-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Dark Souls 1 seems to be looked upon fondly? I can't help but criticise it for all its flaws.
- Thread starter Much
- Start date
Bloodborne was my first Souls game. Got the platinum, played through The Old Hunters, and proclaimed it to be one of the greatest games I ever played. From there I played through everything else... DeS, DkS1 PtDE + dsfix, SotFS, and DkS3. Demon's and Dark Souls 1 stood out to me as the best of the bunch, up there with Bloodborne in my mind. With Remastered, I gained an even greater appreciation for it. Areas I hated or struggled with before (Demon Ruins, Lost Izalith, The Depths) were way more fun this time since I had gained a lot of knowledge about the series, how to deal with mobs, etc. I enjoyed it so much this time that I started with a new character, and took that one to NG+3.
Afterwards, I started playing Bloodborne again from scratch, and... it's still really good, but it's not really doing it for me like it did the first time. I feel like that game makes one of the strongest first impressions due to its atmosphere and design, but falls short in terms of build variety. If I look at it as a straight action game with light RPG overtones, that's cool, but now that I have a much better understanding of these games, I can't really directly compare it to the proper Souls titles.
All that being said, I wouldn't mind a Bloodborne Remastered next generation, bringing the framerate up to 60, giving us either native or close to 4K resolution, better load times, and throwing in some QoL improvements too (like warping directly around instead of having to return to the Hunter's Dream every time).
Edit: Oh, and it's probably a good thing I didn't read the OP in detail before writing this. It just comes off as a lot of venting and some particularly ridiculous hyperbole.
Afterwards, I started playing Bloodborne again from scratch, and... it's still really good, but it's not really doing it for me like it did the first time. I feel like that game makes one of the strongest first impressions due to its atmosphere and design, but falls short in terms of build variety. If I look at it as a straight action game with light RPG overtones, that's cool, but now that I have a much better understanding of these games, I can't really directly compare it to the proper Souls titles.
All that being said, I wouldn't mind a Bloodborne Remastered next generation, bringing the framerate up to 60, giving us either native or close to 4K resolution, better load times, and throwing in some QoL improvements too (like warping directly around instead of having to return to the Hunter's Dream every time).
Edit: Oh, and it's probably a good thing I didn't read the OP in detail before writing this. It just comes off as a lot of venting and some particularly ridiculous hyperbole.
Last edited:
The level design is ok, not mind blowing, but the travel system sucks. You spend waaaay too much time backtracking and even after getting the Lordvessel, the limited number of warp locations and weird things like the inability to warp from some locations is just dumb. It's like they wanted to add some weird artificial difficulty or length to the game, but it's just annoying.
The worst part about the level design is the amount of ledges and cliffs that you are forced to fight on or walk on in the dark. There is just waaay to much of that cheap stuff in certain places.
Dark Souls 2 has a better travel system, but the level design was a bit duller. DS3 is prob the most fun overall, to me, but seems easier.
While it probably hasn't aged well, I enjoyed Demons' Souls more than all of them. I think it definitely had the best level design and atmosphere.
The worst part about the level design is the amount of ledges and cliffs that you are forced to fight on or walk on in the dark. There is just waaay to much of that cheap stuff in certain places.
Dark Souls 2 has a better travel system, but the level design was a bit duller. DS3 is prob the most fun overall, to me, but seems easier.
While it probably hasn't aged well, I enjoyed Demons' Souls more than all of them. I think it definitely had the best level design and atmosphere.
Last edited:
Not after Anor Londo. OP is definitely right about that. Sure the world is put together really well, but some of the actual level design in the last half of the game is just bad.
