So all this Bloodborne hype has got me more than a little interested in the Souls series again. So my question is where should I start? I own Dark Souls on PS3 and it's still sealed. However I'm aware that Dark Souls 2 is right around the corner for Xbox One. So I know conventional wisdom would say do 1 then 2 for story. I'm thinking slightly differently though, which game am I more likely to finish? Does the story even run across the two titles?

Any help would be great, Dragon Age Inquisition is drawing to a close for me so I'm looking at this as being my next main game.

If you want a smoother difficulty curve I would go as follows.

Old Dark Souls 2, Dark souls then Bloodborne.

The new Dark souls 2 thats being released on new consoles changed up enemy placement completely, its a much harder game than it was before. Dark souls 1 is a better game than 2 in many peoples opinion however Dark souls 2 is easier than 1. Bloodborne forces offensive combat due to no shields and dodge heavy gameplay making you feel far more fragile than in previous games. I still however think the old version of Dark Souls 2 is the best to start out on if you want something thats harder than most games, but not too hard.

On the chance you get burnt out on the Souls franchise I say just start with the best -- Dark Souls 1 -- and move on from there. That being said, the PC version is much better option just for the framerate but if that's not in the cards right now the PS3 version should be fine

PC could be an option I'm not sure I could run it fully maxed out so perhaps loses some of the advantages.

Dark Souls. It feels more like a connected world, where as DS2 feels more segmented and as if your going off to the "Forest Area" or the "Sea Towers Area". The one thing I would advise you on is to ignore the whole "Dark Souls is super hard" thing people say. Its more of a challenge because of how it plays on all the things you think a game will do. Its a series to make you think about what your doing and is completely unforgiving to a brazen lets just wing it attitude.

You do not need a very powerful PC to max out Dark Souls 1 or 2.

Yeah I get that and that's what makes me think I could beat it....if I work out the best/easiest character build to play with.

The first Dark Souls. It is better in every regard.

Since you have a PS3, Demon's Souls.

The best has changed from Dark Souls to Dark Souls 2 Scholar of The First Sin, but that's subjective. That's just me speaking.

However- I would also say that's probably the one that's the most palatable for the newcomers since the gameplay is much more refined.

I think both Dark Souls games are great, and although most people think Dark Souls 1 is a better game, I think Dark Souls 2 is much more approachable to newcomers. It has greater class diversity, a better tutorial, less restrictive weapon/armor restrictions, and the ability to respec about half way through the game if you totally mess up your build. Also the greatest challenge of Dark Souls is trying to understand all the poorly explain systems in the game and how they affect your character, and Dark Souls 2 is a little better about that.

ARGH! So many conflicting views! Shows there really is no right answer....

go first with dark souls, then proceed to dark souls 2. The first may be better, but dark souls 2 is still a fantastic game And you shouldn't miss out on it.

The real Dark Souls begins with Demon's Souls

It's pretty clear the answer is Dark Souls 1. It's not only the best in the series, but it also starts you off with some clunkier UI elements that will be really hard to go back to if you started with Dark Souls 2.

Dark Souls. Dark Souls 2 is skippable. I never beat it and don't plan on going back to it any time soon.

Honestly, after playing all of them I feel that Bloodborne is actually the best introduction to the series. It is a more stripped down and easy to understand. It doesn't contain things like equipment weight or hollowing, which have huge affects on gameplay and mechanically make it more dense. (My girlfriend who isn't normally into this kind of stuff is liking it a lot and is currently working on the first boss.) Granted, it also doesn't have things like spells, miracles, or pyromancy, but the lack of those and their corresponding stats makes it harder for new players to build their character "wrong." If Bloodborne is straight up not an option for you then I'd suggest starting with Dark Souls II and reading up on some beginner's guides. Understanding things like kindling, stat weight on weapons, hollowing, etc is massively important and the game doesn't do the best job at explaining them all to you.

Dark Souls is the hardest to get into because it has the least guided and structured beginning, but Demon's Souls is the most mechanically confusing. Fuck, I still don't understand world and character tendency and couldn't explain it if I tried. That being said, at the end of the day they are both better games than Dark Souls II. However, I cant speak for the quality of this new version, but I hear that it improves upon the game in a lot of meaningful ways. Don't get me wrong, the original release was not a bad game. Nowhere near that. But man...really disappointing. The DLC, which is including in Scholar, added a lot to the game and in general was probably all better made than the core game. So, if you can't go with Bloodborne, then Scholar of the First Sin is your best option.

@dudeglove: Thanks for posting that. I found that pretty funny. I haven't heard of these guys before.

Ok I've decided I've got this copy of Dark Souls on PS3 ready to go. I'm going to go for it. Going to play as "blind" as possible although if someone wants to let me know which class will give me an easier time that would be swell :P

@dudeglove nice trailer!

I find people who say this kind of ridiculous. Dark Souls II improved so much.

