What is Souls actually like?

Dark Souls is, as I've mentioned before, one of my all time favourite games. It wasn't an easy game, by any stretch, but the difficulty isn't as bad as it gets made out. The game uses death as a mechanic, and this is tied into the game design and the lore at an intrinsic level. The whole "prepare to die", "Dark Souls is the hardest game ever" thing was kind of an internet meme that developed after the game's release, which Namco ran with in their marketing, but it isn't really what FROM were thinking.

This is most evident when you play the second game: where the first one had enemy placements which A) told a story and B) were always teaching you something, the second one would quite often kill you with cheap bum rushes. This cheapness was noticeable because the first had been so much more fair.

The other complaint about Dark Souls was that it was a grim, brown, depressing affair. The world of Lordran is beautiful, albeit in a melancholy way, and the apocalyptic feeling is used to excellent effect to make the touching, individual characters stand out. The game is all about the dichotomy of light and dark, which is expressed in every aspect of gameplay, worldbuilding, the story beats, the characters, the visuals and the music. After the grim early game, stepping into Anor Londo is breathtaking. None of this is by accident.

It's a third person action adventure whose levels can be tackled in any order (up to a point?). It rewards diligence, patience and care (I hear stuff about traps that cause instant death, so tread carefully!). It's set on an Earth-like world in what appears to be medieval times and the Sun is worshipped. It has a reputation for being as hard as adamantium nails, which is unfair. The story is not told through gameplay, as such, but via items that the player acquires throughout the game.


It is popular because its aforementioned reputation of being tough brought people's attention to it by word of mouth (very much conjecture on my part).

Having never played them, there's nothing I like or dislike about the games themselves in gameplay terms.

I'm not able to play them as none of the games have been released on a system I own but if I had such a system, I don't feel I'd be playing them. Third person action adventures are not my bag unless the player character is either Link or Batman.

...that it's things like this that irritate me about From games more than anything.  Their constant semi-fanatical bringing-up everywhere all the time.  Obviously an exaggeration, but From's supporters are about as prone to go on about From games months after their release as I am to go on about Bravely Second in the week or so after finishing it.  

No gaming series is so talked about among the gaming community, no Nontendo series worms its way into so many Nintendo discussions, or so it seems to me.  Best Zelda?  From game.  Best Metroid?  From game.  This world reminds of a From game.  A really major Nintendo game's coming out this month, let's name the games releases thread after DSIII.  I'm replaying Bloodborne, let's spend forty minutes talking about Dark Beast Paarl... AGAIN.

Combine this with the fact that I haven't played it, and am unlikely ever to play it, and you get someone who gets increasingly frustrated about... less the games, more about their discussion, and their fanbase.  We get it's great, stop bringing them up all the time already, they've sold well enough as is.  THIS MEANS YOU GAVIN "MIRACLE OF SOUND" DUNNE AND THE PODQUISITION LOT.

The Games Themselves

I don't know much about the original, DS1 sounds like a very good Metroidvania, DS2 sounds disappointing in comparison (one of those games that wouldn't have been lauded quite so much had it not been a Souls game), and Bloodborne sped up the combat and was more survival-horrific, but more ugly and grim with it.

It's because of that speeding up of the combat that BB sounds like the one I'd most like to play.  I don't have a lot of patience when it comes to games, especially ones that kill you lots.  And that's one of the things that make me suspect I wouldn't go as mad for the Souls games as many - my lack of patience.  So a game that demands a slow methodical approach or else kills me repeatedly, and takes stuff off me when I die, isn't great.

I've actually heard that the difficulty is oft overstated in Souls games - that as long as you're patient, and treat them with respect, they're not anywhere near as hard as the gaming community would have you believe.  Screw that, I don't have time for giving games patience.  You're a piece of entertainment to while away twenty hours, not a badge of pride.  From my games, I want a combat level somewhere in between that of Warriors games' brainless slashing and From games' patience-or-death.

Also, what I hear about the bosses.  I never want to fight Ornstein or Smaugh.

Other Things I Suspect I Wouldn't Like

The misery for one.  Jas posted up some pictures in the graphics thread, and while there was a lovely one of a red moon, the others were... ugly.  Technically adept, but not nice to look at.  The grim ambience isn't my thing, I love LoZTP in spite of it.  Even Metroid Prime, the game I've loved that I think of as being closest in nature to the From games, mixes in areas like Phendrana and Tallon Overworld.  It'd be much less good if it were all Chozo Ruins.

