[Megathread] Dark Souls 3

[Frozenbeef]

Never played any dark souls game before so decided to try dark souls 3, i'm just struggling to play it..i explore a bit and then i have to go back as i'm worried i'll lose all my souls and then i explroe a bit further and get worried i'll lose souls again so i run back home :S it's taken me 10hours and i've only just killed the tree boss

[3DTyrant]

Be prepared for people telling you that you didn't really finish the game because you only played NG and that's not supposed to be hard.

NG+ and NG+2 was easier than NG (and I guess up to NG+6, not gotten that far yet), for a couple of reasons: Level, gear/weapon arsenal/items, knowledge of areas/bosses. A prime example for me would be the fact I don't know how long it took me to take out the Dancer in NG, but in NG+ I solo'd her with a bleed build in two tries, then one try in NG+2 with the same bleed build.

[Alindra]

I have a Dark Souls related question (it could have gone in any of the DS megathreads, but this is the most active, so):

I've played, but never beaten Dark Souls 1. Actually, I don't think I got very far at all (I beat the Twin Gargoyles then tooled around in other areas, but never even found the next boss). It was fun, but I put it down for some reason and never went back to it. I own, but haven't played Dark Souls 2, but I've heard it's the weakest of the DS games. Now, while the Winter Sale is going on, I'm wondering if I should pickup Dark Souls 3 and give that a whirl then work my way back to DS 1&2, or would you recommend playing in order?

Or, perhaps, DS3 sucks and I should just avoid it - but I doubt that will be the case.

[dope_danny]

I have a Dark Souls related question (it could have gone in any of the DS megathreads, but this is the most active, so):

I've played, but never beaten Dark Souls 1. Actually, I don't think I got very far at all (I beat the Twin Gargoyles then tooled around in other areas, but never even found the next boss). It was fun, but I put it down for some reason and never went back to it. I own, but haven't played Dark Souls 2, but I've heard it's the weakest of the DS games. Now, while the Winter Sale is going on, I'm wondering if I should pickup Dark Souls 3 and give that a whirl then work my way back to DS 1&2, or would you recommend playing in order?

Or, perhaps, DS3 sucks and I should just avoid it - but I doubt that will be the case.

DS3 is okay but not a big hurrah for the series, a lot of it relies on "HEY REMEMBER THIS THING FROM DARK SOULS 1, AND THESE MEMS RIGHT?" and without playing DS1 there is a lot of stuff that will be lost on you.

I mean shit the big gasp moment of the final boss is a music track that will make no impression if you dont know the reference and implications of it.

[Alindra]

DS3 is okay but not a big hurrah for the series, a lot of it relies on "HEY REMEMBER THIS THING FROM DARK SOULS 1, AND THESE MEMS RIGHT?" and without playing DS1 there is a lot of stuff that will be lost on you.

I mean shit the big gasp moment of the final boss is a music track that will make no impression if you dont know the reference and implications of it.

Ah, well that's a shame, though I can certainly understand why that is the case. How is it on a mechanical level? Is it a single interconnected world (DS1) or are there portals everywhere (DS2, from what I read). I also suspect that DS3 has far better PC optimization than DS1.

I'll have to go back and give DS1 another whirl, then... after I reteach myself how the render mods work.

[dope_danny]

Ah, well that's a shame, though I can certainly understand why that is the case. How is it on a mechanical level? Is it a single interconnected world (DS1) or are there portals everywhere (DS2, from what I read). I also suspect that DS3 has far better PC optimization than DS1.