I still don't understand why you have such an issue with Duke's Archives. It's not even that particularly difficult to navigate. Once you exit the cell, you have only 2 paths (up and down the big stairs), downstairs is a dead end. Then you climb a long ladder and arrive at the library area. You have to figure out how the rotating staircase work, sure, but it's not rocket science. Once you do that everything clicks. And the bonfire isn't especially out of reach. It's a great level, requiring the player to use their wits to navigate, with tough enemies that hit pretty hard (and the Channelers sure are annoying), but this idea that it's near-impossible to figure out without a Youtube video or something, is really bizarre.
i read a little about the op but man that title is so fucking, i dont know... like "OH LOOK AT ME I DONT LIKE THE GAME THAT EVERYBODY ELSE DOES!!"
i have started dark souls several times, never finished, i used to hate on it a lot because i couldnt believe people were losing their minds for the combat and stuff when i feel games like dragons dogma had so much better combat
but i dont know, ds has some charm that makes stand out
i hope i finish it with the switch version once and for all
i have started dark souls several times, never finished, i used to hate on it a lot because i couldnt believe people were losing their minds for the combat and stuff when i feel games like dragons dogma had so much better combat
but i dont know, ds has some charm that makes stand out
i hope i finish it with the switch version once and for all
I'm absolutely with you OP.
I have played the "Prepare to die"-Edition on PC in year 2013. Until now, after playing all soulsborne games (except Demons Souls), i was the opinion Dark Souls 1 is the best Dark Souls game.
But now after playing the remaster I have to say it's the worst soulsborne game for me. Surely a great game, but not the best of this series.
I'm the same opinion the game get worse after Anor Londo regarding some areas: Lost Izalith, Demon Ruins, Duke Archives, Crystal Cave, Tomb of the Giants.
And I disliked bosses like Bed of Chaos, Ceaseless Discharge, Capra Demon for examples. For me the second half of the game felt like rushed.
Then I disliked fast travel. The bonfire warp System of the Sequels was more comfortable for me.
My ranking: BB -> DS3 -> DS2 -> DS1
I have played the "Prepare to die"-Edition on PC in year 2013. Until now, after playing all soulsborne games (except Demons Souls), i was the opinion Dark Souls 1 is the best Dark Souls game.
But now after playing the remaster I have to say it's the worst soulsborne game for me. Surely a great game, but not the best of this series.
I'm the same opinion the game get worse after Anor Londo regarding some areas: Lost Izalith, Demon Ruins, Duke Archives, Crystal Cave, Tomb of the Giants.
And I disliked bosses like Bed of Chaos, Ceaseless Discharge, Capra Demon for examples. For me the second half of the game felt like rushed.
Then I disliked fast travel. The bonfire warp System of the Sequels was more comfortable for me.
My ranking: BB -> DS3 -> DS2 -> DS1
I can definitely see where you're coming from with the stiff movement. This must be quite jarring after experiencing the more fluid motions of Bloodborne and Dark Souls 3.
The level design takes a bit of a nosedive after Anor Londo, that's true as well. For me, though, the world design in this game was so great that I didn't mind the more linear levels.
The level design takes a bit of a nosedive after Anor Londo, that's true as well. For me, though, the world design in this game was so great that I didn't mind the more linear levels.
The beauty of the estus is that you have to balance the need to heal with the risk of getting hit while standing still. That ads tension, especially in boss fights. Instant heal while walking around would negate this and would be really lame. But then again some people want a "very easy" difficulty anyway...
I really enjoyed the first half but definitely felt a dip in the level design of the second half. I feel like people are wooed by the fact that the world is so interconnected that they forget to rate the areas by themselves and there are definitely areas that drag this game down overall.
OP
OP
I've played for roughly 20 hours now, and I'm not rushing. I haven't felt robbed of a euphoric feeling of finding the next location in the game when I've only used a guide twice. Believe or not, I really enjoyed Dark Souls 1, but I don't always have time to spend so long to find the next area when I've already spent so long in one location already.
OP
OP
Oh please, can you stop being so condescending? There's nothing beautiful about taking estus in this game, especially when dodging enemy hits and hit registering is less reliable than the later games. Come on, this thread has shown clearly that people will put this game on a pedestal and not judge it for its flaws. Why can one not do this with Dark Souls? I've said I really enjoyed the first game, but it isn't flawed.
Demons souls was my first. Played at launch. Loved every bit. Played ds1 af launch also, Nothing compared to the feeling of playing through ds1 the first time. Level design, lore, NPC's and bosses all fantastic. Easily best in series. Yes it has its faults specifically later stages, and the newer souls have some QOL improvements, but it's still the best. Best souls level design by a country mile and the fact you couldn't fast travel from the beginning forced the devs to craft an intriguing world
We have it up, Impossible for us to go back to it after BB/DS3..... Just feels so ancient the mechanics, Even small details like no ring or anything to remove phantom glow.