And the lore that you fans go on about.  What's wrong with cut-scenes?  I'm no fan of ferreting through item descriptions to piece together a story.  "Show don't tell" is as important in games as it is in films, books, etc.  This seems like an actually bad thing.  At least in Metroid Prime, scanning something would bring a description up straight away: I'd probably have ignored most of that had it gone straight to the menus.

Despite All Of The Above

I have no doubt that the From games are great stuff.  That even the mongrel of the bunch, DS2, has high production values and moments of genius.  That they're all rewarding to play through, have great worlds to explore, and are dripping with ambience.  In the unlikely event of me ever picking up a BBoP, I'd want a shot at Bloodborne at the very least.

Why is it popular?  I think Beemoh made a good post on this: after years of "the casual gaming revolution", "hardcore gamers" were being catered to with DS1.  No longer held by the hand through a lengthy tutorial, no longer patronised by a difficulty curve that was inclusive for those who had never played a game before, this was a pure game for the purest of pure gamers.  And a good one at that.

Why especially DS1 makes its way into so many avenues of conversation years after release ad nauseam... that I couldn't say.  Not even games like OoT do that.


I've been over this post numerous times, trying to tailor the words.  I'm sorry if any of this comes across as rude, you're all great gentlemen here.  But you have touched upon a slight sore point when it comes to gaming with me, as you're probably aware!

I don't have much to say about Zero's post, because he didn't have much to say in the first place.


Drunka's obviously pre-emptively addressed two of the most common concerns, although it sounds like I'm bang on re. DS2!  Drunka, you address the difficulty - would I still die lots?  And is what I say about patience being required at all warranted, at least regarding DS1?  

As for the world, light and dark be damned, it still doesn't look terribly... colourful.  Do you have any pictures of the games that you can use to contradict that?  We've already discussed my thoughts about games with a generally melancholy ambience...

I'm going to take you back to 2009 when Demon's Souls came out in the states, I remember people weren't really exited about it as it looked a bit dull then reviews starting to pop up. I think IGN got a intern to review it and he gave it a 9.4, suddenly they were talking about it on Podcast Beyond on this game which sort like a RKO came out of nowhere.

Also Sony who own the IP, didn't bother to publish it outside of Japan as they didn't think people in the west would want it thankfully Atlus & Namco would pick it up.

Because I heard all these great things about Demon's and at the time we weren't getting in Europe, I imported the game.

It eventually came and I barely played it, I don't know why maybe something else came out late 2009 / early 2010 but it got confirmed for Europe that I sold my American copy on eBay whilst I could still get top dollar for it.

I got the Black Phantom Edition for my PS3 on day one, this was sort of GOTY version. This time I played it a bit more, I really liked the gothic style of the aesthetics along with the music and more then anything the concept of multi player.

But I never got far, I remember ending up at the top of a castle and fighting a dragon who killed me in one hit and when I tried to go back to get my lost Soul's, I ended up dying again and that was the last time I played Demon's. I sort of didn't know what to do, it's not Demon's fault, it's mine and the game industry as whole now where every thing is hand holdy for a while just look at something like Skyward Sword another Action-RPG that game for quite awhile holds your hand.

Then due to what happened with Demon's, Namco and From Software partnered up to bring us the Dark games which the first I did buy and play for a bit but about a week later Arkham City came out and guess what I played.

DSII, I've totally missed and Lords of the Fallen a Souls-like I played at EGX 2 years ago and it was not good.

Then we hear rumors about a new game for the PS4 in the works from From Software which ends up being Bloodborne which I loved the look of from soon as we saw it with it's Victorian setting and faster combat. It came out at a great time and I really tried to like the game as when I see it I really want to play but it just didn't click with me.

I don't know what it is, the Soul's games the combat I found a little bit to slow for me but Bloodborne corrected that also it seemed to introduce you far better to the game. Some have said it's because of the difficulty that it's not clicked but I've played and finished hard games like Ninja Gaiden on the OG Xbox, that I'm not sure it's that either.

Now with DSIII out in Japan and very soon in the west, I'm seeing stuff on it and I'm looking at it knowing a lot of you are getting it. I'm sort of tempted to pick it up on PS4 (If you can run it, I hear waiting for the PC version might be worth it this time) but I know with other games coming out I'll end up playing them instead and never going back to DSIII and it's a game that deserves to have your attention.

