Dark Souls - without soul?

[Azure23]

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.

You might like new game plus better if thats the big issue you're having with the game. There are tons of Dark Spirit ambushes and unique enemies that will hunt you down relentlessly, even some familiar faces. I really don't know how to address your problem with movesets though other than that any game with an emphasis on deliberate, dodge-centric combat will have this problem. I mean I was playing Dragon's Dogma the other day and the gryphon I'm fighting winds up it's huge wind blast attack, what do I do? I roll away and take cover behind a stone piller, because I know its' moveset. I don't know, to me this kind of complaint feels petty when directed at a specific game, and not a genre in general. What's the solution? To somehow create procedurally generated movesets? It doesn't work.

 

[Ten Foot Bunny]

Reading through this thread, about the only thing I've learned (or, rather, what's become more obvious to me) is that DS is one of the most polarizing games ever. What's with all the hostility between those who hold differing opinions about it? Personally, I won't play DS because I have a very low frustration tolerance and this game would only aggravate it. In other forums, I've been called a weak loser for that.

So what if someone thinks the game lacks atmosphere? They're entitled to that opinion. It's not like it flies in the face of scientific fact - nothing that can only be measured subjectively has a "right" or a "wrong." And if someone thinks the mobs lack the type of AI they find enjoyable elsewhere, even if the AI they dislike wasn't revolutionary, then that's also their opinion. Why does said individual need to justify that to others who demand proof that their subjective opinion holds up to public scrutiny, especially to those who already hold a contrary opinion.

If you want to tell me to shut up because I haven't played DS, then go ahead. I have thick skin. But think about this: the mudslinging going on in this thread certainly isn't going to change hearts or minds.

 

[chadachada123]

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 would HIGHLY recommend Demon's Souls. It easily has a much greater atmosphere than Dark Souls 1 or 2, with each world feeling unique and the bosses all having their own qualities that separate them. Dark Souls 1 (and 2, even) all have variations of Demon's Souls' Flamelurker, while Demon's Souls have a wide variety of bosses. Many of them are easy, but they all push the boundaries of what a boss can do.

There's even a boss that summons a player to act as the boss. Every boss feels special in their own way, far beyond what Dark Souls does.

Edit: My favorite part, though, is that Demon's Souls feels much more hopeless and depressing, an atmosphere fitting for the game.

 

[Vigormortis]

Just out of curiosity -
Why is it that any and every criticism levied against the Dark Souls series is met with some variation of one of the following:

> "Your complaint is stupid because it applies to every game ever."
> "Stop being a neophyte/noob/casual/loser and learn to play the game."
> "You obviously haven't played the game for hundreds of hours, therefor you don't get it."
> "You're just trolling."

I mean, seriously. Look no further than this thread for evidence of this kind of reaction.

And this forum says Halo, Half-Life, and Mass Effect fans are annoying...

Personally, I won't play DS because I have a very low frustration tolerance and this game would only aggravate it. In other forums, I've been called a weak loser for that.

I've been called FAR worse by Souls fans. Far worse.

So what if someone thinks the game lacks atmosphere? They're entitled to that opinion. It's not like it flies in the face of scientific fact - nothing that can only be measured subjectively has a "right" or a "wrong." And if someone thinks the mobs lack the type of AI they find enjoyable elsewhere, even if the AI they dislike wasn't revolutionary, then that's also their opinion. Why does said individual need to justify that to others who demand proof that their subjective opinion holds up to public scrutiny, especially to those who already hold a contrary opinion.

Good question(s). You're not likely to get a reasonable set of answers, though.

If you want to tell me to shut up because I haven't played DS, then go ahead. I have thick skin. But think about this: the mudslinging going on in this thread certainly isn't going to change hearts or minds.

Somehow I don't think they'll care...

 

[Drizzitdude]

I cannot tell if the op is just messing with us. Pretty much every rpg, no pretty much every game rather forces enemies to follow a predetermined set of moves for a variety of situations. Name an rpg where enemies literally have an unlimited skill/move set, it doesn't exist. Dragons will breath fire when your far away, enemies do sweeping attacks when you come at an angle or attempt to counter you when you swing, its all very common stuff so I don't see what the complaint is. What are you trying to compare the game to that makes this method seem "archaic"?

