"Dark Souls Will Eat Skyrim's Face"

[Raso719]

It's like they either assume that personal preference has no place in any of this or that EVERYONE loves exactly the same thing.

No tacked on multiplayer? I'm sold.

A difficultly curve that us non-jedi can enjoy? I'm old.

A massive world you have to explore opposed to a cramped world? I'm sold.

Dragons opposed to dragons? Wow, childish much?

 

[TheDooD]

Wait, Hold up didn't this thread happen already this weekend.

edit:

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.314797-IGN-Top-Five-Reasons-Dark-Souls-Will-Eat-Skyrims-Face?page=1

yea this happened already....

 

[Jaime_Wolf]

Not really comparable. Skyrim isn't intended to be multiplayer, the logic in the DLC section is unbelievably stupid (as usual), the size comparison is based on wild speculation, the "true challenge" section is incredibly lol.

It doesn't even read like fanbaiting to me, it reads a lot more like some random fan complaining about games they don't like (and haven't played) and gushing about games they do like, with all the necessary shoehorning of incompatible aspects of the games into a weird list for comparison.

 

[The Electro Gypsy]

Being too young to have played Morrowind or any of the previous Elder Scrolls Games, and thinking Oblivion was insanely bad, I'm going to go with Dark Souls cos I have no reason to dislike it.

My logic is awesome.

 

[rythter]

first reaction, great joke LOL

 

[Emperor Ty Ping]

what an odd thread. clearly the person who wrote it has to make a decision on which they can afford. Those of us with jobs and disposable income will just buy both.

 

[Danceofmasks]

Eh, "Saints Row the Third will eat Skyrim's face" makes about as much sense.
As in, none at all.

 

[Tyrant T100]

Skyrim will do better because it comes from a far more popular series ect ect.
I wish Dark Souls all the best but it's not really my type of RPG.

 

[Politi]

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.

I agree with you, and I would like to point out that every one of the New Vegas DLCs was absolutely awesome. They were worth ten dollars each. Fallout New Vegas is my #1 game. I feel that there is a reason for this. Bethesda, and by extension The Elder Scrolls series has my absolute trust.

All in all, I'm disappointed in IGN. They're usually above this kind of blatant controversy article. Not far above it, but you know, they keep their feet out of the mud. Articles like these are pretty much the equivalent of gaming tabloids.

 

[Dr. wonderful]

What? didn't we already have a thread like this?


Seriously, no one cares about IGN. The only people who cares are the 13 years old.

EDIT: Also I'm going to get Dark souls as well with Skyrim...right after I get Arkham City and X-Men: Destiny then MGS: Collection. Then after that Shadow of the Collesus / Ico games and after that...

 

[Bambi On Toast]

I was also pretty disappointed in IGN.

I only check the site semi-regularly, so I don't exactly read every article on the site. This was the first time I saw an article like this posted by IGN themselves. I was kind of surprised that the author was even allowed to post this article, considering the extreme bias towards Dark Souls. The 5 points raised were valid and I agree that Skyrim could use a lot of work. But picking 5 specific points in your favour, calling your game the winner and not giving the other game a fair look is not balanced at all. Personally I'd like to see more of these provocative articles on IGN, it's a fun read. I think the guy who wrote it was probably sick of hearing about Skyrim and tried to murder the hype.

I'm an Elder Scrolls fan, so the article seemed very unfair from my point of view. Though, I have now come to acknowledge that Oblivion (and probably Skyrim) are not perfect and have many flaws. I wouldn't instantly dismiss a new rpg like Dark Souls, but after seeing the videos and reading the previews, it seems to be aimed at a different audience.

Neither game is out yet, but it's safe to say that the world is big enough for the both of them. Most people here will buy both games and enjoy them. Being poor, I can only afford one and it's got to be Skyrim. With every new detail released about the game I seem to get more suspicious, and a bit nervous. I get annoyed by all the hype as much as anyone, but I am genuinely worried by the problems shown in the gameplay videos. I mainly have doubts about the combat, but there's a month to go and fingers crossed....