So to answer to some other things Drunka brought up

Why it is popular? People want to play a Action-RPG which doesn't hold your hand and takes you back to the days when games were hard but you felt a great sense of accomplishment when you beat that certain boss,

What you like or dislike about it? I like the aesthetics and music of all the From Software games but the combat I did find a bit sluggish and lack of hold handing in the Soul's series but Bloodborne adds a faster paced combat system and introduces you to the game far better but still didn't click for me also I really dig who Multiplayer is handled.

Overall I think the games are excellent at what they are a bit like how Balla talked about Bayonetta but just not for me, that when we look at counting classics again in 4 years time or something, I'll be saying Yes to Bloodborne which is still likely the best first party game this generation and for some like a Jay a reason to get a PS4 over anything else but not for me.

Okay, so Souls. It's a divisive game about these parts, ain't it? There are three main reasons why this series works so well, and I'm going to use all three points to disprove this game's most popular criticism - that it's hard to the point of frustration.

Reason 1: the world design. And I don't mean in terms of graphical fidelity or art design as outside of a few areas the Souls games aren't known for being lookers. And that's okay! No, here, I'm talking about how the world links into one another and how taking time to look at your surroundings can help you overcome the difficulties of each area. There's something truly exciting about wandering through an area, discovering a locked door, finding the key to open said door and to discover that it's a shortcut back to your starting hub. I'm talking about Dark Souls rather than any of its sequels as the ol' bonfire warp did away with this. But each area is still jam packed with helpful goodies to aid you in your quest. Not to mention, if you're taking the time to search for these secrets you'll notice hidden traps and an upcoming enemy ambush. Know your environment well, and you'll avoid some of Souls's "unfair" traps.

Reason 2: the combat. Dark Souls often gets lambasted for being too difficult, but you can't run into this playing it like any old hack and slash game. This game demands patience - much like in how you traverse the environments, you can't blast through this head first. In fact, the combat reminds me a lot of Ocarina of Time's combat against some of the bigger enemies. Battling a Wolfos or an Iron Knuckle in that game asks the player to wait for an opening before rushing in and doing damage. Granted, it's on a simpler scale, but the premise is the same. Once you realise that you need to be a bit more patient with this game's combat, you can experiment with its weapons. You might go for a mighty warhammer, but you'll need to wait for a big opening before swinging that thing. You could go for a katana and outrange your opponents. Maybe you'll choose a rapier and sting the foe with a rapid flurry of jabs. Or maybe you'll be a lame-o and sit back with a bow. Regardless, once you start levelling up a weapon and improving your own character's skills, all but the mightiest of enemies will quake before you.

Reason 3: the story. Now, I use this term loosely as Souls doesn't offer up much story readily. The bulk of this game's story comes from its item descriptions or through NPC dialogue. Want more story? You're going to have to explore each area and root out its hidden items, or slay numerous enemies for their weapon drops. You're going to have chat up some NPCs and in rare cases, complete some side-quests. And the thing is, you'll want to do this. Souls is so cryptic about its world and you'll want to know more about it. Why am I locked in a prison? Why is there a wolf protecting a graveyard? JESUS CHRIST IS THAT A HALF SPIDER HALF LADY HYBRID I DON'T WANT TO KNOW ABOUT THAT. In any case, Souls is the perfect blend of story and gameplay - to get more story, you're going to have to explore reasons 1 and 2 a bit more in depth.

Souls isn't for everyone, but that's okay. If you're not a patient gamer or if you like story to be easily available, then this won't be for you. But you shouldn't be surprised when you hear lots of chat about why this game is a modern masterpiece, because for those that fit the above criteria, they're going to find a meticulously crafted RPG. You'll find your patience rewarded tenfold and you'll become a desperate lorehound. Praise the Sun!

In full agreement with Drunka's post, although I think your criticisms about DSII are more to do with the fact you played Scholar of the First Sins. Its original release, whilst still a shadow of Dark Souls, didn't have that problem of unfair enemy placement.

Zero: Nailed it.  

Balla: I think my post almost reads as a counter-argument to yours! To be fair though, in the close of my post I do mention that if you're not a patient gamer then you're going to get nothing out of Souls. I think Bloodborne might work best for you, as you've said, but I don't think you'd like it in the end.

Mas: I'm surprised you've not gone back to play Dark Souls - but then again, if it's not for you, then it's not for you!