OP
OP
Well, if you read all of the OP, I do actually really like the game. I can criticise it though.
It's easily the worst game of DeDaBorne.
There's so much reliance on invisible pathways, bosses that the game acknowledges are bullshit by retaining your progress with arbitrary unwinnable attack patterns (Bed of Chaos), and much, much more lameness.
It's also among the shortest games in the series with some of the shortest DLC. That said, the DLC is extremely high quality relative to the campaign.
There's so much reliance on invisible pathways, bosses that the game acknowledges are bullshit by retaining your progress with arbitrary unwinnable attack patterns (Bed of Chaos), and much, much more lameness.
It's also among the shortest games in the series with some of the shortest DLC. That said, the DLC is extremely high quality relative to the campaign.
Condescending? After your high horse op and posts?
Dark Souls has flaws and i even could agree with some of your points but your attitude doesn't help your arguments. Sure, there are souls diehards who will praise
OP
OP
" But then again some people want a "very easy" difficulty anyway..."
That's the condescending part. Criticising game design doesn't mean I think it's difficult.
They're usually bait lol. There are so many <criticize liked game> bait threads on Era I just roll my eyes at topics like these.
Do some of those threads have legitimate complaints? Sure. But this one isn't very convincing.
OP
OP
Really? I think I made some good arguments that have some basis. For crying out loud, I said the former half of the game is exceptional, but the latter half ain't as great as people claim. It isn't a 'bait' thread to criticise something where it begins to fall short. I feel like some people haven't even read the OP before replying.
XD.
Yeah, DS2 might not be for you.
I will defend Dark Souls until I die, it's not perfect yes but still a timeless masterpiece.
Also I completely disagree with level design part, Dark Souls has the best level design I've seen in a game other than Symphony of the Night.
Please name ONE game that has a better level design than Dark Souls 1 (that's not SOTN of course)
Also I completely disagree with level design part, Dark Souls has the best level design I've seen in a game other than Symphony of the Night.
Please name ONE game that has a better level design than Dark Souls 1 (that's not SOTN of course)
It's the most inconsistent Soulsbourne game. The highs are very high but the lows are very low. Overall it's just as good as Demons and Souls 2+3. All four have their strenghts and weaknesses. Bloodborne is the best. That game is nearly perfect.
This, I was honestly stunned when OP said that, like is there any other 3D game with a better level design out there?
Also, this is just opinion but I think the later half of Dark Souls got worse because of the fast travel unlock, just like how Dark Souls 2 and 3 had fast travel from the start and they aren't nearly as brilliant as Dark Souls 1, fast travel is just not good for your level design.
Last edited:
OP
OP
Yeah, sorry. I retracted my hyperbolic statement on that. It's masterful up to and including Anor Londo, but not after. Hope that clears it up.
Ah I see.
Well I'd argue it's because of A) budget, honestly this game doesn't have a lot of budget since no one expected it to be a hit and B) fast travel (lord vessel), now player can finally fast travel they don't have to come up with brilliant shortcuts anymore or even bother connecting one area to another, notice how all the end game areas ended with a big dead end and requires you to warp out of it via a bonfire, there's literally no other way to get out. Bed of Chaos, Four King, Nito and Seath's boss room are all dead ends, and your only way out is to fast travel. This barely happened in the first half of the game, in fact I can only think of one (Capra Demon).
Last edited:
That makes me think; why didn't they let players leave Tomb of the Giants via the coffin, like how you enter from the Catacombs if you join the covenant?
Playing through Dark Souls Remastered at the minute. It's my fourth attempt at playing the game but it's substantially the most progress I've ever made.
Currently in New Londo, having already done Anor Londo, Dukes Archives, Lost Izalieth and the Catacombs.. so I think I'm approaching the end game.
I think the game is an all time classic, but Anor Londo absolutely forms a line in the sand between the first and second halves of the game. Some of the locations after Anor Londo are unquestionably poorer and less interesting than the first half. Honestly, some of the second half feels like it may as well be a boss rush.. and not even a particularly difficult one. Despite this being the first time I've ever gone any further than Anor Londo, I seem to have done it in half the time and probably with half the struggle. Even some of the notoriously shitty and pain in the arse bosses like the Bed of Chaos have taken me no more than a handful of re-tries to beat.. and that's going in mostly blind. There are bosses in the first game half of the game that I have never beaten without summoned help.
