I think the online aspects of these games are among their most interesting aspects. They add a sense of camaraderie to an otherwise lonely game, and really help build the community in these games. I've certainly found a lot of hidden doors thanks to messages :) At the same time, I think even without the online features, the people who really like these games -- meaning the people who actually play enough to beat them -- would probably like them anyway. I know I would still be way into them even without the online stuff (I don't even engage with it that much). But I do agree that the online components make the games more welcoming to those who would otherwise be scared away, even if they don't stick with it past a certain point.

I do think you're right that offering a challenge in the face of an industry that's generally decided to reject challenge has also been a big draw. It's the alternative for people tired of certain modern trends, and that's always going to appeal to a certain number of people. Finally, as far as the way these games are challenging, I'd argue that most of the things you talk about being "knowledge humps" (such as getting hit by the crummy early zombies) could just as easily be overcome by players being patient and observant. A brand new player could go a long way in one of these games simply by taking their time and paying attention to everything around them, regardless of their prior "knowledge". I think we're simply trained to not be patient or observant in games, which makes the Souls games seem weirder/harder than they really are.

I dunno I bet it would have succeeded without the online play. Definitely not to the same degree it has with the online play, but I know I still would have bought them. The core attraction to Dark Souls is the sense of discovery, discovering a shortcut, a secret weapon, a mechanic, a dialogue, a boss's pattern etc.

That's so rare in today's games, that's what makes it a novel game experience. Even rarer for a AAA console game to do that.

If more games offered that then I bet the Souls games could be bargain bin material. But other big budget games don't offer that and as far as I know aren't planning to.

@slag: The more I play the Souls series and realize how many cool things there are to see the more I appreciate all they offer, but the first time I played Demon's Souls I was so turned off by the difficulty and how unforgiving specing in the wrong direction could be. Without some outside help you are really flying blind on what items to invest in and which stats to use that it really felt like it punished my attempts at trial and error. Making a leveling or equipment mistake in a Souls game used to mean starting over to apply that new knowledge, which I think is something that they really improved in Dark Souls 2 by letting you re-allocate your points mid-game.

@majormitch: Some of the cheap kills are only really hinted at by bloodstains though, like booby-trapped treasure chests or hidden enemies or actual booby-traps. I know I was killed in Demon's Souls during 1.1, 1.2, and 2.1 enough times by hidden monsters and booby-traps to quit that game because I was offline. No amount of caution prepares you for enemies bursting through a wall or dropping in from off screen. I didn't get into the community at the time because the early levels were too brutal and I didn't know about the light at the end of the tunnel. Not to mention how un-intuitive the weapon and stat descriptions were.

You make a lot of good points. I don't agree with some of them, like I think the game isn't clunky at all. I think it's razor sharp. Also, the information and knowledge hump you mention is one of the reasons why some people (myself included) find it so enjoyable. It brings me back to the old days. Except, Dark Souls has better design than a lot of older games that let you figure everything out yourself.

It is designed to be figured out. It doesn't explain itself, but it also doesn't keep secrets from you. I think that's really great and I haven't seen it executed this well before.

The online camaraderie makes it great. I remember several years ago needing to descent into a bit of aborted babies to kill some saint-demon. I kept getting crushed by Garland or whatever his name was, so I enlisted the support of some guy. He ran around in a thong, switched weapons back and forth to look like he was jerking off, and then made short work of Garland.

@zevvion: I don't think the camera getting hung up in tight spaces or the complete inability for certain weapons to hit small enemies are intentional design choices. I think that some of the more annoying stuff in the Souls series are the result of some of their systems interacting in strange ways more than a deliberate effect.

@thatpinguino: You're right on the camera. But the weapon animations were always a big deal. They are the reason why no one (or not that many people) pick the weapon that does the most damage. Every weapon animating differently makes a huge difference in weapon choice. I definitely think that was intentional.

@zevvion: But you can't even hit crystal lizards with a bunch of the melee weapons in the game, like you lock on and then impotently swing and hit air for 5 seconds. The weapon animations are certainly deliberate, but not being able to hit what is essentially a walking treasure chest is definitely clunky, if intentional.