On the topic of enemies not patrolling that isn't really true. There are plenty of enemies that do have patrol paths but I will agree that they don't do anything aside from that. I can look past that though due to the fact it contributes to the high quality level design, also if you were a rotting corpse with no soul or memories and with nothing but other dead dudes around you what would you do? It isn't like you would hit the clubs or have a nice meal. You essentially a zombie, you would probably sit around and moan all day.

 

[Schmeiser]

Reading through this thread, about the only thing I've learned (or, rather, what's become more obvious to me) is that DS is one of the most polarizing games ever. What's with all the hostility between those who hold differing opinions about it? Personally, I won't play DS because I have a very low frustration tolerance and this game would only aggravate it. In other forums, I've been called a weak loser for that.

So what if someone thinks the game lacks atmosphere? They're entitled to that opinion. It's not like it flies in the face of scientific fact - nothing that can only be measured subjectively has a "right" or a "wrong." And if someone thinks the mobs lack the type of AI they find enjoyable elsewhere, even if the AI they dislike wasn't revolutionary, then that's also their opinion. Why does said individual need to justify that to others who demand proof that their subjective opinion holds up to public scrutiny, especially to those who already hold a contrary opinion.

If you want to tell me to shut up because I haven't played DS, then go ahead. I have thick skin. But think about this: the mudslinging going on in this thread certainly isn't going to change hearts or minds.

Sooo where did you get all this from, it's just two sides debating their opinions. OP made a vague statement that didn't make much sense and calls a game archaic that's actually a breeze of fresh air in gaming. And really who cares if you played DS or not, and he made a post on a forum ofcourse he needs to justify or give us something to back his shit up if not then why bother posting in the first place? Nice effort though

 

[Ten Foot Bunny]

Sooo where did you get all this from, it's just two sides debating their opinions. OP made a vague statement that didn't make much sense and calls a game archaic that's actually a breeze of fresh air in gaming. And really who cares if you played DS or not, and he made a post on a forum ofcourse he needs to justify or give us something to back his shit up if not then why bother posting in the first place? Nice effort though

Just an "effort," eh? Well, your post proved exactly what I was talking about in my earlier one. How on earth can the OP provide objective proof to back up their subjective opinion? Where is this mythical, scientifically obtained data that provides legitimacy to the OP's opinion and grants him the right to share it on a forum? Should he have simply kept his mouth shut without having such proof?

YOU think DS is a breath of fresh air, the OP does not. This doesn't automatically make either one of you correct or the end-all-be-all authority on the game's quality.

Regarding your requirement that the OP validate his opinion with proof, remember this is a casual internet forum about video games, not a doctoral dissertation.

------------------------------------

EDIT - if this is, as you say, "just two sides debating their opinions," how is it at all fair to demand objective proof of something that can only be measured subjectively (as I asked in my earlier post)? That does nothing but set the OP up for failure since no proof exists. Nobody can debate anything if one side requires proof that's inherently unobtainable due to the nature of the subject at hand.

 

[IceForce]

Just out of curiosity -
Why is it that any and every criticism levied against the Dark Souls series is met with some variation of one of the following:

> "Your complaint is stupid because it applies to every game ever."
> "Stop being a neophyte/noob/casual/loser and learn to play the game."
> "You obviously haven't played the game for hundreds of hours, therefor you don't get it."
> "You're just trolling."

I mean, seriously. Look no further than this thread for evidence of this kind of reaction.

And this forum says Halo, Half-Life, and Mass Effect fans are annoying...

I completely agree.

Souls fans who act like that, don't seem to realize that they're only alienating themselves.

No way would I play this game series. Not in a million years. I have the fans to thank for that.

Personally, I won't play DS because I have a very low frustration tolerance and this game would only aggravate it.

Also because of this.

 

[IceForce]

the mudslinging going on in this thread certainly isn't going to change hearts or minds.

Sooo where did you get all this from, it's just two sides debating their opinions.

Yes, two sides debating their opinions ... and getting warnings for it.

Hence: Mudslinging.