I'll have to go back and give DS1 another whirl, then... after I reteach myself how the render mods work.

mechanically its okay but far easier. They tried to add some bloodborne elements that dont work and a weapon art system that can be utterly forgotten meaning you have waay more healing you should be using for mana instead and this compounds the easiness of it. DS1 isnt the best of the 5 but worth playing first if you cant play Demon's

[Cairhiin]

I have a Dark Souls related question (it could have gone in any of the DS megathreads, but this is the most active, so):

I've played, but never beaten Dark Souls 1. Actually, I don't think I got very far at all (I beat the Twin Gargoyles then tooled around in other areas, but never even found the next boss). It was fun, but I put it down for some reason and never went back to it. I own, but haven't played Dark Souls 2, but I've heard it's the weakest of the DS games. Now, while the Winter Sale is going on, I'm wondering if I should pickup Dark Souls 3 and give that a whirl then work my way back to DS 1&2, or would you recommend playing in order?

Or, perhaps, DS3 sucks and I should just avoid it - but I doubt that will be the case.

DS2 isn't as bad as people say it is, and it is imho a relatively okay entry. I at least enjoyed DS2 a lot but you really need to get the Scholar of the first sin edition.

[Slaughty8]

I have a Dark Souls related question (it could have gone in any of the DS megathreads, but this is the most active, so):

I've played, but never beaten Dark Souls 1. Actually, I don't think I got very far at all (I beat the Twin Gargoyles then tooled around in other areas, but never even found the next boss). It was fun, but I put it down for some reason and never went back to it. I own, but haven't played Dark Souls 2, but I've heard it's the weakest of the DS games. Now, while the Winter Sale is going on, I'm wondering if I should pickup Dark Souls 3 and give that a whirl then work my way back to DS 1&2, or would you recommend playing in order?

Or, perhaps, DS3 sucks and I should just avoid it - but I doubt that will be the case.

TBH at least for me DS3 is the best, it's quality is superior if compared to DS1 or DS2, the game is much more friendly towards players, has less annoying combat bugs and stuff, is less difficult, has much better atmosphere and at least I felt it's story and atmosphere much better and closer than when I played DS1 or DS2. DS3 at least for me feels like DS home, I will never ever play DS1 or DS2 again after playing DS3 and I'am and will be replaying DS3 form time to time

My brother tried DS1 and he was totally disappointed, after that he tried DS3 and he loves DS3, says the difference and quality is superior when compared to DS1 and DS2 and I 100% agree. He never played Dark Soulsy game before besides an veeery old title "Die by the Sword" from 90s (1998)

[dope_danny]

DS2 isn't as bad as people say it is, and it is imho a relatively okay entry. I at least enjoyed DS2 a lot but you really need to get the Scholar of the first sin edition.

Dark Souls 2 is a fine game its just a series of issues people really fix on. The lighting downgrade was ridiculous and torches are useless outside the gutter, no miyazaki hero worship and the iron keep above the windmill was ridiculous.

Aside from that its a fun story about a king who returns a hero thinking he has a way to stop the curse, realises his wife is actually a leftover of manus and in desperation hides himself away to hollow and leave the kiln sealed, Shanalotte sends you back in time as part of a self fulfilling prophecy from her youth where you take vendricks place, stop nashandra and ensure the cycle continues. Not amazing but its a fun story thats not straight up "REMEMBER GWYN XDDDDD" but a different look at the same universe instead of a total repeat of it. Then you have scholar of the first sin that is DS2 master quest and worth playing as well.

Its not the best, thats still Bloodborne or Demon's for me but i will replay it and i have not played DS3 in a long time.

[Cairhiin]

Dark Souls 2 is a fine game its just a series of issues people really fix on. The lighting downgrade was ridiculous and torches are useless outside the gutter, no miyazaki hero worship and the iron keep above the windmill was ridiculous.

Aside from that its a fun story about a king who returns a hero thinking he has a way to stop the curse, realises his wife is actually a leftover of manus and in desperation hides himself away to hollow and leave the kiln sealed, Shanalotte sends you back in time as part of a self fulfilling prophecy from her youth where you take vendricks place, stop nashandra and ensure the cycle continues. Not amazing but its a fun story thats not straight up "REMEMBER GWYN XDDDDD" but a different look at the same universe instead of a total repeat of it. Then you have scholar of the first sin that is DS2 master quest and worth playing as well.

