To get things out of the way, I believe Demon's Souls to be superior to Dark Souls in every way. From the level design, atmosphere, combat etc, to the actual difficulty and challenge. By the latter, I mostly mean the legitimacy and fairness of challenge.
First of all, while Dark Souls may be an open world that's fully connected - I feel that this is just an illusion. Dark Souls is a linear game that's disguised as an open world experience. The metroidvania format pretty much means that you only have a handful of paths you can go through and you are actually restricted from progressing without going through necessary dungeons and finding necessary items.
In Demon's Souls, however, the entire game is already open to you. The central hub, Nexus, already connects all the worlds you can go to and nothing actually forbids you from entering all these areas apart from the challenge and difficulty. You could complete half of Stonefang, then come back and visit the Valley of Defilement, then take a visit to Latria, come back to Stonefang etc etc. There were always options and I was never actually limited by general world design. On paper, the connected world of Dark Souls sounds more free and just better, but in practice I found the hub design of the Nexus far more liberating.
The second thing I would like to adress is the challenge. Before I start complaining, I would point out that the majority of hype about the difficulty of both games is grotesquely over-exaggerated and inflated. Mostly I feel that it is done by the very people who've managed to complete the game and they do it for the sole purpose of further glorifying their achievement.
With that said, Demon's Souls was much more fair when it came to the difficulty and when I died, I always felt that it was more or less my fault. However, in Dark Souls, many times when I died I felt cheated. I felt like it wasn't really my fault and I was tricked by the game.
Trial and death is not a valid from of difficulty. In Demons, the dangers were more or less predictable and I was told of the ''rules'' of the fight before actually dying. In Dark, I would have to die to learn the ''rules''. The best example I could give is the first encounter with the Mimic in the Sen Fortress. Before this moment, the game had never given me any reason to suspect that the chests might be rigged. Even in the very room where the mimic is, there is nothing that points to danger - I only know of the danger after I had activated the trap and I think it is unfair that I have to die to learn the lesson. Demon's never required me to die to learn from my mistakes.
For these reasons, I feel that a part of Dark Souls difficulty is artificially inflated for the sole reason of living up to the reputation of its predecessor - that this game is hard and we'll show you why.
I don't have much to say about the combat, but I felt it was more precise in Demon's.
TLDR - use Demon's as a template. It's better.
What do you guys think, I'll probably get some flak for putting Demon's higher on the pedestal, but oh well.
First of all, while Dark Souls may be an open world that's fully connected - I feel that this is just an illusion. Dark Souls is a linear game that's disguised as an open world experience. The metroidvania format pretty much means that you only have a handful of paths you can go through and you are actually restricted from progressing without going through necessary dungeons and finding necessary items.
In Demon's Souls, however, the entire game is already open to you. The central hub, Nexus, already connects all the worlds you can go to and nothing actually forbids you from entering all these areas apart from the challenge and difficulty. You could complete half of Stonefang, then come back and visit the Valley of Defilement, then take a visit to Latria, come back to Stonefang etc etc. There were always options and I was never actually limited by general world design. On paper, the connected world of Dark Souls sounds more free and just better, but in practice I found the hub design of the Nexus far more liberating.
The second thing I would like to adress is the challenge. Before I start complaining, I would point out that the majority of hype about the difficulty of both games is grotesquely over-exaggerated and inflated. Mostly I feel that it is done by the very people who've managed to complete the game and they do it for the sole purpose of further glorifying their achievement.
With that said, Demon's Souls was much more fair when it came to the difficulty and when I died, I always felt that it was more or less my fault. However, in Dark Souls, many times when I died I felt cheated. I felt like it wasn't really my fault and I was tricked by the game.
Trial and death is not a valid from of difficulty. In Demons, the dangers were more or less predictable and I was told of the ''rules'' of the fight before actually dying. In Dark, I would have to die to learn the ''rules''. The best example I could give is the first encounter with the Mimic in the Sen Fortress. Before this moment, the game had never given me any reason to suspect that the chests might be rigged. Even in the very room where the mimic is, there is nothing that points to danger - I only know of the danger after I had activated the trap and I think it is unfair that I have to die to learn the lesson. Demon's never required me to die to learn from my mistakes.
For these reasons, I feel that a part of Dark Souls difficulty is artificially inflated for the sole reason of living up to the reputation of its predecessor - that this game is hard and we'll show you why.
I don't have much to say about the combat, but I felt it was more precise in Demon's.
TLDR - use Demon's as a template. It's better.
What do you guys think, I'll probably get some flak for putting Demon's higher on the pedestal, but oh well.
