I wish they would have added a proper map.
Their waypoint is pretty useless. What does the ''dot'' even mean?
Their waypoint is pretty useless. What does the ''dot'' even mean?
-
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.
Darksiders III |OT| Fury's Road
- Thread starter GrrImAFridge
- Start date
OP
OP
Nordic said the update would hit some time this month, so it may pop up tomorrow or Friday.
Dot means there are other bosses that are farther compared to the one you have indicated on the compass.
Anyway comparing peak players Darksiders III is at 7730. It's not bad compared to Darksiders II that was at 8746 and darksiders 1 that was at 3929.
This shows good enough sales on Steam, i'm glad. Probably it will reach 100.000 copies sold on Steam alone.
I hope this comes this week. I'll play DS2 x enhanced and then have a good crack at 3. I did everything in one and loved it but something about two put me off and I never actually played it.
As someone who is not only a huge fan of Darksiders 1 but also of Dark Souls, Bloodorne & Dark Souls 3, someone who really looked forward to this game a whole lot and had positive impressions of Darksiders 3 playing it pre-launch and who played through the game before release and ended up disliking it quite a bit, let me just say it's a huge bummer to see these incredibly dismissive posts of other peoples' opinions.
The reviews are full of actual criticism if you guys bothered to read them. They call out the fast-paced, combo-based hack 'n slash fighting system being forced upon enemies that can kill you with 3 hits, making you approach many fights in a way slower, methodical way while the combat itself doesn't support that approach. They call out the terrible technical state it's in on consoles. They call out the world design, consisting of bland tunnels of the same environments over and over and over again with only few distractions, making it very hard to navigate these spaces since everything looks the same. Sometimes they called out the lack of dungeons and puzzles.
This whole dismissiveness of other peoples' criticism is tiring, especially when y'all then go even one step further and keep acting like everyone who disliked or called out the game on some of its problems only did so because he expects a "AAA bloaded game with MTX". Like, come on. The gamespot review where the game got a 4/10 doesn't even talk about the presentation until the very end, and even then it's about world and art design instead of the game'es technical prowess.
It's possible to enjoy a game (as many reviewers did, too) without also having to act like everyone with a different opinion is a soulless hack who just wants The Uncharted and is too ignorant to play or enjoy anything else. You can disagree and engage with other people's opinions without constanstly doing that.
OP
OP
Nope. There is a dev branch with a newer build, but it hasn't been touched in almost 18 months, so whatever was being worked on was undoubtedly shelved.
Actually i tried to understand some reviewers arguments. I also admitted the game having low production values as one of the reasons, also being possible to be lost in map and the difficulty of the game being factors as to why they lowered the scores.
You cut it from quote but i talked about technical issues that made the difference between the PC version MC and Ps4 version with the Ps4 being far buggier and with much worse framerate issues. I was in that pre-release topic being one of the first to say the state in which the game was going to be released was a mess, that they had to wait some more to remove these issues and then release it.
I'm far from dismissing criticism.
About the combat i think you have enough tools to face hard hitting enemies, starting after you obtain the Fire Hollow. Dodging works in every direction, arcane skills are important to keep distance between Fury and the more difficult enemies or have AOE damage. But it's not like every enemy kills you in three hits. That's if you play at Apocalyptic difficult and even then it's just few enemies that are stronger than usual and keep you on your toes.
Environments: for me there is enough variation and level design is actually good with shortcuts that make traversing levels much easier if you discover them, and that encourages exploration. Maybe you liked the more linear traditional dungeon approach in DS1, with puzzle rooms, but i think having more open areas is not something that detracts from the quality of the game. On the contrary when there are many branching paths i have this exciting sensation to be exploring an actual world. I can actually enjoy both type of approach (Ds1 and Ds3) as long as i have fun with the games.
Last edited:
Really glad people are enjoying the game and seeing more opinions that match up with my own.
Honestly I thought the other reviews were going to line up closely with my own and that the game would surprise people. When the 4s and other crazy low scores started popping up I was pretty shocked.
It has some issues but it's still a damn fun game.
Honestly I thought the other reviews were going to line up closely with my own and that the game would surprise people. When the 4s and other crazy low scores started popping up I was pretty shocked.
It has some issues but it's still a damn fun game.
Thank God for Steam refunds. HDR only works in borderless windowed mode, so I can't play in 1440/1080p as my PC can't handle 4K on my TV, the gameplay mechanics are a downgrade from the previous games on every level, the combat system is from Darksiders while the difficulty is from Dark Souls, the artstyle is great but the level design is so generic...
It's a pity, I loved the previous 2 games and finished them multiple times. Darksiders II was my favourite game since Prince of Persia 2008. I do not mind the lower budget feel of 3, I was not expecting an upgrade from Darksiders II on every level, but this is a downgrade from Darksiders 1. Will probably buy it on a sale if the HDR gets fixed on PC or get the PS4 version once it's dirt cheap or in PS+.