Soul reallocation, gridded inventory, 360 degree rolling, using more than 1 soul at a time, moving cloth, letting you continue playing when the connection is lost, 60 fps, more useful play styles, parrying and riposting with two-handed weapons, more balanced upgrade paths that don't negate your soul level, a forging system that doesn't require you to have several types of the same weapon, an easier jump function, no huge empty open areas like Lost Izalith and Demon Ruins, weapon degradation on the HUD, PvE that can't be taken advantage of with backstab > backstab > backstab > backstab, more useful rings and letting you equip four, automatic repair at bonfires (which any warrior would do when they are resting)...

@ezekiel: The biggest thing for me is reallocation of soul levels. I loved that I could respec to fit any build I wanted without having to have 10 characters.

You can start with any Souls game, it doesn't matter.

I played ds2 first and strongly prefer ds2 but I recommend playing DS1 first because it will be really hard to go back to DS1 after playing DS2. I was really annoyed by the lack of 360 degree rolling personally.

You have a ps3 so why isn't Demon's Souls an option?

It seems like some people just don't know Demon's Souls exists

@ezekiel: I agree that those are all material improvements over Dark Souls, yet (IMO of course) their cost was the loss of the heart and soul of the game. Dark Souls has a certain je ne sais quoi, something hard to describe but clearly lacking in Dark Souls II. The overarching world design is a big part of it.

I love DS2, I've put in 160+ hours which I think is more than I did for DS1, I've had a lot more fun with the PvP (I never had any fun with it in DS1), but to me it's just not as good even though so many of the mechanics and systems are better.

I'd start with Demon's.

I'd go with Dark Souls on PC. It would be hard to go back to those 360/PS3 games at this point. Mainly because of the frame-rate.

Also the original DS has the best world. I really like DS2 but the opening areas to that game stinks butts and I could see someone more likely putting the game down before getting very far.

I absolutely loved Dark Souls. I played over 100 hours of that game with several different characters. I quit Dark Souls 2 just after the tutorial section, after my weapon broke on me. Seriously, why, Dark Souls 2, why? That is not fun in any way, shape or form. It's just plain bullshit. I read some good stuff about the expansion and I was actually planning on jumping back in when I remember that mechanic and decided against it. That series went from being some of my favourite games to borderline garbage with one, disastrous change. (Playing on PC, heard something about a 60fps bug... maybe that made matters worse).

I haven't played Bloodborne, and I don't intend to. What I appreciated about the souls games was the variety in weapons and characters and the flexibility and replayability that brought. From all I have seen of Bloodborne, it's not for me.

Keep that in mind when I tell you to start with Dark Souls 1. It's an amazing game.

Like almost every person here has said: Dark Souls 1 is the better game. But if you think you might give up halfway through or you'd be easily frustrated then I Highly recommend Dark Souls 2 first.

DS2 has a lot of mechanical improvements that solve a lot of people's frustrations with DS1 & DeS, But it also feels like it has no soul.

Dark Souls II is a legitimately bad game and a permanent stain on the franchise. Souls games are built on their enemy layouts, animations and AI. Dark Souls II has some of the shittiest encounters with the worst designed enemies of the franchise. The story, the characters, the world are not interesting in any way. Skip it and save yourself the disappointment.

Each other game is a great starting point. I played Demon's Souls first, couldn't finish it, picked up Dark Souls a few years later and ended up playing over 800 hours through numerous playthroughs and went back to Demon's Souls to finish it a few times as well. Demon's Souls is my personal favorite, it completely nails every aspect of the story, world and level design, characters, and above all gameplay, it feels like a true refinement of Demon's Souls as it takes many similar themes, characters, areas and bosses but elevates them onto a whole other level. Bloodborne does it's own thing, I've only managed to get to what I assume is around 1/2 through the game because I have my PS4 at my parent's place and only had time over the Easter weekend to play it. I don't find myself obsessing over it as I did with the other (good) games of the franchise, but it seems really really good from what I've played, just a lot more stripped down and 'focused' than the others.

Demon's Souls.

I still think it is the best game in the series. True, you'll find more refinement among inventory and whatnot in the others, and you'll appreciate the changes more in Dark Souls, but in terms of lore / setting, I prefer Demon's Souls. Dark Souls is a very close second and you should definitely play both, if you can muster enough endurance to finish both.

Shadow Tower

Dark Souls II. I love the others (and Dark I is arguably a better game), but mechanically, II is a more refined, sharper experience than its predecessors. Demon's is a deep cut at this point--it's not as visually stunning as it once was, and some environments look quite drab and lifeless compared to the other games in the franchise, however it's still a Souls game, and a unique experience (I don't find it to be as affecting atmospherically as Dark I & II). II is perhaps less challenging for a newcomer, but I don't believe it to be inferior to I, necessarily--it's just different. If I's areas are comparable to grand novels in depth and scope, II's are more often than not the equivalent of novellas and flash fiction: they aren't as fleshed out, but nonetheless, there are marvels to be found in the anthology.

TL;DR: Start from II and work backwards.