Yeah what you say Drunka & Jay and even Zero is true but like I say it's not clicked for me, and I am getting tempted by DSIII and if it reviews well and someone that hasn't played before talks about it and likes I may pick up.

But maybe I should try Bloodborne again more then anything.

Also looking at the games FS have done, I've not really liked many of them but most didn't review well okay there not all Miyazaki games but Otogi is excellent and I do really like the look of Ni-Oh coming from Team Ninja in the Souls-like genre.

A counter-argument?  I'd say that two thirds of your points for why the game is great are outright negatives for me. You're going to have to farm for item drops to get the story out?  Jesus Christ.

But I do place a major major emphasis on world and level design.  In fact, it's probably the single most important thing in gaming for me (unless it's a puzzle game or a visual novel or whatever).  But part of that is atmospheric distinction, of which visuals are a part, so even then...

Don't get me wrong, though, I understand why people think these games (by which I mostly mean DS1) are modern masterpieces.  At the same time, sometimes it seems like some of them go overboard with the chatter about it.

I've explained that wrongly - you don't have to farm for item drops for story. It's for additional bits of info about a character or place. Flavour lore, for want of a better term.

I don't think this forum has gone overboard in Souls chat - at least, not since around Dark Souls II's launch when there were about 5 of us playing it or its predecessor. I try to avoid overhyping a game, but the Internet at large loves to overhype, even if a game warrants praise. Undertale comes to mind there.

ZeroJones wrote:

It's a third person action adventure whose levels can be tackled in any order (up to a point?).

This is essentially true. There's a bit more of the RPG to it; levelling up your stats, equipment, armour and all that is an in-depth affair. The world is mostly open, though divided into areas and gated like a Zelda or Metroid.

Quote :

It is popular because its aforementioned reputation of being tough brought people's attention to it by word of mouth (very much conjecture on my part).

The popularity was mostly word-of-mouth. As Balla notes, people love this game and want to talk about it.

Balladeer wrote:

that it's things like this that irritate me about From games more than anything.  Their constant semi-fanatical bringing-up everywhere all the time.  Obviously an exaggeration, but From's supporters are about as prone to go on about From games months after their release as I am to go on about Bravely Second in the week or so after finishing it.  

No gaming series is so talked about among the gaming community, no Nontendo series worms its way into so many Nintendo discussions, or so it seems to me.  Best Zelda?  From game.  Best Metroid?  From game.  This world reminds of a From game.  A really major Nintendo game's coming out this month, let's name the games releases thread after DSIII.  I'm replaying Bloodborne, let's spend forty minutes talking about Dark Beast Paarl... AGAIN.

This... is pretty unfair. There are some things where the attitude of fans has put me off; Portal and its memes, Daniel Bryan fans slagging off everything else. With Dark Souls though, people just love it. I don't think its ever fair to complain about people loving somehting. As for the "best Zelda, best Metroid" stuff, nobody on here says that in seriousness, we're joking on account of you and things like this
That said, DS is a very well-made game which gets right a lot of what other games get wrong, so seeing it crop up a lot when people talk about what they want elsewhere shouldn't be a surprise.

Quote :

I've actually heard that the difficulty is oft overstated in Souls games - that as long as you're patient, and treat them with respect, they're not anywhere near as hard as the gaming community would have you believe.  Screw that, I don't have time for giving games patience.  You're a piece of entertainment to while away twenty hours, not a badge of pride.  From my games, I want a combat level somewhere in between that of Warriors games' brainless slashing and From games' patience-or-death.

I can't really say much about your opinions of gameplay you haven't played, but... as long as you think about what you're doing, and don't repeatedly do the same thing while ignoring what the game tells you to do, it really isn't that hard at all. It certainly tests my patience a lot less than grinding in a JRPG or something like that.

Quote :

As for the world, light and dark be damned, it still doesn't look terribly... colourful.  Do you have any pictures of the games that you can use to contradict that?

These are all locations from the first Dark Souls. Images like this don't capture the way one can visit anything they can see, and the interconnectedness of it all.

Quote :

And the lore that you fans go on about.  What's wrong with cut-scenes?  I'm no fan of ferreting through item descriptions to piece together a story.  "Show don't tell" is as important in games as it is in films, books, etc.  This seems like an actually bad thing.  At least in Metroid Prime, scanning something would bring a description up straight away: I'd probably have ignored most of that had it gone straight to the menus.

