eot
Banned
More isn't better.
SOULS series - Best to worst?
- Thread starter akaoni
- Start date
More isn't better.
I see enemy tracking as a good thing because it makes enemies more accurate and harder to deal with. Timing windows getting tighter is at worse, neutral rather than bad.
Agility feeling unresponsive is entirely magical thinking. Rolling feels a lot better here and putting iframes on a stat is a brilliant way of making the mechanic less busted. Item actions is neither here nor there, but I think the fact that it takes you longer to perform movements generally makes the character feel more like something in the world rather than outside of it.
Phantom ranges are a legit complaint but mostly associated with online and actually don't seem to exist at all if you play offline (granted, phantom ranges in general are silly but they've existed as far back as Demon's Souls, they are just more apparent now). I'm speaking to PvE specifically because PvP is a debate that goes nowhere.
The reduced moveset is patently false. There are factually way more moves for every weapon in DS2 (and powerstancing increases it further). Tons of new animations for all of these things too.
Enemies have never followed game rules. There is not a single instance in Souls games where they weren't cheating. It's just a necessary evil of AI being really limited.
Clockwork5
Member
Dark Souls 1 is the best if only for no other reason than the bonfire / estus balance troughout the game. They did it so well. Lifegems were an easy out of planning that balance throughout the game. Lifegems...ugh. they didn't really make the game easier, they made it lazier.
Poimandres
Member
Dark > Demon's > Dark 2
Demon's deserves credit for being the first in the series, but I truly believe people have an overly inflated sense of its quality compared to Dark. I think Dark has it handily trumped in basically every way, and for me provided a far more memorable and challenging experience. Dark 2 has been decent so far (I've put in about 20 hours) but I can already tell it's not going to top either of the other games for me... the bosses in particular have been very disappointing.
Demon's deserves credit for being the first in the series, but I truly believe people have an overly inflated sense of its quality compared to Dark. I think Dark has it handily trumped in basically every way, and for me provided a far more memorable and challenging experience. Dark 2 has been decent so far (I've put in about 20 hours) but I can already tell it's not going to top either of the other games for me... the bosses in particular have been very disappointing.
The bonfire/estus balance is entirely busted in the second half of Dark Souls, you basically never run out of Estus
mickcenary
Member
Dark > Demon's > Dark 2, bitchhhhh.
Dark was my first. It is etched into my heart and soul. It changed my perceptions and expectations of video games.
Demon's came years later and while it is superb and I did love it, it felt a little like Dark Lite™; less weapons, armours, lacking graphical polish, etc. I'm also a proud and unwavering member of #teaminterconnectedworld.
Dark 2 is, to put it both simply and cheesily, the Souls game with the least soul. The atmosphere is all but gone compared to its predecessors. Sure, the mechanical improvements and additions (love the guard-break) are great, but they're to be expected. It just didn't have as a profound an effect on me as the others, even if it is arguably the better playing title of the series.
Irrespective of one's leanings, I think that it's very important to highlight just how amazing a Souls devirginising can be. For example, had I played Demon's before the others, that'd probably be my numero uno. To say that I'm not a tad Souls fatigued right now would be a lie. Bring on the Beast.
Dark was my first. It is etched into my heart and soul. It changed my perceptions and expectations of video games.
Demon's came years later and while it is superb and I did love it, it felt a little like Dark Lite™; less weapons, armours, lacking graphical polish, etc. I'm also a proud and unwavering member of #teaminterconnectedworld.
Dark 2 is, to put it both simply and cheesily, the Souls game with the least soul. The atmosphere is all but gone compared to its predecessors. Sure, the mechanical improvements and additions (love the guard-break) are great, but they're to be expected. It just didn't have as a profound an effect on me as the others, even if it is arguably the better playing title of the series.
Irrespective of one's leanings, I think that it's very important to highlight just how amazing a Souls devirginising can be. For example, had I played Demon's before the others, that'd probably be my numero uno. To say that I'm not a tad Souls fatigued right now would be a lie. Bring on the Beast.
It's so boring. Every Dark Souls 2 PvP match I've had lasts under a minute unless someone is just running away the entire time. Even at higher levels it seems like everyone dies extremely quickly. I played Demon's And Dark 1 for years after release but I've already given up 2 because I can't enjoy the online play at all.
Dark Souls didn't feel as bad and was certainly enjoyable but not as enjoyable as Demon's for me at all. I can understand the complaints of there not being much variety in pvp ( for NA version at least) but it's still way more enjoyable to play.
This is pretty much the exact opposite of my experience? I've already had way better PvP matches in Dark Souls 2. I fought a dude named Akihiko and he punched me to death. It was awesome. That fight took a long while too... was probably a good 3-5 minute fight.