Its not the best, thats still Bloodborne or Demon's for me but i will replay it and i have not played DS3 in a long time.

Totally agree with that, though I can't say anything about Bloodborne, as I've not had the pleasure of playing it, as sadly I have no PS3. But for me what made DS2 a good game was the fact that so many builds worked. DS2 had it issues, like relatively weak level design, but the game is really worth playing, and it is a very good entry into the Dark Souls series as it is a little less brutal than DS1.

[StrawberryZebra]

DS2 isn't as bad as people say it is, and it is imho a relatively okay entry. I at least enjoyed DS2 a lot but you really need to get the Scholar of the first sin edition.

The main criticism I always see of DS2 is that it isn't as good as DS1. It's still a good game in it's own right, but for various reasons it failed to capture the same magic as it's predecesor. The lack of a cohesive and interlocked world is often cited as the main reason, but it also lost a lot of that dark oppressive tone that DS1 had too. It also felt a bit flat in when it came to combat, DS1 tended to be more tense fights in narrow hallways or on cliff edges. Being locked in close combat makes you really appreciate how small your character is in comparison, it really fits with the gloomy oppressive tone. DS2 on the other hand ups the stakes by simply throwing more guys in armour at you, and while that does make for a challenge, it does so at the cost of shfting the tone of the game too far away from what players were expecting.

DS2 is still one of the more enjoyable games I've played, and one I would strongly reccomend to anyone who's even passing interested in it, but it's just not quite as good as the first one.

[Cairhiin]

The main criticism I always see of DS2 is that it isn't as good as DS1. It's still a good game in it's own right, but for various reasons it failed to capture the same magic as it's predecesor. The lack of a cohesive and interlocked world is often cited as the main reason, but it also lost a lot of that dark oppressive tone that DS1 had too. It also felt a bit flat in when it came to combat, DS1 tended to be more tense fights in narrow hallways or on cliff edges. Being locked in close combat makes you really appreciate how small your character is in comparison, it really fits with the gloomy oppressive tone. DS2 on the other hand ups the stakes by simply throwing more guys in armour at you, and while that does make for a challenge, it does so at the cost of shfting the tone of the game too far away from what players were expecting.

DS2 is still one of the more enjoyable games I've played, and one I would strongly reccomend to anyone who's even passing interested in it, but it's just not quite as good as the first one.

That is actually a very good analysis, and yeah totally agree with you.

[SirCowdog]

Well guys, just wanted to pop in here and say that I just finished Dark Souls 3, and share my feelings on the game a little bit.

DS3 is both a good, and a bad, game. Good because the combat(once mastered) is actually really fun and makes quite a bit of sense. Bad in regards to Yhorm the Giant and the Final boss, loading screens, and overall trolling of the game devs.

So it took me quite a lot of time to get used to, and understand, how the combat worked. I never played a DS game before, so I didn't understand blocking, or parry, or poise, or hyperarmor frames. All I knew was how to dodge, and I didn't even know how equipment weight effected dodge speed. I was just equipping the biggest weapon, and the armor with the "best" stats. But after like 20-30 hours of playing I hit a wall fighting the Abyss Watchers, and went TO THE FORUMS!!!! This is where I started learning how I was doing pretty much everything wrong.

I basically had to re-learn how to play. I started a new game(I know, mistake), this time using a shield and a faster, more responsive straight sword. I still haven't mastered parrying because it feels very wonky and inconsistent, so I ended up gravitating towards tower shields and a more tanky build. Fights started taking a lot longer, but I was dying a hell of a lot less. I also started being able to crit enemies more often as I circled behind them, or got them when they staggered after hitting my shield.

This strategy worked REALLY well, for the most part, right up until Yhorm. This guy....sigh. All he did was spam super-heavy attacks one after another. And when I hit him it was doing tiny little 25-damage hits. My first few times I literally threw the controller down and yelled "BULLSHIT!" a lot. So...back TO THE FORUMS!!!! where I learned there was a trick to the fight which makes it EZ mode. Bah...whatever. Gimmick fights aren't anything new in videogames.

