"Dark Souls Will Eat Skyrim's Face"

[Chrishu]

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/119/1196353p1.html

Read the article, freak out.

In this article, IGN created the proverbial perfect storm of fan anger and apologists began coming out of the woodwork.

Now, in all fairness, the article is rather obvious flame bait, and the author obviously chose topics that favored Dark Souls, but some things stick out like a sore thumb (which Dark Souls provides amply):

Combat. Skyrim's combat looks... Well, the same. Killing moves alone do not add that visceral thrill that a combat-oriented game can provide.

Online. Dark Souls obviously has some of the most immersive and innovative online ever seen, Skyrim is lonely. But not lonely in the atmospheric, thematic sense of Souls, but rather hollow.

Do the games compare? Which do you think will be better?

 

[Manchubot]

Only thing these games really have in common is they are set in a medieval fantasy setting it's like comparing apples to oranges grown on the same field. To answer the question though I have Dark Souls reserved and paid off and was going to wait a year or two for Skyrim to be in the $30 range much like I did with Oblivion. Should show which camp I fell under.

 

[Amphoteric]

All of their reasons are pathetically bad.

I don't care about multiplayer, I don't care that skyrim isn't bigger than Oblivion, I don't care about the plans for DLC, I don't care about the combat system that much. If it is even slightly better than Oblivion I will be happy. I don't care that Dark Souls has bigger dragons than Skyrim.

Is the person writing the article a 12 year old?

Adding Multiplayer to Skyrim would be an idiotic thing to do. Like Bethesda don't have enough problems with bugs as it is...

 

[Dr_Horrible]

I won't be playing Dark Souls since I don't have a console, but I'm sure it'll be fine. I will be playing Skyrim, however, and I'm calling bullshit. Not because I 'know' Skyrim will be better, but because we can't know which is better seeing as the games haven't been released!

The article also uses some crappy comparisons, as if the two were trying to appeal to the same demographics with the same things. Of course, this article is meant to be flame-bait anyway.

I see IGN as the National Enquirer of games journalism; they act like idiots, post heavily biased or meaningless articles, and are very popular for some reason.

 

[Ipsen]

For me, Dark Souls will. Have the Collector's Edition preordered. Not that Skyrim doesn't look interesting, but after Demon's Souls, I await it's sequel MUCH more than Skyrim (haven't played Oblivion).

Also, things like early/exclusive DLC deals for 360 kind of turn me away from a game, since I only own a PS3.

EDIT: I'd also like to ask/note, Skyrim fans get so defensive over this kind of stuff. I mean, why NOT have multiplayer, in some shape or form, in this game? Even something subtle, along the lines of Dark Souls is doing. (now that I think of it, if these two games got together and made a healthy baby game.../gasm)

Sequels tend to have a habit of playing it 'too safe', and both Skyrim and Dark Souls seem to be guilty of it; having new worlds, tweaked conflict systems, updated graphics, but not much actually innovative, or rather that what has been innovative doesn't change the gameplay habits established in the iteration(s) before it (until that sequel is released on a new console, of course). Not that this is a particularly bad habit, familiarity is nice, but when you can take a risk to do something that is both new AND works well, it will be noticed.

 

[DeadlyYellow]

Better question: Will fallen enemies in Dark Souls still flop around like they're made of paper?

 

[Marmooset]

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.314797-IGN-Top-Five-Reasons-Dark-Souls-Will-Eat-Skyrims-Face

...and if your screenplay idea concerns a dinosaur amusement park gone wrong, I have some more bad news for ya.

 

[Nudu]

This is a strategy called nerd baiting. Basically they spew out some inflammatory nonsense in hopes of getting people to visit their site. Not sure why an established site like IGN would do this, though. Even if that article generates a lot of ad revenue, I don't think all PR is good PR on the internet, and I can imagine this harming them in the long run.

 

[Griffolion]

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/119/1196353p1.html

Read the article, freak out.

In this article, IGN created the proverbial perfect storm of fan anger and apologists began coming out of the woodwork.

Now, in all fairness, the article is rather obvious flame bait, and the author obviously chose topics that favored Dark Souls, but some things stick out like a sore thumb (which Dark Souls provides amply):

Combat. Skyrim's combat looks... Well, the same. Killing moves alone do not add that visceral thrill that a combat-oriented game can provide.

Online. Dark Souls obviously has some of the most immersive and innovative online ever seen, Skyrim is lonely. But not lonely in the atmospheric, thematic sense of Souls, but rather hollow.

Do the games compare? Which do you think will be better?

When I saw this, this came into my head:


Anyhoo, no, it won't. Skyrim is big, has an entire franchise behind it, as well as a consistently proven dev team in this field.