I also feel like the first half of the game has this constant level of experimentation of equipment and weaponry that I've not experienced in the second half. I've managed to finish what I'm assuming is the majority of the second half of the game with pretty much the exact same armour and weaponry set that I left Anor Londo with (possibly earlier actually.. maybe even Sens Fortress).
Currently in New Londo, having already done Anor Londo, Dukes Archives, Lost Izalieth and the Catacombs.. so I think I'm approaching the end game.
I think the game is an all time classic, but Anor Londo absolutely forms a line in the sand between the first and second halves of the game. Some of the locations after Anor Londo are unquestionably poorer and less interesting than the first half. Honestly, some of the second half feels like it may as well be a boss rush.. and not even a particularly difficult one. Despite this being the first time I've ever gone any further than Anor Londo, I seem to have done it in half the time and probably with half the struggle. Even some of the notoriously shitty and pain in the arse bosses like the Bed of Chaos have taken me no more than a handful of re-tries to beat.. and that's going in mostly blind. There are bosses in the first game half of the game that I have never beaten without summoned help.
I also feel like the first half of the game has this constant level of experimentation of equipment and weaponry that I've not experienced in the second half. I've managed to finish what I'm assuming is the majority of the second half of the game with pretty much the exact same armour and weaponry set that I left Anor Londo with (possibly earlier actually.. maybe even Sens Fortress).
OP
OP
Thank you. This is the discussion I wanted. It's why I posted this thread. You and others have helped me see what I've been wrong about, and while I still think some areas are bad, I can see that I was being a bit hyperbolic on some areas. Some other posters haven't helped and have only resorted to crirticism as me not liking the game and being bad at it.
My first dark souls game wasn't the original, so I might be a little bias with this one. I have always thought that DS1 is one half of a good game. After Anor Londo the game just becomes rather mediocre and a bit of a slog to play. DS1 is also really easy, much easier than any other DS game by far. All though, at least it isn't as easy as the mindless snore fest that DeS was.
Definitely still a good game, but totally overrated in my eyes.
Definitely still a good game, but totally overrated in my eyes.
No game is perfect, DeS and DS1 are the best in the whole series imo, the world design, music and bosses were soo good, sure there are some bad areas but what game doesn't.
You mean Lost Izalith? That's one unfinished area, and I don't recall anything broken or glitchy. It seems like some people don't remember the game at all.
C'mon that is the whole point of the Estus animation. It's there to stress you out and take risks.
That really doesn't happen much. The only times from my memory that you are forced to fight on a narrow ledge or beam are Blighttown, Sen's Fortress, Anor Londo rafters, Anor Londo archers, and Crystal Cave (EDIT: oh, and Kiln). Tomb of the Giants and Chasm of the Abyss are dark, but you're not really pushed into danger of falling off (unless you get kicked by that one skeleton who hides behind a corner. But he's hilarious.). I guess if you try to sprint through some areas?
Invisible paths are only in one tiny area of one level, though. And DS1's bosses have the simplest patterns in the series (yes bed of chaos is bad, though). As for the length, Bloodborne is shorter, and it doesn't really get shit on for that, so I won't deduct from DS1 for that reason.
I like it rough. Loved Dark Souls back then. The sense of wonder was a big part of the experience, the level design helped a lot.
I have to agree, that the second half wasn't as good as the first.
I have to agree, that the second half wasn't as good as the first.
There's also so much shortcuts you can't implement. At the second half the map of Dark Souls is so big you can't interconnect it anymore like the first half.
I dunno if there's also other issues with it, like tech issues? Bloodborne and Dark Souls 3 also haf scrapped connections between areas (scrapped shortcut elevator at Cathedral Ward, scrapped shortcut from Smouldering Lake to Irithyll where Alva invades...).
I dunno if there's also other issues with it, like tech issues? Bloodborne and Dark Souls 3 also haf scrapped connections between areas (scrapped shortcut elevator at Cathedral Ward, scrapped shortcut from Smouldering Lake to Irithyll where Alva invades...).