This is odd. In terms of the "show don't tell" thing, I'd say DS is the game on the correct side of that, rather than the other way around. Story is given to you in the world design, enemy placement, characters and their dialogue, a few cutscenes, item descriptions...
There's nothing "wrong" with cutscenes, but videogames are an all-new medium. They can tell stories in much more interesting ways than other media, so I'd much rather see them do that than see a poor excuse for a movie at either end of some arbitrary, barely-related gameplay.

Quote :

Why especially DS1 makes its way into so many avenues of conversation years after release ad nauseam... that I couldn't say.  Not even games like OoT do that.

But... they do. People still call OoT the best game of all time after all this time, and in the initial years after release, I bet they talked about it even more. Every game on the N64 was compared to that or Mario 64. Dark Souls is a top, top game, and that's why people want to talk about it. It plays well, it has memorable moments and characters, and it uses the medium in interesting ways. I'd be more upset if people weren't bringing it up whenever they discussed these issues!

Quote :

I've been over this post numerous times, trying to tailor the words.  I'm sorry if any of this comes across as rude, you're all great gentlemen here.  But you have touched upon a slight sore point when it comes to gaming with me, as you're probably aware!

No, no offence taken. But it is a bit grating that your "sore point" is everyone else liking something!

Quote :

Drunka, you address the difficulty - would I still die lots?  And is what I say about patience being required at all warranted, at least regarding DS1?  

Yes, you would die. But that's like saying of Mario "will I jump lots"? It's just a mechanic of the game, and as soon as you let go of caring, it stops being an issue. This is another reason I disliked DSII; it did death, and how enemies respawn, a little differently, and in that game sometimes it was a frustrating grind.

JayMoyles wrote:

A load of stuff that was right on the money.

Balladeer wrote:

You're going to have to farm for item drops to get the story out?  Jesus Christ.

That's not quite true. You get enough of a story from the world you're in and what you're told, but the juicy little details about characters and events are hidden. And you don't have to farm, really. Just exploring every nook and cranny and killing everyone you see will get you enough.

Quote :

sometimes it seems like some of them go overboard with the chatter about it.

Note to self: up the Souls chat!

no reply from Drunka to me,

I've just been on eBay and I'm watching some Bloodborne's and some Dark Soul's II, what is DSII actually like, is worth getting etc. I may give the series ago again and get one of these cheap instead of buying DSIII for £40 and not liking it.

Drunkalilly wrote:

This... is pretty unfair. There are some things where the attitude of fans has put me off; Portal and its memes, Daniel Bryan fans slagging off everything else. With Dark Souls though, people just love it. I don't think its ever fair to complain about people loving somehting.

It's not about the love, it's about its communication.  Anything can get annoying if it's repeated enough, in the wrong manner.  And while it's perfectly right that negativity should wear faster than positivity, I don't think it's fair to say that repetitions of love should be free from criticism.


Let's address this all at once...

Drunkalilly wrote:

But... they do. People still call OoT the best game of all time after all this time, and in the initial years after release, I bet they talked about it even more. Every game on the N64 was compared to that or Mario 64. Dark Souls is a top, top game, and that's why people want to talk about it. It plays well, it has memorable moments and characters, and it uses the medium in interesting ways. I'd be more upset if people weren't bringing it up whenever they discussed these issues!

I don't think many people call OoT the best game of all time now, but what's probably a better comparison is Super Mario Galaxy.  A game whose constant appraisals I never really understood, which is still referred to as the best game of all time, and people do still ask for SMG3 (I'd rather have SM64-2).  But the clamour doesn't seem have to have gone on for so long, in so many different discussions, regarding so many series, often on consoles where SMG is unavailable, in the same way as DS1.  

Maybe I'm mistaken, there's probably a bit more of a niggle coming from the fact that I'll likely never play the game(s); but there's certainly been a lot of talk, more than any other multiplat game in Nintendo discussions at least.

Drunkalilly wrote:

No, no offence taken. But it is a bit grating that your "sore point" is everyone else liking something!

Not at all, it's everyone else (and, I should state, it's not "everyone else" at all) going on repeatedly about liking something!  Like it would be for someone constantly talking about how great a new girlfriend and relationship is, or their love of Marcus off The X Factor.  Well done, I don't need/want to hear about it in excruciating detail.

Drunkalilly wrote:

Note to self: up the Souls chat!