I guess ymmv applies to PvP here.
Clockwork5
Member
Hmmm. I would say this is only true if you knew what you were doing or are a DS pro. Neither of which applied to me on my first blind playthrough. That second half of DS1 kicked my ass.
Well yeah, if you unequip your weapons then you can make the battles longer I guess (._. )
Demon Souls was definitely the best. Had the tightest controls, best atmosphere, and best PVP in my opinion. I enjoyed Dark Souls more than Dark Souls 2. Felt similar but the atmosphere of Souls games seems to get weaker and weaker by the game. Dark Souls has the slowest/sluggiest controls I think.
I was using regular weapons and he was using Caestus? Come on dude.
Yes, you are going to play more people in PvP and due to the increased diversity of the playerbase more players will not be as skilled as they were who continued to play Dark Souls years into its lifecycle.
Thus far I've seen more theme characters, more weird characters, and more straight up kill you characters in this game than any of the past Souls games. Arguing about PvP diversity just isn't something you can do when Dark Souls 2 offers so much more than its predecessors. If it weren't for PtDE magic in Dark Souls would be completely worthless, because the timing for all the spells in that game were initially awful for PvP. At least magic is viable and useful for PvP, whereas it felt like little more than a footnote in the previous games or something you use to power up your weapon.
I chose Dark > Demon's > Dark II. I highly dislike Dark II, but concede that it's still a good game.
Here's why I chose what I chose:
Dark Souls is quite possibly my favourite game of the forever. It's also my first Souls game, so there may be bias in that regard. I love it so much because I think it, of the three games, best captures that minimalist design of such lauded classics as SoTC and Journey. The game expounds show and not tell; nevertheless, the depth is there if you care to dig.
Moving on, the world feels much more organic because there's a strong sense of continuity as you traverse Lordran. It's all accessible at once. Demon's Souls felt more arcadey/gamey as the world is segmented into levels that you cannot access but through an Archstone. One could argue that the Archstone could be taken as natural with the Demon's world, but then you still lose the continuity between each level of a particular locale. Dark Souls II loses a few points because, while it's creative for all parts of the game to branch from Majula, the transition does not feel as natural. Need I say Iron Keep? However, I'll concede that all 3 games well integrate certain gameplay features such as multiplayer into the story well by justifying it within the lore (i.e. summon stones).
What follows is quite subjective, but I find Lordran to be the most beautiful and serene. There's so much variety to the areas, from the Darkroot forest to Demon Ruins to Crystal Caves. I think it covers a lot of ground and is so easy on the eyes. I felt the world of Demon's Souls was more pedestrian in this regard. The areas were not as colourful and varied. A good example would be the contrast between Boletaria and Undead Burg. The latter is riddled with foliage that helps spruce up the visuals while the former felt more clinical (grey upon grey). I'm probably not making sense here, but yeah.
On the other hand, I'll acknowledge first and foremost that, of the 3 games, Demon's exudes the strongest and most oppressive "mood/atmosphere". There's nothing quite like the Tower of Latria. I used to scoff when people said they were creeped out by this level. After having played it, I'll gladly admit the entire experience was disconcerting, especially when you understand the lore. As well, I felt the Valley of Defilement was more putrid than Blighttown, but this is down to personal opinion. The latter felt more like a shantytown of criss-crossing, maze-like walkways while the former really felt like a dumping ground of all the world's refuse.
I don't have much to say about Dark Soul II's aesthetics, other than it is not consistent. There are certain areas that are quite beautiful (Heide's Tower of Flame), and certain areas that look really bad (Gutter).
With respect to characters, Dark Souls overwhelmingly wins out (for me) for fan-favourites such as Solaire, Artorias, Sif, and personal favourites such as Siegmeyer and Orstein. The only characters I liked from Demon's Souls were the Maiden in Black and Biorr. The others felt like more like stand-ins for rendering services than real characters (but again, this is down to personal opinion).
Dark Souls also had my favourite bosses (though Demon's Souls can claim a few like Penetrator, Old Hero, Old Monk). Here, I feel DSII is by far the weakest. There are far too many "multi-boss rushdowns", repeats (Dragonriders, Pursuers, Ornstein), and humanoid bosses (the humanoid ones are so generic, as well; they could have easily been strong enemies if shrunk down). The "4 major bosses" and the final boss were also a huge step-down from Dark Souls.
There's more to be said about game systems, but I'll leave that for another time. I've already rambled too long.