 

[AlternatePFG]

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.

I agree with you, and I would like to point out that every one of the New Vegas DLCs was absolutely awesome. They were worth ten dollars each. Fallout New Vegas is my #1 game. I feel that there is a reason for this. Bethesda, and by extension The Elder Scrolls series has my absolute trust.

Bethesda didn't develop New Vegas, Obsidian did. Bethesda published it.

I'm not a huge fan of the Elder Scrolls series, and I actually really liked Demons Soul's, so I'm more interested in Dark Souls at the moment. That doesn't mean Skyrim isn't interesting me either, but Dark Souls also looks really cool.

 

[Politi]

Though, I have now come to acknowledge that Oblivion (and probably Skyrim) are not perfect and have many flaws.

This is very, very true. But they're still absurdly good. How do they do it

EDIT: I suck at remembering that Bethesda only published New Vegas.

I have made that mistake so many times.

 

[Pingieking]

Demon's Souls would have been my game of the year if only it wasn't so fucking depressing. Even winning doesn't really feel like winning in that game. Other than that, it was epic. Dark Souls looks like more of the same, with the depression dialed up to 11. So I'm not going to play it (because I don't deal well with depression), but I'm pretty damn sure it's going to be a great game.

Skyrim looks like more ES, which means... not much, really. Morrowind was cool, Oblivion wasn't. Fallout 3 wass awesome, but ES not so much. So not really caring about Skyrim here.

Personal preference though.

 

[Smeggs]

Oh, IGN, keep on trollin.

I always find it amusing when someone is such a blatant flame baiter and people just fall over themselves trying to come up with their ignorant counter arguments. How can they not notice?

 

[The Artificially Prolonged]

The article is just flame war bait. IGN hype machine is in full swing on Dark Souls. There has been a new article on that game nearly everyday on IGN.

 

[ZeroMachine]

I feel like, initially, I will enjoy Dark Souls more. But Skyrim I will enjoy for FAR longer, and I'll be able to go back to it more. It just seems to have a more lasting appeal and, obviously, greater replay value.

 

[Krantos]

DLC - Dark Souls Wins because there is no DLC planned. Wait, what?

I don't care about the other points, because, frankly, they cherry-picked the topics and most of their "points" are simply opinions ("TRUE" Challenge? Sure.)

On the DLC side, however, I acknowledge that Bethesda has made some missteps in the past, but they're (supposedly) approaching it from a different angle this time. Or I should say an old angle. Rather than Horse Armor or 50 DLCs for Fallout, they're going back to Full Expansions. Howard made a comment at one point saying they're looking more at focusing on Expansions like the Bloodmoon and Tribunal from Morrowind or SI from Oblivion.


I think it's funny that they article is playing up Dark Souls's marketing so much while blatantly ignoring the information we've gotten about Skyrim, choosing to instead base everything on what the series has done before.

Oh, and Epic Scope: Dark Souls wins? Wahahahahah.....

 

[TheDooD]

Demon's Souls would have been my game of the year if only it wasn't so fucking depressing. Even winning doesn't really feel like winning in that game. Other than that, it was epic. Dark Souls looks like more of the same, with the depression dialed up to 11. So I'm not going to play it (because I don't deal well with depression), but I'm pretty damn sure it's going to be a great game.

Skyrim looks like more ES, which means... not much, really. Morrowind was cool, Oblivion wasn't. Fallout 3 wass awesome, but ES not so much. So not really caring about Skyrim here.

Personal preference though.

because you didn't win, you survived.

A lot of good warriors, people died trying to control the power of the demons souls and that the good ending. The bad ending is that you basically kill everybody in the world collecting their souls for the old one. It was suppose to be bleak, this "great" kingdom had such a horrible history and the release of the soul arts brought all the corruption into the light.

 

[Termagent]

Bah, this thread again. Same point I made last thread, both games are going to be good but it's down to personal preference. Also it's not exactly a fair comparison since both games have completely different design, gameplay, setting and story in general. The two games both are classified as RPG's and that's about as far as the similarities go.