Kopikatsu said:
Yeaaah, but iunno how good that is. I mean, there were people arguing that the player character was the Furtive Pygmy for the longest time until the DLC came out and it turned out that the Furtive Pygmy is (probably) Manus.
When nothing is really set in stone, erryone gets something wrong.
That's part of the point. In interpretive lore, there is rarely a truly correct or incorrect answer. Sometimes, players will be wrong -- and that's also part of the experience. It's less about working out right or wrong answers and more about being invested in the process of drawing connections and interpreting elements of the game. We still don't know if Solaire is actually Gwyn's son, after all, and the pendant? Don't get me started on that -- it was an absolutely amazing hoax that provided such a great deal of investigation and conversation that, even amounting to nothing, it contributed to the experience of the game. It made the implication that there was still something you hadn't worked out, or didn't understand, or hadn't unlocked. And because it was always nothing, it gave the sense that Dark Souls was infinite and unsolvable.
And that is awesome.
Kopikatsu said:
Yeah, and that's something that really bugged me. As noted in the OP, I like being the tank and stacking as much defense as possible. But in Souls, it's not really a viable playstyle. Everyone 1-2 shots you regardless of armor (Although this might just be because of the Champion guild. Going to try turning it off and see how it goes). Same deal in Torchlight 2. Eventually even having max resits isn't enough to save you from dying instantly, so the only viable class really becomes ranged DPS. Which I hate. Hate hate hate hate HATE. MAGIC IS FOR WUSSES. REAL MEN USE CAESTUSES.
Plenty of different styles of play are viable in both Souls games I've played. Evasive, aggressive builds are certainly optimal in both, but that only counts in PvP at a high level and for PvE runs where the player wants to be absolutely optimal. Both games can be completed completely reasonably with any of the many good builds. So far, I've found the Souls games to be less punishing when it comes to suboptimal builds, because plenty of the suboptimal builds are still
really good, and that extra bit of optimisation only matters in corner case scenarios.
In particular, Dark Souls 1 did one hell of a lot for tanky builds with the poise system. That didn't change the fact that taking a hit was still worse than dodging it (and when will it not be?), but the very fact that there was a poise system for both players and NPC enemies meant that using heavy weapons was an excellent choice for permission strategies and quicker weapons were still optimal for DPS strategies. The Souls games, while ultimately imperfect, do a really good job of enabling a variety of different style of play. If you want to tank with a great shield, heavy armour and the biggest weapon you can find, you can do so and win the game without being unduly punished for choosing a "suboptimal" strategy.
My comment was correcting the assumption that a shield defense strategy was optimal; that a starting shield is absent from the knight class in Dark Souls 2 seems to be a reference to the optimal nature of dodges in previous games and the heavy weapon permission strategy I was referencing before. That's pretty interesting -- it seems as though FromSoftware want to more clearly draw distinction between the warrior and knight classes, and have therefore chosen to make the warrior the go-to for a flexible combat build, while incentivising knight players to use those heavy weapon permission strategies. To me, that says that FromSoftware is trying to encourage build diversity, and I see no reason why that wouldn't be supported in the system by trying to broaden what counts as an "optimal" build.
And that is the point of my rambling paragraphs.