Here's why I chose what I chose:
Dark Souls is quite possibly my favourite game of the forever. It's also my first Souls game, so there may be bias in that regard. I love it so much because I think it, of the three games, best captures that minimalist design of such lauded classics as SoTC and Journey. The game expounds show and not tell; nevertheless, the depth is there if you care to dig.
Moving on, the world feels much more organic because there's a strong sense of continuity as you traverse Lordran. It's all accessible at once. Demon's Souls felt more arcadey/gamey as the world is segmented into levels that you cannot access but through an Archstone. One could argue that the Archstone could be taken as natural with the Demon's world, but then you still lose the continuity between each level of a particular locale. Dark Souls II loses a few points because, while it's creative for all parts of the game to branch from Majula, the transition does not feel as natural. Need I say Iron Keep? However, I'll concede that all 3 games well integrate certain gameplay features such as multiplayer into the story well by justifying it within the lore (i.e. summon stones).
What follows is quite subjective, but I find Lordran to be the most beautiful and serene. There's so much variety to the areas, from the Darkroot forest to Demon Ruins to Crystal Caves. I think it covers a lot of ground and is so easy on the eyes. I felt the world of Demon's Souls was more pedestrian in this regard. The areas were not as colourful and varied. A good example would be the contrast between Boletaria and Undead Burg. The latter is riddled with foliage that helps spruce up the visuals while the former felt more clinical (grey upon grey). I'm probably not making sense here, but yeah.
On the other hand, I'll acknowledge first and foremost that, of the 3 games, Demon's exudes the strongest and most oppressive "mood/atmosphere". There's nothing quite like the Tower of Latria. I used to scoff when people said they were creeped out by this level. After having played it, I'll gladly admit the entire experience was disconcerting, especially when you understand the lore. As well, I felt the Valley of Defilement was more putrid than Blighttown, but this is down to personal opinion. The latter felt more like a shantytown of criss-crossing, maze-like walkways while the former really felt like a dumping ground of all the world's refuse.
I don't have much to say about Dark Soul II's aesthetics, other than it is not consistent. There are certain areas that are quite beautiful (Heide's Tower of Flame), and certain areas that look really bad (Gutter).
With respect to characters, Dark Souls overwhelmingly wins out (for me) for fan-favourites such as Solaire, Artorias, Sif, and personal favourites such as Siegmeyer and Orstein. The only characters I liked from Demon's Souls were the Maiden in Black and Biorr. The others felt like more like stand-ins for rendering services than real characters (but again, this is down to personal opinion).
Dark Souls also had my favourite bosses (though Demon's Souls can claim a few like Penetrator, Old Hero, Old Monk). Here, I feel DSII is by far the weakest. There are far too many "multi-boss rushdowns", repeats (Dragonriders, Pursuers, Ornstein), and humanoid bosses (the humanoid ones are so generic, as well; they could have easily been strong enemies if shrunk down). The "4 major bosses" and the final boss were also a huge step-down from Dark Souls.
There's more to be said about game systems, but I'll leave that for another time. I've already rambled too long.
For a while, Demon's Souls was all I wanted to play. I bought the Asian version online a couple of months after release, way before any localization announcement, and was floored by its quality. It didn't just live up to my expectations based on the gameplay vid I've seen beforehand, but it immediately became my GoTG.
But Dark Souls takes that title now. Simply because it was an improvement in almost every aspect, except for the lack of servers. Dark Soul II and Demon's Souls for me can be interchangeable for 2nd and 3rd place (Demon's Souls with the superior setting and Dark Souls II with the superior gameplay mechanics), but no doubt Dark Souls is ahead of both as it combines their strongest points.
One thing worth noting though is that Dark Souls II's biggest fault is in its direction. Some levels make you feel like the dev team tried to mishmash whatever ideas they had in order to fulfill the location variety quota. It just felt messy sometimes.
In any case, these are the 3 games that defined last gen for me. Can't freaking wait for Beast Soulswhich I hope is real!
But Dark Souls takes that title now. Simply because it was an improvement in almost every aspect, except for the lack of servers. Dark Soul II and Demon's Souls for me can be interchangeable for 2nd and 3rd place (Demon's Souls with the superior setting and Dark Souls II with the superior gameplay mechanics), but no doubt Dark Souls is ahead of both as it combines their strongest points.
One thing worth noting though is that Dark Souls II's biggest fault is in its direction. Some levels make you feel like the dev team tried to mishmash whatever ideas they had in order to fulfill the location variety quota. It just felt messy sometimes.
In any case, these are the 3 games that defined last gen for me. Can't freaking wait for Beast Souls
SargerusBR
I love Pokken!
That's is one of DS2 biggest flaws imo. I loved that most weapons had different movesets. In DS2 every weapon belonging to a category has the exact same moveset.