I think Dark Souls in particular has some of the best controls of any game. I feel like I can be extremely methodical and precise with my execution and that's a rare thing in games. There's a reason everyone throws out the phrase "if you die you know it's your fault." That's because of the good controls. I don't get why so many people think the controls are bad. If you get hit enough that you the enemy stuns you with a shield break, that's not lag, that's a weakness in your approach and the consequence you suffer. If you swing a weapon in a tight corridor and hit the wall and not your opponent, then that's something that can be avoided by choosing the right weapons for the right areas, or perhaps drawing out your enemies into more open areas, which is a key to success in many areas of the game.

I think with the tight, precise controls and the ways in which you pay for your mistakes, it makes perfect sense that people think it's brutal, but fair, and that people enjoy the exploration, because they know how dangerous every step can be. It makes it intense and exciting the whole time.

If I'm not mistake, most weapons do have at least one swing that will hit something like a crystal lizard. There is the normal attack, the running attack, the jumping attack, the heavy attack, and then all the variations of those when you two-hand the weapon. If you know your weapon well, you know which swing to use in those situations. Granted, I haven't used every weapon in the games so maybe you used a rare one that doesn't, but as far as I know, they all have a swing that will connect low.

To me that doesn't tell me they intentionally or unintentionally made the controls clunky. It just means that for certain situations it helps to know your weapon and how it handles.

Dark souls is notperfect. Sometimes I get a little annoyed these games get such a pass from ppl. who would be screaming suck-ass camera and other much worse epithets. The online aspect is controversial, but this is how the devs designed the game. At that point I may like it or I may not. But I respect the intention as deliberate.

As for weapons, some weapons really are designed for certain purposes. I learned that from the Halberds in dark souls. One had a normal stabbing thrust that was almost(but you dropped your shield some) spear-like, the other two were normal slashers. Both attacks separately proved very fruitful in different areas/different enemy types, and that I really liked.

But that camera trap that was the door to Ornstein and Smaugh, damn damn damn!!!!! The giant was stabbing you from behind while Ornstein did his often-times rush. Oh well.

In the words Of Matt Rorie, most of it was truly 'hard but fair'. Not all, but of no matter at least afterwards. I really do enjoy these Soul games.

I played almost all of Dark Souls completely alone, not looking at many guides or anything or even knowing how to summon people consistently. I didn't find it clunky or glitchy in the slightest, and if by slow you mean "methodical" or "deliberate" then yes. Obtuse and difficult are two of the reasons I really liked it - it gave it a lot of mystery. I don't find my liking of Dark Souls to be paradoxical at all, or in spite of itself. I just think it's a dang well-made game.

On another note, I would never have liked Demon's Souls if I didn't already have an appreciation for Dark Souls. So it's true for that one at least. Heck, I still don't like Demon's Souls very much, but at least I can sort of get why people liked it when it came out. Dark Souls II is great. Played through the thing in a week and really liked it.

Also, no game's completely flawless because, hey, humans made it. But I have very few complaints about such huge and rewarding games, and that's saying something. Usually big open games are way more janky and messed up than these (Assassin's Creed, inFamous, etc.)

@mormonwarrior: I challenge that the game has to be slow and deliberate because I play with no armor and as such I am quick enough to dodge almost anything from the game's regular enemies and most of the game's bosses. If you load up on heavy armor and shields then the game becomes slow and methodical. If you try to take advantage of mobility, however, I find that the game's shortcomings become a little more pronounced (bad camera, finicky lock-on, tendency to get hung up on geometry, etc).

@ibushido: Many weapons have a jumping attack that hits low, but crystal lizards often run up against walls so a jump attack will usually clink against a wall rather than hit them. I had to resort to spending throwing knives on one because my weapons kept missing the little bastard. And as far as the game being methodical, I play with no armor and with massive weapons like the ultra great-sword and club so I really need the game to be as responsive and quick as possible to beat most of the game's toughest enemies. I have had the camera get caught on walls in tight boss arenas which gets me killed. I have had the lag between jogging and running get me killed. I have had my character start swinging an ultra great-sword only to turn a 180 and hit air, because apparently if you back peddle while attacking with that weapon the lockon targeting breaks. There are multiple bosses where I have had multiple mobile enemies to fight and the camera just can't keep up with their movements. There are not "perfect" controls they are good enough if you choose to play a slow and methodical style, if you try to play quickly I have found that the game can be incredibly frustrating.