I know this is probably a joke, but this quote:

Drunkalilly wrote:

As for the "best Zelda, best Metroid" stuff, nobody on here says that in seriousness, we're joking on account of you and things like this

...makes me have a little smidgeon of a doubt.  So just in case: please don't.  I've had enough of it already, I wouldn't take it as a joke.

Drunkalilly wrote:

I can't really say much about your opinions of gameplay you haven't played, but...

Oh c'mon, you can't ask me to give my impression about a game I've never played, then get snooty when I do so!

Drunkalilly wrote:

These are all locations from the first Dark Souls.

Fair play, that's a great counter-argument, and I rescind that paragraph. Some very striking pictures there.  Looks like DS1 is in fact closer to the Metroid Prime on the visuals, not as grim as some shots would have you believe.  What about Bloodborne?  As mentioned, I get the feeling that's a bit darker.

Drunkalilly wrote:

Yes, you would die. But that's like saying of Mario "will I jump lots"? It's just a mechanic of the game, and as soon as you let go of caring, it stops being an issue.

No, it's absolutely not.  Jumping is intentional, positive (unless you jump down a pit), not a failure state.  You need to jump to complete the game, you lose nothing through jumping, it helps you make progress.  You don't get fed up if you jump five times in a row.  

Drunkalilly wrote:

That's not quite true. You get enough of a story from the world you're in and what you're told, but the juicy little details about characters and events are hidden. And you don't have to farm, really. Just exploring every nook and cranny and killing everyone you see will get you enough.

Yes, it sounds like I misinterpreted what Jay was saying, and indeed people's general comments about the lore.  Sounds like you'll pick up the story perfectly well through simply enjoying the game, and rifling through the item descriptions and all that jazz only fleshes things out.  In any case, I don't see the sweetness of what Jas referred to as "sweet sweet lore", but that's personal taste and it looks like you get enough either way.


In this and the visuals argument, you have convincingly argued against two of the major things that I thought about DS1, at least.  Gameplay's still up in the air, the faster pace of Bloodborne might have fixed that.  Shame I'll probably never played any of them anyway.

I wouldn't really recommend DSII. It wasn't a bad game, but not a patch on DS or, from what I hear, BB. Also, all the best moments were the bits that harkened back to or referenced the first game, which you've not played.

Balladeer wrote:

Oh c'mon, you can't ask me to give my impression about a game I've never played, then get snooty when I do so

Sorry, I didn't word that well. I just meant I can't really give a definitive answer as to how you will or won't enjoy playing it without seeing it in your hands.

Quote :

 What about Bloodborne?  As mentioned, I get the feeling that's a bit darker.

I've not played Blooders yet myself, but it looks like it has a very gothic feel. I think it looks beautiful, but not colourful. But maybe, much like yourself and DS, I've only been going on a very limited section of the game?

Quote :

No, it's absolutely not.  Jumping is intentional, positive (unless you jump down a pit), not a failure state.  You need to jump to complete the game, you lose nothing through jumping, it helps you make progress.  You don't get fed up if you jump five times in a row.

 
Death in DS is a tool you use and decision you make. Unless you're especially stupid or unlucky, the parts where you will be dying repeatedly are when you've made that decision and are making suicidal runs into a new area to map it out or you're making attempts at a boss with no souls to lose. Like I said, it's a mindset thing. Everyone has a moment where they realise death in DS is not a failstate but part of the gameplay loop, and it changes.

Quote :

Gameplay's still up in the air, the faster pace of Bloodborne might have fixed that.  Shame I'll probably never played any of them anyway.

Gameplay's the one I'm less worried about convincing you one way or the other. I still think you've got a more unfair and much harder game in your head than what actually exists, but that was kind of the point of this thread: the game is advertised and discussed as this brutal monster, which isn't quite true. And in the end, you'll never know for sure without playing it.

I'm glad we've helped you see a little of why we love it so much,  and you've had a chance to say your bit about us annoying you. I can't promise we won't be mentioning it still; it gets the synergy of gameplay and story more right than anything else and it is well made. But hopefully we won't be having the same conversations over and over again, with the two parties talking about a totally different game from one another!

One last thing: you might just play it one day. Even assuming you don't ever do a complete turn on your Nintendo only stance like I did, I could see the Souls Trilogy hitting a Nintendo machine. It was very deliberately inspired by the NES Zeldas and Metroid.

Oh my where do I start? I guess I'll break this down into some of the questions that Buska has put forward.