Continued to steadily progress all the way up to the First Flame. Here we go again...another boss which spams heavy attacks, making my tower shield pretty ineffective. I actually spent a couple hours just learning how to dodge his attacks instead of blocking, because my shield was useless. I had to learn a completely different playstyle than what worked the entire rest of the game in order to beat him. And that's why I say it's a bad boss design. Challenging? Sure! But wholly inconsistent.

All in all, however, beating DS3 wasn't what I'd call an enjoyable experience. It was more a sense of beating the game out of spite rather than pleasure. Maybe that's what the game devs intended? I didn't see much point in some of the longer walks back to the bosses after being killed. I was already suffering the shame of defeat, and a loading screen, and losing souls and burning an ember....why slap 2 minutes of extra walking/elevators on top of that? Still, that's a minor gripe.

But, I did it. I didn't give up. I didn't cheat. I didn't call in online friends to cheese bosses. I just kept at it and finally beat the game. And that's something not everyone can say.

[Omnoms]

So help me god I will fight you for that final boss comment.

I shed a tear when I heard Gwynn's theme song play during that fight, and instantly switched to dealing with his boss mechanics.

[Frozenbeef]

Yeah i tried ds1 and it was just a pile of rubbish tbh, the controls, the graphics pretty much everything was a let down.

DS2 was much better at least it was playable, DS3 is even better It generally feels like a polished game (at least compared to 1 and 2)

[Velshin]

Yeah i tried ds1 and it was just a pile of rubbish tbh, the controls, the graphics pretty much everything was a let down.

DS2 was much better at least it was playable, DS3 is even better It generally feels like a polished game (at least compared to 1 and 2)

Well keep in mind that DS1 was released in 2011 so of course the graphics and movements will not be as good as DS2 and DS3. However, if you download the addon for DS1 it will be good enough.

[Baconeggcheese]

I never played a DS game before, so I didn't understand blocking, or parry, or poise, or hyperarmor frames. All I knew was how to dodge, and I didn't even know how equipment weight effected dodge speed.

Ds3 was my first DS game too, I ended up just using dodge roll for everything and 2hing a short sword / dual wielding sword once I got access to decent ones for the whole game. Shield felt like too big of a crutch and I just never felt the need to learn what I could and couldn't parry when I could just roll through everything.

I have a Dark Souls related question (it could have gone in any of the DS megathreads, but this is the most active, so):

I've played, but never beaten Dark Souls 1. Actually, I don't think I got very far at all (I beat the Twin Gargoyles then tooled around in other areas, but never even found the next boss). It was fun, but I put it down for some reason and never went back to it. I own, but haven't played Dark Souls 2, but I've heard it's the weakest of the DS games. Now, while the Winter Sale is going on, I'm wondering if I should pickup Dark Souls 3 and give that a whirl then work my way back to DS 1&2, or would you recommend playing in order?

Or, perhaps, DS3 sucks and I should just avoid it - but I doubt that will be the case.

DS3 was my introduction to the series and I enjoyed it. Definitely wasn't as challenging as I was expecting but overall I enjoyed myself and didn't feel like I was missing out just because I didn't understand the references. If anything the more standout things just made me want to go look up what's what since the story leaves a lot to be desired in game and you have to do homework to understand wtf is going on. And even then you pretty much don't understand wtf is going on.

To me though, I get the feeling that you just aren't crazy about the kind of game it is. As far as I can tell there isn't a huge leap between the games, just relatively minor differences in the grand scheme of things.

[ThrashMetalFtw]

Yeah i tried ds1 and it was just a pile of rubbish tbh, the controls, the graphics pretty much everything was a let down.

DS2 was much better at least it was playable, DS3 is even better It generally feels like a polished game (at least compared to 1 and 2)

We didn't play the same game then. DS1 has muuuuch better graphics than DS2, and it's hell of a lot more polished.

The main issue with DS2 is that it doesn't fit in the series.

