch so that you can grind if you really want to?

#94 Posted by Ares42 (2620 posts) -

@MikkaQ said:

@Hailinel said:

@MikkaQ: In Dark Souls, as in life, you can't just cancel out momentum. I appreciate the fact that the game takes weapon weight into account as it does.

I know it's a deliberate choice, but I struggle to see the justification. If the game was supposed to be like life you wouldn't be encountering gigantic crows that fly you off to cool looking medieval castles. I mean.. I wish life was like that, but hey.

Weakening a really fun combat system to make the game's pace more deliberate just really strikes me the wrong way. I'm not too bothered by over-animation in games as long as you can cancel to some degree. I'm totally cool with watching that slow-ass ladder animation every time, and I don't mind the huge wind up on my axe, but I should at least be able to drop out of the animation mid-wind-up, that would be more realistic, really.

I mean how fun would it be if you could like trick the enemies and invaders by raising your axe, but then pivoting away at the last second? That was probably a legit tactic back when axes were common anyway.

I've already explained it earlier in the thread, but I'll give it another go. The point is that the game isn't about execution, it's about puzzles. The animation priority, lack of cancels and harsh consequences are there to encourage to think before you act, not just mash buttons and save your ass because you have good reactions. It's all about experimenting and figuring out when you can do what, and it works on multiple levels. First time going through the game most people will just rely on blocking and retaliating, then as they get more confident they might start going for backstabs, then they might start going for dodges or parry and ripostes and finally they go for straight up counter-attacks. For each step you learn you become more efficient at taking down enemies to the point where you can just blast through them in a hurry.

#95 Posted by pyrodactyl (1973 posts) -

@MikkaQ said:

Having finally played a couple hours of it for myself, I'm actually having fun, but I still don't see why it gets so much praise from certain pockets of the internet.

It has it's share of problems, like I can see that the combat is really fun but when I was told that the shitty starting axe that takes an hour to swing was one of the game's faster weapons, I got really discouraged. It would be totally fine if the game had cancelling, but you can't cancel, so you're just stuck watching your guy flail around like an asshole if you screw up your timing just a little bit. Also I feel like I have to cheese my way out of a lot of situations which never feels right.

Basically if this game had animation cancelling like most other games of this sort, I'd be shouting the praises like anyone else. But it feels really clunky to me.

if you want fast weapon, use an estoc (you find it near firelink shrine, if you take the elevator down), bandit dagger or other dex based weapons. Put points into dex instead of strenght and equipe light armor so you're below 25% equip load enableling fast roll.

#96 Posted by Animasta (14672 posts) -

@MURDERSMASH said:

@Animasta said:

@MURDERSMASH: it's not like mobs will automatically take off the same amount of health each run through, though. Once you figure out everything (and upgrade your weapons and stats) you can just sweep everything up no problem (it takes me like 2-3 minutes to get from the bonfire in undead burg to the wall where the taurus demon is, compared ot the 25 I had when I first played).

and if they didn't respawn, there's a good possibility you can end up fucked and having to restart the game over due to the losing of souls or even leveling up the wrong thing.

Well, the bonfires respawns them, don't they? Why not just have that be the respawn switch so that you can grind if you really want to?

isn't that already how it works? you can go kill the entire world and never go to a bonfire, but you will have to go to one to refill on estus flasks; you can light a bonfire without resting on one.

#97 Edited by MURDERSMASH (251 posts) -

@Animasta said:

@MURDERSMASH said:

@Animasta said:

@MURDERSMASH: it's not like mobs will automatically take off the same amount of health each run through, though. Once you figure out everything (and upgrade your weapons and stats) you can just sweep everything up no problem (it takes me like 2-3 minutes to get from the bonfire in undead burg to the wall where the taurus demon is, compared ot the 25 I had when I first played).

and if they didn't respawn, there's a good possibility you can end up fucked and having to restart the game over due to the losing of souls or even leveling up the wrong thing.

Well, the bonfires respawns them, don't they? Why not just have that be the respawn switch so that you can grind if you really want to?

isn't that already how it works? you can go kill the entire world and never go to a bonfire, but you will have to go to one to refill on estus flasks; you can light a bonfire without resting on one.