It's a pity, I loved the previous 2 games and finished them multiple times. Darksiders II was my favourite game since Prince of Persia 2008. I do not mind the lower budget feel of 3, I was not expecting an upgrade from Darksiders II on every level, but this is a downgrade from Darksiders 1. Will probably buy it on a sale if the HDR gets fixed on PC or get the PS4 version once it's dirt cheap or in PS+.
It doesn't work like that. It doesn't matter what the devs says, it matters what they do. And what they do? Release the game at full price. If you want to not be judged as an AAA game, don't release the game at full price, but at $39. If you put a price tag of $60, you will be compared against other games with that price. There is a reason indie games are released at an inferior price.
Also, Darksiders 2 was released in 2012, for the previous generation. At this point even being an AA game you are supposed to being able to go to toe-to-toe with past generation AAA games. I don't expect them to match the values of RDR2 or AC Odissey, but it should be something close to Darksiders 2.
I just beat Avarice/Greed.
Where the hell am I supposed to go now? I've tried following the tracker but it takes me in some wierd ass directions.
Where the hell am I supposed to go now? I've tried following the tracker but it takes me in some wierd ass directions.
One way I found,
Between the first two vulgrim points in the game, where you first saw the four handed guy and got fortifcation there is a place you use Flame Hallow to get up to one of those first person shafts
~2h in, I have to say that I am really liking it. I can see where people are coming from with their criticism and I might feel the same way later but right now I am not terribly bothered. If you're expecting AAA production values from this game, you won't find any but so far it's a pretty fun Souls-lite with acrobatic combat.
I've never played a Darksiders game. Are the HD remasters worth it (visuals, performance)? Would you recommend playing the first two games before buying DS III?
edit: I play on PS4 slim. How's the performance?
edit: I play on PS4 slim. How's the performance?
Last edited:
Finally played the game for an hour or so. It feels good, the combat is responsive and the world looks nice, but the game has lots of technical issues even on PC. The first cutscene with Ulthane looks strange, he moves at 5 fps for some reason and teleports a lot during the curtscene. Lots of fps drops in some transition areas too. And the language issues are really bad, I started the game on Spanish (Steam default) and didn't like the dub and the fact that some subtitles were in English. Changed to English and now everything is in English except Vulgrim's voice, that is Spanish.
I'm replaying the first one on xbox one x and I'm having a great time!
Jumped in on pc and thankfully so far the issues on pc are small (looks very different from consoles) and the game itself is good fun. It obviously can't compare to something like the new God of War but it does feel similar in quality to the previous Darksiders games, just a few years late to the party.
They're making it harder to justify day-one purchases, and I was excited for this game too.
I will wait another month for them to smoothen rough edges.
I will wait another month for them to smoothen rough edges.
Yes you should play the other 2 games, they're great, the performance isn't great on consoles but might be after you finish DS1/2.
I don't think it works like this either. We don't get a lot of AA games that look like Uncharted 2 either.
DS2 was a 50 million USD game and more than 100 people worked on it, try to guess why Darksiders 3 isn't comparable in scale and ambition to Darksiders and Darksiders 2.
Less budget and less budget.
A lot of AAA past generation titles were 40-50 million USD titles or even more, AA games nowadays are 10-20 million at most and in certain cases, see The Surge, 4-6 million.
Cool! :)
That's a good point. There's a collection on the psn store (Darksiders 1+2 remastered + Darksiders 3 + upcoming DLCs) for 99,99 €
Worth it?
edit: Will I miss something when I play DS3 first (I love the souls games..) and DS 1+2 after that (...and I like Zelda!)? Are these separate storylines?
You need to play at least the first one before this one imo.
After reading some player impressions here I bought the game to support the AA games I'm often saying that I miss. So far, so "good". The game looks and runs great on PC, the combat is fun and overall it seems like a good game. It's technically rough though and I got the first crash after an hour and fifteen minutes :/ I had cleared out the big area below Haven and leveled up with Vulgrim before I was going to take the lift back up to upgrade with my newly found materials - stepping on the lift crashed the game and I lost everything from that level...
In-engine cutscenes also seem to run at 30 fps to begin with, but then mid-scene they will switch to 60 fps. A bit odd.
In-engine cutscenes also seem to run at 30 fps to begin with, but then mid-scene they will switch to 60 fps. A bit odd.
All 3 games take place around the same time frame, running parallel to each other for the most part. The first one sets up the story though, so good idea to play that one.
The 2nd game is still worth playing though, it's a much longer game than 1 and 3 though, so might be one to play when you have more free time, if you don't want to dive into 1 and 2 back to back.
Sounds perfect. I heard the second game is not 60 FPS despite being a remaster, is this true?