Definitely agree with this. Good post.
Honestly, the complains are kinda exaggerated. I had more problems getting matches in DS1, some high-level areas were basically desert.
The Xtortionist
Member
Dark 2 > Demon's > Dark
I greatly prefer the sense of forward momentum and convenience provided by a more linear game structure. Dark 2 has the best weapon upgrade system of the series imo and the most content. Dedicated servers help put Dark 2 and Demon's over Dark 1. Dark 2 is also really open at the beginning, giving the player something like four viable paths to take after about 30 minutes to an hour of playing. The higher early game soul payout helps to kickstart builds, especially for mages. I also prefer the more consistent design of Dark 2 over the stellar first half but lackluster back half of Dark 1.
Basically
Dark 2
+Most content, Excellent sense of pacing and momentum, Very open, Best PvP (coop + competitive), Most consistent overall quality
-Some bosses can feel samey, Some areas could have used another pass for graphics, Occasional hitbox issues
Demon's:
+Most interesting bosses, Best overall level design, Best atmosphere
-Light on content compared to the others, Encumbrance is annoying, World tendency is a mess, Coop is more difficult to access
Dark 1:
+Best environmental design/art style, Highest highs of series (Sen's Fortress/Anor Londo), Interconnected world (if you're into that)
-No dedicated servers, Lowest lows of series, Interconnected world can diminish sense of pacing/momentum (subjective, I admit)
I may have forgotten some stuff but yeah. Also, I played the games in order of release. It's a tough series to rank. Maybe I should have put Demon's first. Despite its flaws, it has it where it really counts (level design/bosses).
I greatly prefer the sense of forward momentum and convenience provided by a more linear game structure. Dark 2 has the best weapon upgrade system of the series imo and the most content. Dedicated servers help put Dark 2 and Demon's over Dark 1. Dark 2 is also really open at the beginning, giving the player something like four viable paths to take after about 30 minutes to an hour of playing. The higher early game soul payout helps to kickstart builds, especially for mages. I also prefer the more consistent design of Dark 2 over the stellar first half but lackluster back half of Dark 1.
Basically
Dark 2
+Most content, Excellent sense of pacing and momentum, Very open, Best PvP (coop + competitive), Most consistent overall quality
-Some bosses can feel samey, Some areas could have used another pass for graphics, Occasional hitbox issues
Demon's:
+Most interesting bosses, Best overall level design, Best atmosphere
-Light on content compared to the others, Encumbrance is annoying, World tendency is a mess, Coop is more difficult to access
Dark 1:
+Best environmental design/art style, Highest highs of series (Sen's Fortress/Anor Londo), Interconnected world (if you're into that)
-No dedicated servers, Lowest lows of series, Interconnected world can diminish sense of pacing/momentum (subjective, I admit)
I may have forgotten some stuff but yeah. Also, I played the games in order of release. It's a tough series to rank. Maybe I should have put Demon's first. Despite its flaws, it has it where it really counts (level design/bosses).
NEOPARADIGM
Banned
Yeah that sucks.
Not sure why you're bringing up diversity as I agreed that the games, in terms of items and etc, are indeed getting more diverse. To me, however, that means little if the mechanics are getting worse. I don't care if the sword I'm using looks cool if I find it sluggish or slow or whatever.
And re:magic, I can see the argument about it being unpopular in Demon's, but definitely not Dark. It certainly wasn't just a buff thing. Dark Souls 2 again has more variety here, but I find it meaningless in the end when I'm one or two shotting people with spells.
Indrid Cold
Unconfirmed Member
dark 1>demon's>dark 2
ds1 had the interconnectedness and really felt like a living breathing world rather than a bunch of levels stung together. Though the world design does fall apart a bit after the lord vessel.
demon's was more consistent level design wise and has the best atmosphere. latria is still my fav "horror" level from last gen.
ds2 was sort of a mix that added a lot of small things but oddly contradicted those gains. Like having tons of new items/equipment by making titanite rare so you can't experiment and the lore/balance etc is not as good as the others imo.
ds1 had the interconnectedness and really felt like a living breathing world rather than a bunch of levels stung together. Though the world design does fall apart a bit after the lord vessel.
demon's was more consistent level design wise and has the best atmosphere. latria is still my fav "horror" level from last gen.
ds2 was sort of a mix that added a lot of small things but oddly contradicted those gains. Like having tons of new items/equipment by making titanite rare so you can't experiment and the lore/balance etc is not as good as the others imo.