Also, at Eurogamer this year, I played both. Dark Souls is kinda rubbish. Clunky gameplay from the sections I played & very linear. It might just be my preferences. I'm not an ES fanboy at all (though I have enjoyed 3 & 4), but it honestly won't stand up to Skyrim, both off the merit of the game itself and in terms of popularity.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

I saw a thread on this earlier but unfortunatley was on my phone so I could'nt write much. The multiplayer part is a total joke. I challenge you to go on to the Skyrim facebook page and say that you want multiplayer you will be shouted down by angry people within minutes. Nobody who is a long time fan of TES wants multiplayer it will cheapen the single player experience quests and will become MMORPGER like.
I personally like DLC especially from Bethesda just look at S. Isles and Point Lookout. They are constantly cited as the best parts of both of their main games.
They also are using Obliion to judge Skyrim's combat which just speaks for itself...
The whole article is just conjecture about what people want. It's a load of rubbish.

 

[kemosabi4]

DLC and Pricing:

Skyrim: Average DLC packages run $10-15 apiece, plus weapons and armor for a few bucks more. For reference, there have been four pieces of Fallout: New Vegas DLC.

Dark Souls: "we are not planning any DLC for Dark Souls"

Winner: Dark Souls

I would like to meet this person so I can kick them very hard in their shins.

This is either blatant flame bait or the most heinous breach of intelligent journalism I have ever seen. The author does nothing but take low blows at a game that is already established to be great.

This is one of the reasons I hate IGN.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

DLC and Pricing:

Skyrim: Average DLC packages run $10-15 apiece, plus weapons and armor for a few bucks more. For reference, there have been four pieces of Fallout: New Vegas DLC.

Dark Souls: "we are not planning any DLC for Dark Souls"

Winner: Dark Souls

I would like to meet this person so I can kick them very hard in their shins.

This is either blatant flame bait or the most heinous breach of intelligent journalism I have ever seen. The author does nothing but take low blows at a game that is already established to be great.

This is one of the reasons I hate IGN.

Well

1. Bethesda didn't make that fallout :|
and
2. The actual DLC's mentioned are awesome and add so much to the game. I wanted to play OWB through again right after I'd finished.

You are right it's just a horrible piece of nerd bait.

 

[Scrustle]

I read this article when they first posted it. Totally stupid. It's moronic how they say Dark Souls will be better because it DOESN'T have DLC planned. Sooo less game = better then? It's also pretty hilarious how they shortly after ran an article saying that Forza 4 will be better than Gran Turismo 5 because it DOES have DLC planned. Well done IGN! The whole "innovation vs. tradition" article was also a load of rubbish.

 

[Enslave_All_Elves]

i've never played demon souls because I don't have a PS3. However I would be interested in trying Dark Souls because I keep reading about the ball smashing difficulty level.

At this point though, I'd have to go with Skyrim because I have played Morrowind and Oblivion and enjoyed both more than enough to be skeptic.

 

[KingHodor]

Meh, a few years ago, people were raving about how Gothic 3 was going to kill Oblivion. What Gothic 3 eventually turned out to be was a buggy mess with ludicrously broken combat (and lets face it, to look buggy and imbalanced next to a Bethesda game, it has to be *really* buggy and imbalanced). So yeah, my money is still on Skyrim.

As for DLC, remember that we've come far from the ridiculous 2$ horse armor plugin they had for Oblivion. I haven't played Lonesome Road, but with both Dead Money and Old World Blues I clearly had the impression that the designers (yeah, I know that was Obsidian, not Bethesda) were really pouring in their creativity and soul to create a fresh experience rather than just make a quick buck for the publisher.

On a sidenote, if you're into older, slightly obscure RPGs, you might want to give Gothic 2 a try. One thing they really succeeded at back in the day was to actually make you feel the world was alive, something Bethesda has consistently failed at. Smiths wouldn't just stand around peddling their wares - you'd actually see them go through the whole process of swordmaking, from heating and hammering the ingot to quenching the blade in water and sharpening it on a whetstone.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

Silly IGN.

I'm getting both, like all the cool kids.

 

[Chrishu]

Yeah, the article is stupid, but the concerns are still real. Skyrim will be great, I'm sure, but it'll just be more a minor improvement over oblivion. Todd Howard basically said it himself. So, a retread.

Dark Souls will also be great (and soul-crushing), but really, Skyrim, where's our co-op? Would it be so hard to give us some system link? My buddy and I play the game right next to each other. Why can't we just fucking play together? And guess what! A system link co-op wouldn't have to do anything but drop in another main character. They could work the quests like Borderlands.

Until Skyrim adds even a rudimentary online mode and improves combat, it's going to be eventually left behind.

Anyway, immaturity aside, everyone please try Dark Souls (except the Glorious PC Master Race, sorry). It's from a tiny team and a little-known publisher and they really do need all the help they can get.

 

[gostlyfantom]

I hate IGN, they just stir shit up on purpose to generate views.

 

[Frozen Donkey Wheel2]

You guys do realize how stupid it is to argue about which of two UNRELEASED games will be better, right?

Answer: Very stupid.