DS1 > BB > DS3 feels like a natural evolution. Every game adds a bit of its own, while still keeping the spirit of the previous. Then you have DS2 which feels like some other random company tried to make a copy of Dark Souls, failing at it miserably. It feels like an annual CoD/FIFA version of DS1.



Biggest disappointment in gaming so far for me was when I finished DS1 (which was amazing), then started on DS2. Biggest relief in gaming was when decided to quit and skip DS2, and started DS3 instead. "Ah, this feels like the Dark Souls I remember".

[SirCowdog]

Ds3 was my first DS game too, I ended up just using dodge roll for everything and 2hing a short sword / dual wielding sword once I got access to decent ones for the whole game. Shield felt like too big of a crutch and I just never felt the need to learn what I could and couldn't parry when I could just roll through everything.

I had the complete opposite feeling. Dodge-rolling felt very inconsistent to me. I felt it was WAAAAAY too much of a pain in the ass to try and learn the telegraphs for, LITERALLY, every enemy in the game when I could apply a single strategy for everyone(barring the final boss where blocking really doesn't work well). Only on the actual boss fights did I need to learn which attacks had to be dodged instead of blocked. And Parrying? Don't get me started. It's like dodging but with more perfect timing, when I could just hold up my shield and circle behind, or get a crit after they stagger themselves on my shield.

The only advantage to dodging that I could see is that if you were willing to invest the time to master it, the stat investment is much lower. Using a tower shield required me to have a much higher stat investment in both vitality and stamina. It also precludes two-handing weapons.

As for being a crutch? Meh. The Souls games are already trollish and punishing enough that I don't feel any compunction about using every advantage I can get.

I have a Dark Souls related question (it could have gone in any of the DS megathreads, but this is the most active, so):

I've played, but never beaten Dark Souls 1. Actually, I don't think I got very far at all (I beat the Twin Gargoyles then tooled around in other areas, but never even found the next boss). It was fun, but I put it down for some reason and never went back to it. I own, but haven't played Dark Souls 2, but I've heard it's the weakest of the DS games. Now, while the Winter Sale is going on, I'm wondering if I should pickup Dark Souls 3 and give that a whirl then work my way back to DS 1&2, or would you recommend playing in order?

Or, perhaps, DS3 sucks and I should just avoid it - but I doubt that will be the case.

Of all the Dark Souls games, 3 feels the most polished and smooth to me. But I will tell you right now I had a similar experience where I almost put down the Souls games and walked away forever. It's a game that's VERY frustrating, not just because of the skill floor, but because of the walking back to where you were and loading screens, and such. Try different styles of play. Switch from small fast weapons to a sword and shield, or try a two-handed weapon that one-shots enemies. Once you find the style that just clicks with you, you'll start knocking down bosses and enemies, and begin getting a feeling of satisfaction from defeating the game.

Or maybe not. The Souls games are definitely games people either love or hate.

[Baconeggcheese]

I had the complete opposite feeling. Dodge-rolling felt very inconsistent to me. I felt it was WAAAAAY too much of a pain in the ass to try and learn the telegraphs for, LITERALLY, every enemy in the game when I could apply a single strategy for everyone

I mean, I used a single strategy for the entire game as well; press space bar when things are about to hit me and butt poke them to death.

The iframes in at least ds3 are also extremely forgiving and most attacks are fairly telegraphed to the point where its almost never an issue. And then they went overboard with the estus flask, so pretty much if something wasn't a 1shot or a combo you could chug your way through it.

I could tell you right now I didn't memorize and master every mobs attack patterns and timings to a T or anything of the sort, I just reacted to whatever they were doing the entire way through the game.

As for being a crutch? Meh. The Souls games are already trollish and punishing enough that I don't feel any compunction about using every advantage I can get.

See I hear that, but at least ds3 absolutely wasn't. It was extremely forgiving for what it is, especially so if you're taking advantage of all the things the game allows you. For instance blocking everything and chugging estus would make the game a joke.