I prefer its more Bushido Blade-style of fighting. Though aside from Dark Magic you will rarely 1-shot anyone with spells. Dark magic is definitely pretty busted in this game, but no more so than any of the dark magic from PtDE. Also, I played Sorcerer primarily in PvP in the first Dark Souls and it was awful. Just awful (so awful that for a long time I was just another Lightning Katana-wielding idiot because it was the only viable build). Dark magic "saved" it by basically making your spells physical damage and hitting for a ton (which by the way, still weren't Sorceries, but Pyromancies). Dark Souls 2 fixed this by giving both more spells but more importantly, spell variety (Soul Greatsword being my personal favorite).
I see the game as introducing a lot of interesting new mechanics by way of diversifying a great number of things in the game, and the weapons generally feeling both more powerful and more versatile, while also feeling somewhat fragile (i.e. Durability actually matters now).
The Xtortionist
Member
What? You can buy infinite amounts of all non-slab titanite in DS2. And slabs are more easily gained from killing enemies and exploring than previous games. If anything, Dark 1 discouraged experimentation by limiting slabs so much.
scoobidoo112
Member
This exactly. Also, why can't I vote in the poll?
Demon Souls was the best experience.
Dark Souls the best game.
Dark Souls 2 is not bad, but it lacked something. I dunno what, but it was "more of the same" instead of the DeS => DaS feel of "something new".
Tho, Dark Souls 2 has probably the best boss fight: Smelter Demon was gameplay wise the best fight by a landslide.
Dark Souls the best game.
Dark Souls 2 is not bad, but it lacked something. I dunno what, but it was "more of the same" instead of the DeS => DaS feel of "something new".
Tho, Dark Souls 2 has probably the best boss fight: Smelter Demon was gameplay wise the best fight by a landslide.
Junior members can't vote.
IAmRandom31
Banned
Demons Souls showing everyone whats up round here
Fantasy Final
Member
Demon > Dark > Dark2
The horror and hopeless feels in Demons Souls were never replicated in the Dark series in my opinion. Tower of Latria is probably the best example of what I'm talking about.
The horror and hopeless feels in Demons Souls were never replicated in the Dark series in my opinion. Tower of Latria is probably the best example of what I'm talking about.
Yeah, you said everything that I wanted to bring up.
I'm one of the crazy people who put that Demon's>Dark 2>Dark 1 and, despite the lesser world design, I feel that Dark 2 actually improves on its predecessors in a variety of ways.
phoenix296
Member
Dark > Demon > Dark2
I've put the most hours into dark2 as it was the first game i've played at launch. The only reason I put dark2 at the bottom is soul memory. Worst mechanic for online multiplayer ever.
If the first dark souls had a better pc port I would love it even more.
I've put the most hours into dark2 as it was the first game i've played at launch. The only reason I put dark2 at the bottom is soul memory. Worst mechanic for online multiplayer ever.
If the first dark souls had a better pc port I would love it even more.
Dirk Benedict
Gold Member
Demon's Souls, taking a big preferential shit on the competition. Will eat crow if itloses the top spot. Hungry anyway.
Professor Oak
Neo Member
Dark Souls = Demon's Souls = King's Field 1 (US) > Dark Souls 2 > King's Field 2 (US) >>>>>>> Shadow Tower.
I still need to finish King's Field The Ancient City and Shadow Tower Abyss, but so far I enjoyed all of From's dark rpgs.
I still need to finish King's Field The Ancient City and Shadow Tower Abyss, but so far I enjoyed all of From's dark rpgs.
Fbh
Member
Dark-Demon-Dark 2 for me.
I just overall preffered the world of Dark Souls and I like the change from "levels" (as in Demon) to a big open world.
The gameplay was just as good and they introduce some good new elements like bonfires, estus flasks and covenants.
Demon is still an awesome game and has the bounus point of being "the original".
I enjoyed Dark 2 but, IMO, it had the weakest locations and the few additions/changes it made to the formula weren't that great
I just overall preffered the world of Dark Souls and I like the change from "levels" (as in Demon) to a big open world.
The gameplay was just as good and they introduce some good new elements like bonfires, estus flasks and covenants.
Demon is still an awesome game and has the bounus point of being "the original".
I enjoyed Dark 2 but, IMO, it had the weakest locations and the few additions/changes it made to the formula weren't that great
I will totally concede that Dark Souls world is more seamless and organic. There really is no question about that. But the sprawling "messy" world of Dark Souls 2 was huge appeal to me. You never know what you are going to come across next. It's rougher around the edges but I also find it more interesting. It also feels highly influenced by Kings Field and I loved, loved the old Kings Field games.
Bummer this'll be at the bottom of the page, but oh well. This thread has almost run its course anyway.
