Dark Souls - without soul?

[Casual Shinji]

How about you give some examples of games where the AI isn't "robotic" then, because honestly, your complaint covers just about every game enemy ever conceived. What enemy doesn't cycle through a predetermined amount of moves, which we as the player then try to exploit?

The soldiers in Crysis 1 have interesting AI - flanking moves etc.

A bit of adaptability in the AI in Dark Souls would be nice depending on what style of moves and weapons you use. Say you have heavy armour or a two handed weapon, vary the types of moves used.

At the moment the bosses and enemies just seem very devoid of personality in my opinion.

Giving all enemies and Bosses an AI that reacts to what equipment you're using would likely require an entire seperate team of developers. Dark Souls is a game with a lot of different enemy types and Boss types. That's where the variety comes into play. Fighting regular undead mooks works different from fighting skeletons, or black knights, or rats, or archers, or black knight archers, or dogs.

And if all enemies could adept to whatever equipment and/or move set you wield, it would nulify the rock-paper-scissor aspect of the game. A lot of the fun in creating a build is that you'll be strong against certain enemies, but weak against others. Same with the Bosses. A tank build makes the Capra Demon quite easy, but Smough and Ornstein a pain. But the opposite is true if you go for a pure mage build.

 

[TrevHead]

I can certainly see the OP's point even though I like DSK' design, sure every AI is built out of a similar set of rules which can be analysed and overcome by the player, however imo part of the difference is that many games can be blundered through without bothering to take notice in the AI's patterns.

 

[lord canti]

Well in all fairness most of the enemies are not very smart. They mostly react based on instinct and very little strategy.

 

[elvor0]

What really irks me about that game is that I don't feel any atmosphere in it. No compelling character or story, and no particularly immersive atmosphere to get into.

That's what makes the game feel very boring to me: all I see in it is the high difficulty challenge... and nothing else.

I think thats something that varies. The thing that made the world feel atmospheric is /exactly/ the reason some people find it empty, I felt the world was flat and empty at first too. The game manages to link you with your character very well in that regard, given you and your character are experiencing dying every time and the fact that only the stuff you discover yourself is what you know about this strange world, you and your character are totally attuned.

Absoloutely bugger all is given to you on a plate, which is obviously very jarring. It's very much an experience that'll suddenly "click" once you get it. I wasn't into it at first either and it took me ages to do so, but suddenly everything falls into place and you're fully invested.

 

[Darth Rosenberg]

What really irks me about that game is that I don't feel any atmosphere in it.

...I think my brain just exploded. For me DS is one of the most atmospheric games ever crafted, but I guess we'd both need to define what we mean with that word first.

The whole game is an archaic concept, from my understanding. It's an oldschool game for oldschool players who think true gameplay is about rote memorisation.

Does your understanding also include playing it for a fair stint?

It isn't about players enjoying rote memorisation, it's about players enjoying a consequential world in which your mistakes occur because of your lack of patience, or awareness, or willingness to learn. There's an immense sense of reward in mastering an area, and progressing beyond enemies (or bosses) you previously thought unbeatable.

The god-damned Stray Demon beneath the Asylum. / I do not like that boss.

Heh, I think that guy took me the best part of an hour to defeat. For various reasons he's been my hardest boss so far (only have two left before the finale).

 

[MysticSlayer]

How about you give some examples of games where the AI isn't "robotic" then, because honestly, your complaint covers just about every game enemy ever conceived. What enemy doesn't cycle through a predetermined amount of moves, which we as the player then try to exploit?

The soldiers in Crysis 1 have interesting AI - flanking moves etc.

A bit of adaptability in the AI in Dark Souls would be nice depending on what style of moves and weapons you use. Say you have heavy armour or a two handed weapon, vary the types of moves used.

At the moment the bosses and enemies just seem very devoid of personality in my opinion.

I don't really think you can compare the AI of Crysis to that of Dark Souls, because the AI of an FPS compared to an action-RPG is going to behave significantly differently. In FPS games, the only thing the AI really can do is position itself, as enemy actions are limited to shooting, occasionally throwing grenades, and bashing the player if they get too close. In action games, the AI is normally more concerned with various move sets that the player has to learn and adapt to, and adapting to those move sets and the minor variations is the key to success.