Cause who review games suck at them. It's not unlike Jim to get overly frustrated at a game and then allow his review score to be a reflection of it.
Finished it. Man they ending is nice
strife being there, hopefully DS4 happens and we play him finally.
Lilith talking what I assume is Lucifer? And he hinting at his plan (corruption and abbadon) which we know Death and War are going to thwart.
Can't wait to finally fight lilith
Lilith talking what I assume is Lucifer? And he hinting at his plan (corruption and abbadon) which we know Death and War are going to thwart.
Can't wait to finally fight lilith
Yeah the console version of DS2 is only 30fps, which is a shame as the DS1 remaster was 60fps. Still worth playing though and PC version of 2 is 60fps of course.
Well thats just not true, the fights are designed for your tool kit. If you turtle up an try to play slow and methodical, then thats on you. Its a game that literally says hold X to AOE, and move postion yourself well. And single target fights are designed so that you can use your delay to counter their counter attacks. I dont know how that is slow and methodical.
And idk the area of found bland so far is the hollow crypts place that looked straight out of D2. XBX performance is fine, very occasional stutter if you backtrack and the games not expected.
Using rest mode? I noticed it only started stuttering in an area after i used it
What's outraging is that the press only supports indie and AAA games nowadays. I respect people who were annoyed by the technical issues,but scoring this game a 4 like in gamespot and eurogamer reviews is straight disrespect for the developers imo ! It even got a 2/10 from another site I mean this is disgusting
Please keep them coming !!
Did you read the reviews? Do you have an issue with any of the actual criticisms they made or did you just look at the number, decide they had to be wrong and ignored any of the actual arguments they made?
Again: The gamespot review didn't even talk about the technical aspect of the game. Eurogamer doesn't score games anymore. And Gamerant gave it a 1/5 for numerious bugs, some of them gamebreaking. Doesn't this forum especially normally accuse reviewers of too often ignoring issues like this?
Sorry for lumping you in with the rest of those responses if that wasn't your intention!
That's exactly my point: The combat isn't methodical, it's almost exactly the same as it was in Darksiders 1. It just got put into a Dark-Souls-like game where quite a few normal enemies can kill you in 3 hits, where Health doesn't just regenerate with basically every enemy you kill, where regaining Health takes quite a bit of time, where enemies patrol areas and follow you around instead of being put into specially designed arenas - basically the Darksiders 1 combat system got put into Lords of the Fallen. And I don't think that works. The game can be fun whenever you are well leveled and fight hrough enemies much in the same way as you did in the previous games but there where 3 or 4 times where I came into an area where 3 or 4 really strong mobs got lumped together and where I had to try to pull each and every one of them by itself, stay away, hit once, dodge away again...in a combo-based fighting system in the style of God of War. Again: I LOVE Dark Souls, Bloodborne, I even quite like Lords of the Fallen. But their combat systems, no matter if they were fast- or slow-paced, where built for the enemy and world design. Darksiders 3's wasn't. It was built for a Zelda-like in DS1 and then got put into a Souls-like in DS3.
The combat system was built to be one of several supporting pillars, next to the dungeons and puzzles and a little bit of platforming. Dungeons don't exist anymore, puzzles barely do, platforming only exists in the very first boss battle and in the form of "Hold Square to Swing" actions. I think I heard the "puzzle solved" chime about...5 times in the whole game? In Darksiders 2, there were even more pillars introduced, arguably too many, with the huge focus on way more platforming, open-world-exploration, loot, crafting and other role-playing systems. Now, in Darksiders 3, all supporting pillars other than the combat are gone. There are no dungeons to contextualise the combat and barely any puzzles to give you a break from it. The combat is the entire game.
I can't talk about the XBX performance (though I heard bad things) but on PS4 Pro it's absolutely dreadful. Whenever you actually try to run through larger parts of the world when you are searching for where to go next it loads constanstly - and i do mean constantly, at some points with as little as 10 seconds of gameplay inbetween - with the world bugging out and disappearing around you and when you die there are huuuge load times worthy of Bloodborne when in launched, both leading to me actively dreading having to explore this world.
Last edited:
I'm fine with most of the criticisms,especially in the technical deparment. But when Skyrim released was a total bugfest,but yet it scored as it should,because the core essence was what mattered. They don't seem to care about that when it comes to AA games though.They are just not forgiving at all,in contrast to other games for example.
Fallout 76 was both a technical mess and a hollow shell of a Fallout game,that's why it was panned. If Fallout 76 had at least the same level as Fallout 3 or New Vegas quality,they would have be willing to criticise less the technical aspects of it.
So if this game's core essence is good as many people have mentioned in this thread,why destroy the game due to technical problems that will possibly be patched soon?
You can have your opinion,but the way I see it,the press is biased
Yes they are worth it. Play them in release order and by the time you have finished with the previous 2,DS3 will have been patched for a smoother experience. Also this game awaits dlc,so have this in mind too.