I'm amazed at all the DS1 > DS2 posts, not that they exist, but that they're so many of them. I do not agree at all. I'd love to know for whom DS1 was their first Souls' experience. I bet there is correlation there. As my list will prove!
1. Demon's
2. DS2
3. DS1
Demon's gets the nod a little because of nostalgia, a little bit because of its novelty (playing an imported non-localised version for the first time was all kinds of amazing) and lot because Dragon Bone Smasher/Keel > every other Souls' weapon. Also Stockpile Thomas and Yurt > your favourite NPCs. I prefer the Nexus to what DS did. Majula is a move in the right direction, a nice balance of the two prior games' level select methods. Lastly, Latria and all of world 5 are in a league of their own in terms of environments and nasty enemies. Each is the perfect embodiment of dread and foreboding.
I've adored DS2 almost from go to woah. I'd say its opening hour or two, if you persevere with FoFG (rather than head to Heide's, No Man's Wharf etc) is worse than DS1's Undead Burg. However, I enjoyed the rest of the areas more than the equivalent areas in DS1 (with exception given to Sen's and conceptually at least, Anor Londo). Even Amana, lol. A place as simple as Shaded Woods makes for a delightfully serene change of pace, for which I don't buy the hilarious comment that it has 'N64 draw distance', which is miles off point. The Gutter and Black Gulch are also quintessential Souls' areas, that play wonderfully with your need for big weapons or big spells to progress, perhaps upsetting your acclimatised play style in their own peculiar ways.
While it's still far from perfect, I also have enjoyed the PvP and covenants of DS2 vastly more than DS1. Bellbros and those annoying Ratbros are terrific additions that I'd really love to see fleshed out in future games. Also, more PvP boss battles, please From: Royal Rat Authority could have been even more annoying!
DS1's inter connectedness is a delight, unmatched by any other game I've ever played. That simply looking up and around with binocs could cause such delight speaks volumes to the world built in Lordran. And seeing Anor Londo for the first time, trying to conceptualise why such a magnificent metropolis exists high above like that is awe inspiring. Shame we only got to experience such a tiny amount of it.
I've seen comments around the series' bosses and it is clear to me that depending on what your interpretation of what a 'boss' is, both generally and in this series, dictates how favourably each instalments versions were received.
They're an interesting facet of these games, as they serve a different role in each game. In Demon's, bosses are gate keepers, they clearly punctuate the end of a level, in the way a Bobomb or big Koopa or even Bowser marks the end of a world in Mario (the most common video game trope since day-0: defeat a boss, earn a new power or level up). In DS1, they moved away from that a little, partly for lore reasons, partly due to the way the world was built. Then in DS2, they got even further away from that, with bosses cropping up everywhere, some for no more reason than to flesh the lore out, others to simply block you from the next bonfire. Very rarely are the bosses worth killing explicitly for their souls (Freja and the Skeleton Lords the most notable exceptions). But it seems some of the player base still expects bosses to be of the more traditional variety. I think there is room for all types, and it'll be interesting to see the progression in future games of puzzle bosses (Dragon God and Chariot are both wonderful enemies), DPS race bosses (Maneater, Gargoyles), crowd control bosses (which are probably my favourite - heaven help you if you kill the pinwheel Skeleton Lord first!) and so on.
My take is merely that I've enjoyed each one equally. I love the spectacle of Gaping Dragon, Tower Knight, Nito and Moonlight Butterfly, regardless of their lack of difficulty. I enjoy the subtle challenges of The Dragon God and Chariot. And the out and out difficulty - and satisfaction of defeating - of Ornstein and Smough or dual Pursuers, is unparalleled.
The incidental, incremental changes that people moan about are neither here nor there. You're moaning about the 1%'s, when poise, guard break and whether 22 or 25 ADP is the optimal (I don't say that to dismiss them, they're very relevant and poignant. However I can love Street Fighter 4 without giving a shit for frames, footsies, hit exchanges and so on. The same can be said for this series and the way it has handled and made changes to the underlying mechanics). They are outweighed by the improvements in so many other areas to render than almost moot observations.
All told, the 'perfect' Souls' game probably exists with elements from each game combined. All three are in a league of their own relative to all other 'Big Games' that came out in the last generation, standing heads and shoulders above the pack. The fact that three games have come out in such short time and only grown the fan base, and not alienated large swathes of it, speaks volumes to their quality.
Bring on whatever is next, I can't wait.
I'm amazed at all the DS1 > DS2 posts, not that they exist, but that they're so many of them. I do not agree at all. I'd love to know for whom DS1 was their first Souls' experience. I bet there is correlation there. As my list will prove!