Really, if you're going to compare Dark Souls AI to any other game, you need to pick games that have similar combat systems to Dark Souls (i.e. action-adventure games), and frankly, there just aren't a lot of action games that do anything but force the player to learn attack patterns in the same way Dark Souls does. Sure, Dark Souls isn't pushing any new ground in terms of that kind of AI, but it also is hardly any more "robotic" than any other kind of game of its type.

 

[jademunky]

For me this seems quite an archaic concept. It makes the enemies and bosses seem like robots, with no thoughts or personality. I'd really like to see the next game of the series include some AI that is more adapative and thinks like a creature with a mind and a soul, instead of just randomly using it's preset moves up.

We talking Dark Souls 1 here?

How about the very first boss, the Asylum Demon: after you escape from him the first time, you get a weapon and find youself looking down on him from a platform. You can drop down and get some good bonus damage on him with a plunging attack, but if you hesitate for too long, he will jump up and smash you right off the platform. That floored me the first time I saw it. (both figuratively and literally)

What other game developers put that much detail into enemy behaviour?

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

Did you notice how you can only do around six or so attacks too? You, the player, are hardly any less predictable in dark souls. Also, that isn't as much of a thing in dark souls 2, where they dealt with that complaint among others. Now you will almost never find an opening to use a healing item during most boss fights, which I suppose is a kind of progress. Actually, the AI in dark souls 2 is surprisingly reactive for an action game AI, though the best way to beat everyone still breaks down to figuring out what all the enemies are going to do because that is the best way to succeed in all action games.

It actually isn't something you have to do though. Most enemies have tells for their moves, allowing you to tell where their attack is going before they throw it. If you just act on that then most enemies are pretty easy to deal with actually

 

[kasperbbs]

That actually applies to every game ever made, even for the protagonists. I don't really get your point. If you want to fight intelligent enemies then try online games, not with russians though.

 

[SnakeTrousers]

Thats not what he said.
Beyond that, Dark souls having no atmosphere is a really old troll statement. If you're not familiar I don't blame you, but don't air your ignorance on the matter.
He might as well be saying PS3 has no games. Its old and lazy trolling.

Well, to reiterate:

"What really irks me about that game is that I don't feel any atmosphere in it. No compelling character or story, and no particularly immersive atmosphere to get into.

That's what makes the game feel very boring to me [...]"

This is what he did say and it sounds to me (and I imagine, to most reasonable people) like a simple statement of opinion, and hardly an inflammatory one. If your reaction to someone admitting being underwhelmed by the atmosphere or narrative is to go straight for the "TROLL!" card, you may just be a bit too attached.

 

[SnakeTrousers]

Its almost word for word that content people post in /v/ or /vg/ when trolling. That post may very well be a copy/paste from years ago.

I could very well just be the guy's thoughts on the game too. Things like "PS3 has no games" or "Why does Zelda have to save the princess" are pretty obviously intended to be facetious, but this?

I'm not "trying to play devil's advocate," I'm just pointing out that there's nothing factually incorrect about what's been said.

 

[Eternal_Lament]

I'm having a hard time understanding your issue.

All AI, by virtue of being in a game, is going to be robotic. Even "adaptive" AIs are merely working on pre-determined movements and reactions. The only way to get something truly adaptive and unique is to play online, since technically players are going to react in more human ways (by virtue of being, well, human) In other words, every game that has ever been made and featured enemies is going to have "robotic" AI, so complaining about Dark Souls for robotic AI is like criticizing a game for not allowing you to control photo-realistic characters. It may honestly be something that bothers you, but at that point that's not so much the fault of that game so much as it's just something all games are guilty of.

Also, as you went on to explain, your issue also seems to be that enemies will just throw attacks at you regardless of situation. I just have to ask, have you played a Souls game before? Sure, I wouldn't say AI is the selling point of the series, but I wouldn't say the enemies just throw attacks at you just "because." Hold your shield up for too long? Expect the enemy to use a shield bash or similar move that drains stamina. Get up close to a ranged enemy? Expect them to switch to close range combat. Use a healing item or ranged attacks yourself? Expect the enemy to charge at you. Leave your back exposed? Expect the enemy to backstab. Trying to backstab the enemy or circle them? Expect an AoE attack. Again, I wouldn't really say that AI is necessarily the selling point of the series, but I find it strange for someone to say the AI just throws any attack at you when playing the game reveals that that's definitely not the case.