If you are going with my plan of playing order,I'd suggest buying the first 2,then wait for a price drop for DS3[/QUOTE]
Clearly you didn't read the Gamespot review for example then, because the 4/10 there had very little to do with the the technical aspect. In the review Text it's barely mentioned at all. Instead, it spent a lot of time explaining why the exact core essence you're describing didn't work for him.
Meanwhile, the Gamerant review actually did make the technical issues a big point of contention, arguing fo why numerious game-breaking bugs, loading times and frame-rate-issues have a big influence on further worsening their opinion of the already unimpressive core of the game.
As always, there are numerous outlets with numerous opinions. Many liked the game! Many didn't. Trying to shame everyone who didn't because they just HAVE to be some kind of AAA-Bethesda-Shill who is either too bad playing the game or ignoring that it's actually great all while ignoring the actual criticisms of the actual reviews is both lazy and a huge reason why discussing video games can be so absolutely tiring and unconstructive.
Looking at the post history, you seem to spent a LOT of time on arguing why all of these people making arguments for their opinion are worthless shills...without having even palyed the game yourself? At least you didn't talk once about your own experience with it. That would make this all the more frustrating.
Last edited:
Tbf I see each sin area as a dungeon in itself, they all look distinct when compared to each other. I've seen quite a nice amount of variation in environments and the game is beautiful.
That said the biggest problem with the game is that it has structure like Dark Souls but combat like the original Darksiders, I'm not sure it's that good of a fit because Souls combat relies on timing/potshots etc which is why they don't have as many combos. Watch any Soulsborne gameplay and you'll see that there aren't really many combos and they are all fairly basic. Whereas in this game you pretty much need to combo and remember them so that you can use the appropriate one depending on what the enemy is doing/how many enemies are around. It works...sometimes but it's not an optimal approach. Another thing being, in Soulsborne after a certain point of progression your fodder enemies dies in like 1 hits whereas here they don't as even the weakest enemy at any point will take like 3 hits.
Lastly, one of my personal complaints about the game is that it's very difficult to see enemies telegraphing their attacks in this game due to all the flashy looking moves that causes all sorts of particle effects, lighting and what not. Say when you use wrath, the enemy is still able to react and hit you but you can barely see what the enemy is doing. A lot of attacks in the game are like this.
In any case I am enjoying the game, but I would have enjoyed it a lot more if this was a Zelda game like the first one. I thought they were making Darksiders 3 for the fans so not sure why they'd not make it like the games that made people fan of the series.With all of this said, this in no way is this game a 4/10 or 5/10, those scores are nonsense. I never like scoring games but if I had to score this I'd score it a 7-8/10. I am playing on PC though so I'm not sure about how the performance issues on consoles affect the game.
That said the biggest problem with the game is that it has structure like Dark Souls but combat like the original Darksiders, I'm not sure it's that good of a fit because Souls combat relies on timing/potshots etc which is why they don't have as many combos. Watch any Soulsborne gameplay and you'll see that there aren't really many combos and they are all fairly basic. Whereas in this game you pretty much need to combo and remember them so that you can use the appropriate one depending on what the enemy is doing/how many enemies are around. It works...sometimes but it's not an optimal approach. Another thing being, in Soulsborne after a certain point of progression your fodder enemies dies in like 1 hits whereas here they don't as even the weakest enemy at any point will take like 3 hits.
Lastly, one of my personal complaints about the game is that it's very difficult to see enemies telegraphing their attacks in this game due to all the flashy looking moves that causes all sorts of particle effects, lighting and what not. Say when you use wrath, the enemy is still able to react and hit you but you can barely see what the enemy is doing. A lot of attacks in the game are like this.
In any case I am enjoying the game, but I would have enjoyed it a lot more if this was a Zelda game like the first one. I thought they were making Darksiders 3 for the fans so not sure why they'd not make it like the games that made people fan of the series.With all of this said, this in no way is this game a 4/10 or 5/10, those scores are nonsense. I never like scoring games but if I had to score this I'd score it a 7-8/10. I am playing on PC though so I'm not sure about how the performance issues on consoles affect the game.
Last edited:
Its funny how the flame warden actually punishes you for attacks after a perfect dodge. Furys attack just takes too long cause she jumps into the air but the flame warden doesnt care and spams the same single attack over and over so you get hit by it.
also its kinda weak that he has 2 attacks but deals such damage once you get hit .
also its kinda weak that he has 2 attacks but deals such damage once you get hit .
That's weird. I have had no issues on my 1X. Not even noticeable frame drops.
Maybe a few stutters.
Can you throw cars in this game. I used to love doing that.
Also wheres the cheapest place to get it on PC right now?
Also wheres the cheapest place to get it on PC right now?
Yep, and the arena where you fight him is beautiful too.