OP
OP
The centipede demon broke on me constantly with crap camera and then straight up got stuck in the geometry and let me pass.
The demon ruins/lost izalith area just feels lacking in any sort of QA. Enemy placement is so lazy it feels like a debug room.
No worries fam
Dark Souls is a very beloved game (it's also my favorite game of all time), so yeah it's gonna be quite difficult to have some good discussion about its flaws and bad designs.
Believe it or not there were a lot more people criticizing Dark Souls' flaws back then, no one ever thought the game is perfect. It was precisely after Dark Souls 2 came out that people realized just how well designed and unique Dark Souls 1 truly is, and how stupid and insignificance all of our criticism on DS1 look in comparison to Dark Souls 2.
It is precisely Dark Souls 2 that makes Dark Souls 1 so incredibly beloved, it was already beloved yes, but it's was Dark Souls 2 that made us put it on a pedestal, and every time there's a new Souls game failed to top Dark Souls 1 people put it on an even more special place in their heart. To be honest with you, I did the same.
(I'm talking about the general Souls community of course, not just GAF & Era's opinion, most Gaffers don't even know Souls games all that well before Bloodborne.)
I honestly expected Bloodborne to top Dark Souls but that game turned out to have so many design flaws (blood gem, build variety, healing system, fast travel system, weapon variety, combat depth etc.) and barely decent level design compared to Demon's Souls and Dark Souls 1. It was honestly a disappointing game for me before the Old Hunters DLC came out.
Last edited:
Dark Souls is a great concept and gets a lot of things right, but it's also a very janky experience. Animations are clunky. Hit detection is very poor thanks to hitboxes that seem to have little to do with your effective shape. There are areas designed greatly, while others are just cheap, eg. when the game hides an enemy after a blind corner: that's just fucking with your users. The AI is bad, and while you could argue it's a choice so you can outsmart it constantly, it's not a quality feature that supposedly menacing enemies kill themselves because they aren't smart enough not to charge you next to a ledge. Like, even if their attack goes successfully, they die, so they should be smarter than that. And from a technical standpoint, it's very far from the era's standards. Plus not being able to pause is a very pointless limitation that only leads to frustration. Sure, hardcore gaming experience, but games don't exist in a vacuum: if I have a sudden work call or something I'd be fine not having to lose half an hour progress because "lol you can't pause git gud".
But for all its shortcomings, it's a fascinating experience in many ways. A very interesting world, fascinating lore, a gameplay that can be satisfying despite the clunkiness, and some real difficulty. It is mainly a very cool concept, remembered fondly because of the design, the atmosphere, the lore, the ideas behind it, the depth of the combat and class system, the unrelentless difficulty for anyone who never played such a game before. It is, however, a deeply flawed game in many aspects, both technical and in game design. It's far from those "perfect" gameplay formulas like Doom or Super Mario Bros. that just "feel right" and correct in everything. Of course, the game is a very unique experience and many are inclined to look beyond those flaws. It happens with many Japanese games that are a bit of a technical mess with a lot of things that wouldn't fly if from Ubisoft or EA (see the Dynasty Warriors games for a good example), they are however praised because of the uniqueness, the concepts, the atmosphere, etc.. That's the case with Dark Souls that can be freely considered a masterpiece if you will, but it has many glaring flaws.
But for all its shortcomings, it's a fascinating experience in many ways. A very interesting world, fascinating lore, a gameplay that can be satisfying despite the clunkiness, and some real difficulty. It is mainly a very cool concept, remembered fondly because of the design, the atmosphere, the lore, the ideas behind it, the depth of the combat and class system, the unrelentless difficulty for anyone who never played such a game before. It is, however, a deeply flawed game in many aspects, both technical and in game design. It's far from those "perfect" gameplay formulas like Doom or Super Mario Bros. that just "feel right" and correct in everything. Of course, the game is a very unique experience and many are inclined to look beyond those flaws. It happens with many Japanese games that are a bit of a technical mess with a lot of things that wouldn't fly if from Ubisoft or EA (see the Dynasty Warriors games for a good example), they are however praised because of the uniqueness, the concepts, the atmosphere, etc.. That's the case with Dark Souls that can be freely considered a masterpiece if you will, but it has many glaring flaws.