 

[Schmeiser]

Sooo where did you get all this from, it's just two sides debating their opinions. OP made a vague statement that didn't make much sense and calls a game archaic that's actually a breeze of fresh air in gaming. And really who cares if you played DS or not, and he made a post on a forum ofcourse he needs to justify or give us something to back his shit up if not then why bother posting in the first place? Nice effort though

Just an "effort," eh? Well, your post proved exactly what I was talking about in my earlier one. How on earth can the OP provide objective proof to back up their subjective opinion? Where is this mythical, scientifically obtained data that provides legitimacy to the OP's opinion and grants him the right to share it on a forum? Should he have simply kept his mouth shut without having such proof?

YOU think DS is a breath of fresh air, the OP does not. This doesn't automatically make either one of you correct or the end-all-be-all authority on the game's quality.

Regarding your requirement that the OP validate his opinion with proof, remember this is a casual internet forum about video games, not a doctoral dissertation.

------------------------------------

EDIT - if this is, as you say, "just two sides debating their opinions," how is it at all fair to demand objective proof of something that can only be measured subjectively (as I asked in my earlier post)? That does nothing but set the OP up for failure since no proof exists. Nobody can debate anything if one side requires proof that's inherently unobtainable due to the nature of the subject at hand.

Hmmm didn't think of it that way, yes i think you are right. We could debate how useful his post was or were his intentions noble but in the end game it does not matter I can live with people having different opinions to mine. I just recently started playing DS for the first time and i love the shit out of this game so i might be a bit fanboyish in my posts

 

[endtherapture]

I cannot tell if the op is just messing with us. Pretty much every rpg, no pretty much every game rather forces enemies to follow a predetermined set of moves for a variety of situations. Name an rpg where enemies literally have an unlimited skill/move set, it doesn't exist. Dragons will breath fire when your far away, enemies do sweeping attacks when you come at an angle or attempt to counter you when you swing, its all very common stuff so I don't see what the complaint is. What are you trying to compare the game to that makes this method seem "archaic"?

On the topic of enemies not patrolling that isn't really true. There are plenty of enemies that do have patrol paths but I will agree that they don't do anything aside from that. I can look past that though due to the fact it contributes to the high quality level design, also if you were a rotting corpse with no soul or memories and with nothing but other dead dudes around you what would you do? It isn't like you would hit the clubs or have a nice meal. You essentially a zombie, you would probably sit around and moan all day.

If we're looking at RPGs - take Dragons Age, Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale - the enemies have AI that can react to what you're doing - they have the same skill set as you and will use those abilities reactively - for example to take out your weak mages first, so you have to counter and manage the agro for example, as well as engaging in spell battles etc. These enemies do feel like actual living beings and not very gamey.

 

[default]

Hoooooo boy, okey dokie.

I'm a huge Dark Souls fan. 400+ hours in the first game and thoroughly enjoying the second, and I'm the first person to say that the games have flaws. LOTS of flaws. But I love them for those flaws, not despite them. The game feels rough and raw and gamey. I always say that Dark Souls is basically an NES game wrapped in a modern skin. It's not a super organic and dynamic shiny corridor to walk down like a lot of games try to be these days. It's both more and less than that at the same time.

It's slow and brutal and broody and methodic. You have a very limited, minimalist moveset to work with and adapt around. No +5 Cleave attack that bleeds enemies on a 2 second cooldown. Enemies and NPCs are raw and retro-feeling. They attack and move like hollow robots and if you're clever you can trick them into traps. You get lost and frustrated and often have no clue what the fuck to do or where to go. Your favourite weapons end up sucking in late-game because you didn't level up in the right way or you come across an area that counters your armour build. It forces you to stop and think and plan, not just bash your way through like nearly every other action game out there.

It's not meant to be for everyone, but you're totally entitled to your opinion man. But I don't want Dark Souls to be different. I don't want it to be like every other game. Dark Souls does what it does, and you either like it or don't. I fucking love it personally, but I'm never going to say that you have to as well. Oh sure, I might try and show you why I think it's great, if only because I want to share it. I probably went a bit overboard with this reply, but I really do love this series.

 

[Bombiz]

No way would I play this game series. Not in a million years. I have the fans to thank for that.

Can you explain this to me? I never got why people could stop/never enjoy a thing just because of it's fans. mIt just make no sense to me. It would be like me saying oh there are people on this form I don't like cause reasons, better stop using coming to the escapist then.
It just feels too much like quitting to me. Like your letting them warp your perspective of [thing].
Don't get me wrong though. If you truly don't like Souls games then you shouldn't play it. just don't make one of the main reasons you don't play it "the fan base".