Why did I want to play it?

I came to DaS super late compared to a lot of folk but I had seen demon souls in passing years ago as my brother owned a copy (which is now mine) anyway it didn't seem like my type of thing because of the rpg aspect of it so I just forgot about it. Years later I heard lot's of folk raving about Dark souls & a Monster hunter podcast I watched regularly were well into it and mentioned how both games have some similarities, since I have put hundreds of hours into the MH games I thought I'd give it a go.  


What do I like about it?

Lot's of different things (combat, sense of a achievement after beating a tough boss) but by far the biggest thing I like is how well designed & connected the world is without obvious sign posting like you see in most other games, this makes exploring the world an absolute joy because you feel like you've made an actual discovery rather than being lead directly to it.

Despite what is generally believed it actually does a brilliant job of teaching you how to play & you can see yourself gradually getting better the more you play it, lastly I love piecing together all the lore the games have and trying to figure out what it all means within that world & since it's so open for interpretation & how everyone plays the game differently every play through feels totally unique for that person.

Why is it popular?

I think what I said above covers that pretty well but in an industry that can often follow the same mould or trends the souls games always seem to stand out from the pack & people will always gravitate to that to experience something new.

Drunkalilly wrote:

I'm glad we've hoped you see a little of why we love it so much,  and you've had a chance to say your bit about us annoying you. I can't promise we won't be mentioning it still; it gets the synergy of gameplay and story more right than anything else and it is well made. But hopefully we won't be having the same conversations over and over again, with the two parties talking about a totally different game from one another!

One last thing: you might just play it one day. Even assuming you don't ever do a complete turn on your Nintendo only stance like I did, I could see the Souls Trilogy hitting a Nintendo machine. It was very deliberately inspired by the NES Zeldas and Metroid.

Always good to to have an airing of opinions. And if the series ever does come to a Nintendo console, I'll definitely pick it up so that I can give a more informed viewpoint.  I think I'm less likely to change my Nintendonly tack now than I might have been a while ago, because I have plenty of other stuff going on so that the rate of Nintendonly releases is about right for me.

balla wrote:

Why especially DS1 makes its way into so many avenues of conversation years after release ad nauseam... that I couldn't say.  Not even games like OoT do that.

I know you expect me to say this because my love for the game is as clear as day BUT it's just that good that people can't help express their love for it/celebrate it & why shouldn't they? I don't mind when this is done with any game either even if I happen to dislike it myself (FE awakening comes to mind here) in fact funnily enough on the Daft souls podcast they often discuss games I've either never heard of or even likely to play but when they gush about something I might not entirely get a little smile still creeps onto my face because they're into games as much as I am.

I like Dark Souls because it reminds me of the games I used to play when I was mega-young; where the next goal isn't signposted, and therefore you feel like a genius every time you find something new. Don't get me wrong - occasionally I think it pushes things too far, allowing one-time mistakes that can snooker you from then on, and the occasional rule that disobeys all of the other rules. But crucially, most of the things that are tough are also fair - and, importantly, they've been tested to be fair (unlike difficulty spikes in other games where some bits are badly made and therefore cheap).

There is sometimes some bollocks written about Dark Souls. Very similar to how people talked about the White Stripes when Elephant came out. So I can understand if Balla etc. get fed up if the Souls fans compare everything to it. But I kind of feel a bit like that when it comes to the wave of JRPGs-and-similar; your Bravely-wotsits and Xeno-doodads (I am being deliberately obtuse here; I do like the look of XCX etc.) - but when there's talk about interactions etc. which then spills into arguments about what's/what isn't OK - it's a whole subsection of gaming culture I can live without. Same deal Undertale: I'd probably even like the game, subversive as it is. But people have so quickly transplanted its lexicon into the general gaming one that it feels like it's almost a bit like, if I didn't jump on the bandwagon already, I'm nothin'.
But I like Dark Souls, despite trying it after the hype, so I'm a massive hypocrite

I don't think I understood your second spoiler, Jim! But I appreciate your first: even if I have been known to get a bit irritated with sign-less Metroid games at times, can't knock the thrill of discovery.

Me too with the exploring and finding things! I would be 100% happy with an open world game with no combat, but filled with buildings, most of which have a secret door, behind which is a new piece of unique tat.

Don't worry, I'll stop talking about BSEL in a fortnight or so, until the next relevant voting thread anyway. I'll try not to go on and on about it.