-
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.
Recommend the essential Souls games
- Thread starter Carnby
- Start date
We very clearly want different things out of our Souls levels if you don't think any zone in DS3 is better than Forbidden Woods. It's a good level, but c'mon. There are probably 10+ areas from DS3 I'd put above it. I really don't understand what it is you value in level design.
Admittedly discovering Ash Lake is a series-defining moment. It's amazing. But at the same time there's very little to do there but gawk at how epic it is. That said Dark Souls III has plenty of hidden zones, bosses, and covenants as well. Archdragon Peak, Untended Graves, and Smouldering Lake/Demon Ruins being the primary ones.
? Again, I completed the game near launch as a caster without summoning. I remember it being pretty easy with the exception of Aldrich who is magic resistant. I still beat it after a few tries without compromising the build. Do you mean zero melee allowed? Is that even possible in any of the games? It sounds miserable even if it is.
There are tons of useful weapon arts. Katana parry/quick attack, halberd/spear charges, long/shortsword shield break, Dragonslayer Greataxe/Swordspear lightning attack, Perseverance, Sunlight Straightsword buff, etc, etc, etc. Honestly looking at the list on the wiki I think most weapons have a useful weapon art. Yeah you need to invest a few points into MP to use them more than a couple times. That's the tradeoff.
Here's the kicker about weapon arts though... they're just extra. Even if you completely removed them from the game you'd still have parity with Dark Souls 1. It's literally just icing on the combat cake.
Yeah it's linear. Just like Dark Souls 2, the other game you mentioned in your original post. No remaster would change that. It was very clearly a design decision to have you go on a journey to faraway lands instead of having a big interconnected world like Dark Souls 1. I prefer DS1's style as well, but people really need to let it go. It's the only game in the series like it so it's clearly the exception, not the rule.
I'm not sure what you mean about the color and the theme; they both seem great to me. It's a world on the brink of death. It's grey and dead, but there's plenty of beauty to be found as well.
I love the line about funneling you into crowds. Dark Souls 2 is Crowds of Enemies: The Video Game. It really seems like your criticism has some double standards here.
It doesn't seem like you understand how poise works in Dark Souls III. It's similar to Demon's Souls' hyper armor. Poise only takes effect when you're swinging your weapon. It works exactly as it's supposed to.
It was broken at launch though so maybe you just assumed it never got fixed?
Infusions... I've done a refined, raw, heavy, sharp, hollow, blessed, and dark/deep infused build. And crystal for a while early on in my mage build. All worked out great. I know Chaos is very strong as well. That leaves fire, poison, blood, lightning, and simple. I think fire and lightning are probably fine, but poison, blood, and simple are indeed probably pointless. But I could be wrong? Anyway, at the very least it's definitely not "most" infusions that are useless.
Build variety is just as good as any other Souls game except for 2.
The only enemy/boss I'd call a hit sponge is Midir, and combat neither feels out of place nor looks stupid to me, but I guess that's highly subjective. I don't think you'd find many people agree with you. Shields being less sturdy is a good thing. They're way too strong in the other games.
Sounds like a console problem. These issues do not exist on PC.
In conclusion, thinking Dark Souls III needs a remaster is pretty absurd. If any game in the series needs it it's 2.
Last edited:
This. 2 is a profoundly mediocre game but everything else is great.
DS3, Bloodborne, and Sekiro are all different enough and also the highlights you should check out. Dark 1 is kind of a stiff clunker at this point that looks and plays worse than the rest of From's game, minus 2. Detached from its importance to From's work, and it's overall influence on gaming, it's less good than the other options available.
I'm a huge souls fan and I recently grabbed Surge 2 on sale. I have to say I was super surprised at how enjoyable it is, imo it's really one of the best non From souls games (and I've played nearly all of them) definitely worth picking it up next time it's on sale. Nioh is also fantastic.
I just played The Surge 2 myself and I agree, it's pretty decent. They've really got their shortcut-based level structure down.
Yeah right, the amount of tints I opened a door and went "holy shit, I'm here...." Very impressive level design. I'm also loving the combat and the simplicity of the leveling up system.