1. Demon's
2. DS2
3. DS1
Demon's gets the nod a little because of nostalgia, a little bit because of its novelty (playing an imported non-localised version for the first time was all kinds of amazing) and lot because Dragon Bone Smasher/Keel > every other Souls' weapon. Also Stockpile Thomas and Yurt > your favourite NPCs. I prefer the Nexus to what DS did. Majula is a move in the right direction, a nice balance of the two prior games' level select methods. Lastly, Latria and all of world 5 are in a league of their own in terms of environments and nasty enemies. Each is the perfect embodiment of dread and foreboding.
I've adored DS2 almost from go to woah. I'd say its opening hour or two, if you persevere with FoFG (rather than head to Heide's, No Man's Wharf etc) is worse than DS1's Undead Burg. However, I enjoyed the rest of the areas more than the equivalent areas in DS1 (with exception given to Sen's and conceptually at least, Anor Londo). Even Amana, lol. A place as simple as Shaded Woods makes for a delightfully serene change of pace, for which I don't buy the hilarious comment that it has 'N64 draw distance', which is miles off point. The Gutter and Black Gulch are also quintessential Souls' areas, that play wonderfully with your need for big weapons or big spells to progress, perhaps upsetting your acclimatised play style in their own peculiar ways.
While it's still far from perfect, I also have enjoyed the PvP and covenants of DS2 vastly more than DS1. Bellbros and those annoying Ratbros are terrific additions that I'd really love to see fleshed out in future games. Also, more PvP boss battles, please From: Royal Rat Authority could have been even more annoying!
DS1's inter connectedness is a delight, unmatched by any other game I've ever played. That simply looking up and around with binocs could cause such delight speaks volumes to the world built in Lordran. And seeing Anor Londo for the first time, trying to conceptualise why such a magnificent metropolis exists high above like that is awe inspiring. Shame we only got to experience such a tiny amount of it.
I've seen comments around the series' bosses and it is clear to me that depending on what your interpretation of what a 'boss' is, both generally and in this series, dictates how favourably each instalments versions were received.
They're an interesting facet of these games, as they serve a different role in each game. In Demon's, bosses are gate keepers, they clearly punctuate the end of a level, in the way a Bobomb or big Koopa or even Bowser marks the end of a world in Mario (the most common video game trope since day-0: defeat a boss, earn a new power or level up). In DS1, they moved away from that a little, partly for lore reasons, partly due to the way the world was built. Then in DS2, they got even further away from that, with bosses cropping up everywhere, some for no more reason than to flesh the lore out, others to simply block you from the next bonfire. Very rarely are the bosses worth killing explicitly for their souls (Freja and the Skeleton Lords the most notable exceptions). But it seems some of the player base still expects bosses to be of the more traditional variety. I think there is room for all types, and it'll be interesting to see the progression in future games of puzzle bosses (Dragon God and Chariot are both wonderful enemies), DPS race bosses (Maneater, Gargoyles), crowd control bosses (which are probably my favourite - heaven help you if you kill the pinwheel Skeleton Lord first!) and so on.
My take is merely that I've enjoyed each one equally. I love the spectacle of Gaping Dragon, Tower Knight, Nito and Moonlight Butterfly, regardless of their lack of difficulty. I enjoy the subtle challenges of The Dragon God and Chariot. And the out and out difficulty - and satisfaction of defeating - of Ornstein and Smough or dual Pursuers, is unparalleled.
The incidental, incremental changes that people moan about are neither here nor there. You're moaning about the 1%'s, when poise, guard break and whether 22 or 25 ADP is the optimal (I don't say that to dismiss them, they're very relevant and poignant. However I can love Street Fighter 4 without giving a shit for frames, footsies, hit exchanges and so on. The same can be said for this series and the way it has handled and made changes to the underlying mechanics). They are outweighed by the improvements in so many other areas to render than almost moot observations.
All told, the 'perfect' Souls' game probably exists with elements from each game combined. All three are in a league of their own relative to all other 'Big Games' that came out in the last generation, standing heads and shoulders above the pack. The fact that three games have come out in such short time and only grown the fan base, and not alienated large swathes of it, speaks volumes to their quality.
Bring on whatever is next, I can't wait.
No, some of them are legit. But we are comparing some of the best games ever made this gen against each other. You occasionally hear "DS2 is shit", or is "...garbage..." etc, when these flaws don't make it a terrible game, by any means.
Demon's = Dark = Dark 2
I find it really hard to pick a favourite.
In terms of atmosphere, sense of isolation and "the feels" that started it all, I would say Demon's nails a lot of aspects better than its successors.
However, I find that mechanically Dark and since then Dark 2 has progressed the series favourably. I enjoy playing Demon's still, but it feels quite early days in terms of character movement and feedback.