 

[Erttheking]

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 personally have to disagree with that. One of the strongest points about Dark Souls is that they ooze atmosphere. Drop me off in a random area and I'll know which one it is within fifteen seconds because they all have a unique feel to it. The world as a whole has this dying feeling to it, like it used to be bright and thriving but everything got swept away. The world itself feels like its on life support.

As for characters, I'll admit that the game takes a minimalistic route to storytelling and that a lot of looking is required to find out about the characters. If that's a deal breaker for you, that's perfectly understandable, but there are a LOT of interesting characters. I'd highly recommend looking up the "Prepare to Cry" youtube series if you get the chance.

OT: I suppose that Dark Souls enemies CAN feel rather robotic at times, but it's part of the games limitations. It's a niche game being sold to a niche audience, it's got a limited budget and probably couldn't afford super fancy A.I.s a la Crysis. Plus, well, show me a game where this isn't the case. The list will probably be very short.

 

[Fox12]

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 still think the story itself is very lacking, but it is there. Be prepared to have a lot of fans tell you that it's in the lore, which now that I know and understand, I must admit is pretty deep and interesting. It makes the game much more fun for me to play this second time around.

But does the game teach you the lore as you play it? If not, where on earth do the developers expect you to learn it from? I love the game, but it would be nice if you could find old documents or characters who slowly teach you things about the world as you progress. Maybe the game does have that, and I just haven't found any of it yet.

OP: I actually found the enemies more adaptive to my attacks. If I repeated an attack multiple times, a lot of enemies would surprise me, and I'd have to change my strategy. It also helps that most enemies have completely different fighting styles, forcing me to quickly adapt. After finishing Upper Undead Burg, with its large quantity of hulking, slow enemies, I was caught completely off guard by the faster dogs and thieves in Lower Undead Burg, who would actually use tactics to defeat me. When I saw three thieves fanning out in different directions, darting past cover, surrounding me, and throwing knives, I knew that the name of the game had changed completely.

 

[michael87cn]

The irony about this thread is, Demons Souls, Dark Souls are popular BECAUSE their combat system is so good. I think it could be improved, sure, but it's pretty much a unique gems in a sea of awful.

 

[lapan]

This is one of the keys reasons why I also feel that Dark Souls 2 is frequently commented on as being so much easier than Demon's Souls and Dark Souls 1.

I don't get how people feel that way. I played both other games, and DaS2 felt harder than both of them

. almost no healing items at the start, no instant regeneration
. bosses are either more aggressive or have more enemies in general
. much more oneshot-kill moves (some of those got nerfed though)
. cruel level design (Shrine of Amana if you are playing melee. also somewhat nerfed by now.)
. poison hurts a lot more

 

[Vigormortis]

Souls fans who act like that, don't seem to realize that they're only alienating themselves.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not implying this is true for every Souls fan out there. I have plenty of friends/associates that like or love the series. Some of whom have been non-stop gushing about Souls 2 since release. However, none of them are anywhere near as obnoxious about it as I've been seeing in this and other forums.

When faced with similar criticisms about the series, these friends and associates of mine will often disagree - and at times even agree - on the validity of those criticisms, just as some have done here. But the key difference between them and some of the responses we're seeing is that they're not jerks about.

It's fine if someone wants to disagree about another's opinion. But don't pretend like that other person is "wrong". And definitely don't be mean or rude about your disagreement. That kind of reaction serves no one and only serves to intensify the animosity between fans and non-fans.

No way would I play this game series. Not in a million years. I have the fans to thank for that.

This has never really been the case for me. I tend to not let a particular thing's fanbase ruin the experience for me. From my perspective, the fanbase and the piece of media in question are two separate entities.

Now, admittedly, sometimes the type of fanbase a piece of media has is indicative of the kind of media it is. But generally speaking, the two are disparate.

As for the Souls series, I've tried both Dark Souls 1 and Dark Souls 2. Neither has appealed to me. As much as some gush over the combat and movement systems, they feel awkward and tedious to me.

I fully understand why the fans love it, but it's just not for me.