If I had to rank the areas in terms of level design, I'd probably go:
Catacombs
Darkroot
Undead Burg/Parish
Oolacile Township
Anor Londo
Painted World
Blighttown
New Londo
The Depths
For areas that are fun and engaging to explore, with great level design. Then, for areas that are still good, but are either a bit short, or quite linear:
Sen's
Duke's Archives
Oolacile Sanctuary
Kiln
Firelink
Valley of the Drakes
Crystal Cave
Then you get the garbage areas, so:
Lost Izalith
Chasm of the Abyss
Demon Ruins
I don't know where to put TotG, because I think it's a well designed area, but the darkness spoils it. It's not that the darkness makes it difficult, but if that level was as bright as the Catacombs, it would probably go down as one of the universal favourites in the series.
Catacombs
Darkroot
Undead Burg/Parish
Oolacile Township
Anor Londo
Painted World
Blighttown
New Londo
The Depths
For areas that are fun and engaging to explore, with great level design. Then, for areas that are still good, but are either a bit short, or quite linear:
Sen's
Duke's Archives
Oolacile Sanctuary
Kiln
Firelink
Valley of the Drakes
Crystal Cave
Then you get the garbage areas, so:
Lost Izalith
Chasm of the Abyss
Demon Ruins
I don't know where to put TotG, because I think it's a well designed area, but the darkness spoils it. It's not that the darkness makes it difficult, but if that level was as bright as the Catacombs, it would probably go down as one of the universal favourites in the series.
Yeah the open areas of the Ruins/Izalith with the Taurus perfectly lined, or the same case with the Dragon butts, feels like they didn't even started to position the enemies through the map.
I played Dark Souls recently for the first time. I've also played DS3 and Bloodborne.
The main things I found I didn't like about Dark Souls is the enemy encounter design. The movesets themselves aren't tricky to deal with, but the game has a habit of putting you in tiny spaces with enemies and the environment design becomes the problem to overcome than the enemy itself. Perfect example being that lead up to the archers in Anor Londo, tight balconies and scaffolding with only room for one person to stand on. It's kinda bullshit, and I agree with the OP in that regard.
Obviously the latter half of the game is rushed, we all know about that already.
For me the game is designed to be frustrating rather than challenging. An early example of this is when I got to the poison swamp at the bottom of Blight Town. I was underlevelled for Quelag and was having trouble with her. When I respawned at the bonfire, there's an obvious path to the boss but no way to get to her without being poisoned by the lake. Yeah I could farm items, to stop that from happening. But i don't want to spend 30 minutes looking for items or unequipping armour just to challenge a boss. Fair enough if you're going to put enemies in the way, I can deal with that, but i can't get to the boss without being poisoned? Fuck off lol.
The main things I found I didn't like about Dark Souls is the enemy encounter design. The movesets themselves aren't tricky to deal with, but the game has a habit of putting you in tiny spaces with enemies and the environment design becomes the problem to overcome than the enemy itself. Perfect example being that lead up to the archers in Anor Londo, tight balconies and scaffolding with only room for one person to stand on. It's kinda bullshit, and I agree with the OP in that regard.
Obviously the latter half of the game is rushed, we all know about that already.
For me the game is designed to be frustrating rather than challenging. An early example of this is when I got to the poison swamp at the bottom of Blight Town. I was underlevelled for Quelag and was having trouble with her. When I respawned at the bonfire, there's an obvious path to the boss but no way to get to her without being poisoned by the lake. Yeah I could farm items, to stop that from happening. But i don't want to spend 30 minutes looking for items or unequipping armour just to challenge a boss. Fair enough if you're going to put enemies in the way, I can deal with that, but i can't get to the boss without being poisoned? Fuck off lol.
Of course, that's why I agreed that Lost Izalith is unfinished, the part that's incorrect is the "glitches" part.
You have to be grabbed by Centipede Demon in a specific corner of the area, one glitch like this doesn't mean the entire area is glitchy. Also you can make Ornstein do the exact same thing.
I never have camera problems with Centipede Demon, so I'm not sure how you play the game that makes you have this problem.