Yeah, BUT, if you die, you'll respawn at the last bonfire you've used, with all the mobs respawning as well. So my thought was to NOT have the mobs respawn unless you choose an option at the bonfires. I would play the hell out of the game if it was like that. As it is now, it's just too much of a timesink for how I like to play games.

#98 Posted by ImmortalSaiyan (4676 posts) -

@Animasta said:

@MURDERSMASH said:

@Animasta said:

@MURDERSMASH: it's not like mobs will automatically take off the same amount of health each run through, though. Once you figure out everything (and upgrade your weapons and stats) you can just sweep everything up no problem (it takes me like 2-3 minutes to get from the bonfire in undead burg to the wall where the taurus demon is, compared ot the 25 I had when I first played).

and if they didn't respawn, there's a good possibility you can end up fucked and having to restart the game over due to the losing of souls or even leveling up the wrong thing.

Well, the bonfires respawns them, don't they? Why not just have that be the respawn switch so that you can grind if you really want to?

isn't that already how it works? you can go kill the entire world and never go to a bonfire, but you will have to go to one to refill on estus flasks; you can light a bonfire without resting on one.

Plus the bonfire fits the themes and atmosphere of Dark Souls unlike a switch which would look out of place. One thing I love about Dark Souls is how commited it is to it's world. Bonfire being an example, as it makes you feel safe.

#99 Posted by Animasta (14672 posts) -

@MURDERSMASH said:

@Animasta said:

@MURDERSMASH said:

@Animasta said:

@MURDERSMASH: it's not like mobs will automatically take off the same amount of health each run through, though. Once you figure out everything (and upgrade your weapons and stats) you can just sweep everything up no problem (it takes me like 2-3 minutes to get from the bonfire in undead burg to the wall where the taurus demon is, compared ot the 25 I had when I first played).

and if they didn't respawn, there's a good possibility you can end up fucked and having to restart the game over due to the losing of souls or even leveling up the wrong thing.

Well, the bonfires respawns them, don't they? Why not just have that be the respawn switch so that you can grind if you really want to?

isn't that already how it works? you can go kill the entire world and never go to a bonfire, but you will have to go to one to refill on estus flasks; you can light a bonfire without resting on one.

Yeah, BUT, if you die, you'll respawn at the last bonfire you've used, with all the mobs respawning as well. So my thought was to NOT have the mobs respawn unless you choose an option at the bonfires. I would play the hell out of the game if it was like that. As it is now, it's just too much of a timesink for how I like to play games.

then how would it be hard to get to your bloodstain? why include the bloodstain system at all, at that point?

say there are 5 single guys in a row and you die at #4. in your scenario, all you would need to do would be to kill the 4th one which would make it extremely anti climatic.

#100 Posted by cmblasko (1191 posts) -

@MURDERSMASH said:

@Animasta said:

@MURDERSMASH said:

@Animasta said:

@MURDERSMASH: it's not like mobs will automatically take off the same amount of health each run through, though. Once you figure out everything (and upgrade your weapons and stats) you can just sweep everything up no problem (it takes me like 2-3 minutes to get from the bonfire in undead burg to the wall where the taurus demon is, compared ot the 25 I had when I first played).

and if they didn't respawn, there's a good possibility you can end up fucked and having to restart the game over due to the losing of souls or even leveling up the wrong thing.

Well, the bonfires respawns them, don't they? Why not just have that be the respawn switch so that you can grind if you really want to?

isn't that already how it works? you can go kill the entire world and never go to a bonfire, but you will have to go to one to refill on estus flasks; you can light a bonfire without resting on one.

Yeah, BUT, if you die, you'll respawn at the last bonfire you've used, with all the mobs respawning as well. So my thought was to NOT have the mobs respawn unless you choose an option at the bonfires. I would play the hell out of the game if it was like that. As it is now, it's just too much of a timesink for how I like to play games.

That would completely betray the core philosophy of the game. You would be able to just brute force your way through the whole game instead of being forced to stop and actually think about what you are doing. The bonfire system is designed as it is because the game wants the player to learn more and get better with each attempt at a section until they are good enough to be able to clear it successfully without dying.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.