The interconnected world in Dark was also handled masterfully. Not emulated so well in Dark 2, but the sheer diversity in areas, and overall volume of content lets it stand on its own.
Increased scope of customisation and intricacy of the worlds also meant I went back to Dark much more than I did Demon's after completing both. I just don't feel the urge to play Demon's as much, although upon introducing it to some friends, I did realise that I miss some parts of it.
Despite some niggling concerns about graphics and consistency, Dark 2 took off in terms of sheer scale, and I'm finding myself much more inclined to mess around with NG+ and different builds. It's much easier to get a new build up to a reasonable pace quite quickly, which keeps it fresh and accessible.
I love the lore of all three. They each have a different story to tell, and a different world to embrace despite being set roughly around the same core concepts. I really can't pick a favourite, so this is my vote.
I find it really hard to pick a favourite.
In terms of atmosphere, sense of isolation and "the feels" that started it all, I would say Demon's nails a lot of aspects better than its successors.
However, I find that mechanically Dark and since then Dark 2 has progressed the series favourably. I enjoy playing Demon's still, but it feels quite early days in terms of character movement and feedback.
The interconnected world in Dark was also handled masterfully. Not emulated so well in Dark 2, but the sheer diversity in areas, and overall volume of content lets it stand on its own.
Increased scope of customisation and intricacy of the worlds also meant I went back to Dark much more than I did Demon's after completing both. I just don't feel the urge to play Demon's as much, although upon introducing it to some friends, I did realise that I miss some parts of it.
Despite some niggling concerns about graphics and consistency, Dark 2 took off in terms of sheer scale, and I'm finding myself much more inclined to mess around with NG+ and different builds. It's much easier to get a new build up to a reasonable pace quite quickly, which keeps it fresh and accessible.
I love the lore of all three. They each have a different story to tell, and a different world to embrace despite being set roughly around the same core concepts. I really can't pick a favourite, so this is my vote.
Huh?
More people have voted Dark Souls in 1st place than Demon's Souls.
~180 + 20 is not more than ~160 + 70.
(reposting in case people miss this)
Beerman462
Member
Man tough decision, but ultimately.
Dark>Dark 2=Demon
Dark Souls was my first entry and by far it captures the imagination more than the other 2. The world it builds is so good. My first play through was just a monster closet/boss rush. Kill everything, what's the story? I don't care, because the combat is so good. After watching youtube videos by like ENB and Prepare to Cry, you realize how deep the lore is and it inspires you to play the game more. The way the world is interconnected is awesome and really adds to the immersion. Alot of people complain about the second half of the game, but it's still pretty good. Lost Izalith doesn't add much to the game, but I really like Duke's Archives and Catacombs/Giants Tomb.
Dark Souls 2 is technically better(online/graphics), but as of right now the story doesn't do anything for me. It's all game play and mechanics. I wish it had more mystery like Dark Souls.
I played Demon's Souls after Dark Souls and I do like it, but I don't think the bosses are nearly as good as Dark Souls(especially DLC bosses). Also Valley of Defilement sucks and the second half of Tower of Latria is terrible.
Quoted for truth
Dark>Dark 2=Demon
Dark Souls was my first entry and by far it captures the imagination more than the other 2. The world it builds is so good. My first play through was just a monster closet/boss rush. Kill everything, what's the story? I don't care, because the combat is so good. After watching youtube videos by like ENB and Prepare to Cry, you realize how deep the lore is and it inspires you to play the game more. The way the world is interconnected is awesome and really adds to the immersion. Alot of people complain about the second half of the game, but it's still pretty good. Lost Izalith doesn't add much to the game, but I really like Duke's Archives and Catacombs/Giants Tomb.
Dark Souls 2 is technically better(online/graphics), but as of right now the story doesn't do anything for me. It's all game play and mechanics. I wish it had more mystery like Dark Souls.
I played Demon's Souls after Dark Souls and I do like it, but I don't think the bosses are nearly as good as Dark Souls(especially DLC bosses). Also Valley of Defilement sucks and the second half of Tower of Latria is terrible.
Quoted for truth
Demon's Souls = Dark Souls >>> Dark Souls 2
Not that Dark Souls 2 is bad (it's still a good game), but it's definitely the worst game in the series in almost every conceivable way, other than a few mechanics.
To me, Demon's Souls has the best gameplay and combat and Dark Souls has the best world/content.
Not that Dark Souls 2 is bad (it's still a good game), but it's definitely the worst game in the series in almost every conceivable way, other than a few mechanics.
To me, Demon's Souls has the best gameplay and combat and Dark Souls has the best world/content.
Similar threads
- Poll