 

[endtherapture]

I'm having a hard time understanding your issue.

It's weird to understand, but basically when I play Dark Souls I feel like I am fighting silent, robotic, programmed enemies. None of the enemies seem to have personality. They don't even have any menace about them in my opinion. I know they're supposed to be husks and hollows but they're mostly just personalityness and bland to me.

This is amplified by the fact to win the game you learn "movesets" and how to dodge them, that enemies don't react to you unless aggrooed, don't really patrol about, which just ends up with combat as this weird, bland experience that I'm fighting essentially computers - rather than actual entities in a fantasy land - which kills the atmosphere of the game for me personally.

I'm trying to imagine Lordran as this desolate, apocalyptic fantasy world but the illusion is killed for me personally by the fact that these enemies exist doing nothing in a vacuum waiting for you to come and kill them.

 

[nuttshell]

...the fact that these enemies exist doing nothing in a vacuum waiting for you to come and kill them.

Yeah, thats very "gamey". I looked past it but it did feel very weird at times, especially when you can see some enemies and they could see you too or should be able to notice you but they just stand there and you realize, you can take a break without hitting pause.

 

[Something Amyss]

If you're really bad at the game and die numerous times trying to memorize what to do, it may not be the game series for you.

I think a sizable chunk of the player base would disagree.

Does your understanding also include playing it for a fair stint?

No, the player base and marketing put me off enough to not bother. But honestly, unless the other players are lying,a handful of players telling me "no, really, it's not like that" won't make much of a difference. I'm not sure playing it would make a difference, either, given the defenses even in this very thread.

 

[verdant monkai]

He said something demonstrably false and you agreed with him. Thats not a matter of opinion. You tell me that a sphere is a square and I'll call you out on trolling, not having an opposing opinion.
In regard to your opinions, I asked you questions relating to them that you refused to answer. I didn't say that your opinion was wrong or invalid. I asked you how one character was less helpful than another and how one was less mysterious than the other.
Read posts properly in the future.

In his opinion Dark Souls may not have much atmosphere, for exampleyou have to go and research a lot of what's going on for yourself, and that is not good story telling and can mess with the atmosphere. Your opinion isn't absolute just because its your opinion.

I did answer your questions. I said I think the DS2 npc's are unhelpful rather than mysterious, I didn't say they weren't mysterious. Whereas the DS1 npc's are mysterious I didn't mention their usefulness. Would you like me to make a chart? To go into depth on Lucatiel, the ***** went to great lengths to hide her summon sign well away from the boss fight areas. So no she wasn't a great help.

I've read your post now read this twice before you reply, or better still don't bother as I'd like to save us both the trouble of subtly slagging each other off so as not to induce a warning. Where the only outcome is that we disagree.

 

[Azure23]

For me this seems quite an archaic concept.

The whole game is an archaic concept, from my understanding. It's an oldschool game for oldschool players who think true gameplay is about rote memorisation.

If you're really bad at the game and die numerous times trying to memorize what to do, it may not be the game series for you.
Personally, I spent most of my time playing these games taking in my surroundings and thinking. I was able to spot traps or ambushes and avoid them. I was far from perfect, but I didn't need to be.
A huge chunk of the game is you being able to think and apply the things that you've learned. Thats where a lot of the fun comes from and I'm not shocked if you're not having fun by refusing to do that. Of course you'll be caught off guard from time to time, but even then you learn. Off the top of my head I can't think of a single section of thing in the souls games that require rote memorization. That may just be an error on your part.

Much obliged, I do occasionally get tired of ranting at Souls neophytes about how they should just keep their damn shield up and look at environmental clues for traps and such. People who claim that rote memorisation is where Dark Souls' difficulty comes from are clearly playing the game wrong. I had maybe four areas that took me more than three tries (Drangleic castle, accidently kept pulling more ruin sentinels, stone soldiers. Shrine of Amana, a few more but memory fails) all because I'd been trained since Demon's Souls to look for those charred corpses on the bridge. Obviously Amaranth up there has a pretty bad understanding of the Souls series.