Apparently I'm not into the minority, I'm THE minority. Weapon arts are, as you say, a plus...I just don't see it worth it over basic attack or parry. They are an extra that adds nothing that can't be done more efficiently otherwise. That could be my love of efficiency speaking tho.
Casting being tied to MP is something that I liked at first, but the estus trade off is something that makes it simply not a good choice for anyone other than an experienced player. And yes, pure casting is impossible, but even a pure caster boss is hard to accomplish with the pitiful mp regen without sacrificing many hp estus. This I admit is a personal thing, I loved the attunement system and uses, and didn't force me to choose.
DS2 is very linear, but its world has a surreal quality to it DS3 does not. Has the general coherence of DS1, but without the smart ways to move. Idk if I'm ecplaining myself well.
And the crowds in DS2 were fine to me, but apparently everyone hated it. But in DS3 they are fine? Crowds in DS2 rarely mixed many enemy types, maybe Drangleic castle? In DS3 you get many crowds of different enemies in a faster game, so you end up, again, rolling like crazy (and sorry to repeat nyself, but a fully armored guy rolling around at Mach1 looks odd to me). I don't get why shields being basically a trap against more than 2 enemies is a good thing. There were several 100% phy/fire def shields in the rest,you could fix that without nerfing them this much, here stability is just ridiculous.
Poise thing you may be right that I just assumed it never got fixed, tbh I still don't feel it well in the ps4 version but could be entirely me.
So...maybe a remaster no, but a new cut I'd like to see. Or just assume that I don't like it for reasons I can't quite describe and move on, I guess.
Oh, and about spongey enemies, I meant there are many minibosses and "special" enemies (in undead settlement, i.e, those nuns) which are either really high in HP, or have weaknesses I haven't found yet (likely, being honest).
i love all of demon's souls, dark souls 2 and 3 and bloodborne. all excellent. all essential. sekiro is not a souls game, but also excellent and essential
They all should be played, but if you want to start with a couple in particular, do Dark Souls 1 and Bloodborne.
All I'm gonna say is motherfucking blasphemy, Sekiro is the perfect finisher.
Why don't you have time? Military? Either way, all games are great and available on PS5. I suggest going in order of release (Dark Souls 1, Dark Souls 2, Bloodborne, Dark Souls 3, Sekiro), the "bad" one is Dark Souls 2, and really it just feels like it was made by the B team and some of the environments feel less interesting than Dark Souls 1. But, it could be your favorite game? Lots of people love it. For me, Bloodborne is the crème de la crème. Also, all games after Demon's Souls have DLC/Additional content and, unlike other games, they are usually the best stuff in the series, specially Bloodborne. I enjoyed Dark Souls 1 DLC too!
Play them all if you like Demon's Souls. Start in order and whatever you don't get to, you don't get to.
I would recommend you play Dark Souls 1 after Demon's Souls, then move into Bloodborne, and then come back to Dark Souls 3. Those are sort of the essential games and then if you're still hungry for more, but in a unique way, go into Sekiro since it's a very different game that plays extremely differently to the rest (Bloodborne does play differently and requires different things from you the player, but not to the extent that Sekiro does). THEN and only then, if you still want to play more, I'd recommend Dark Souls 2 since it's a long game with many rough edges and areas that may turn you off and you don't want it to turn you off from the series as a whole if it rubs you the wrong way. It's still an intriguing game that is worth playing with some pretty solid moments, but it's the weirdest and often times most frustrating entry in the series with a weird feeling to play. Not bad, but definitely something I would never prioritize.
If you only have time to play a couple games though, play Dark Souls 1 with its DLC and then Bloodborne and its DLC. They are the best games From has made by far.
If you only have time to play a couple games though, play Dark Souls 1 with its DLC and then Bloodborne and its DLC. They are the best games From has made by far.
I would recommend Bloodborne the most because it does everything right. The placement of enemies on maps, worldbuilding, deep lore, combat mechanics, boss fights, art style, etc. It's all magnificent and perfectly produced. If you're AT ALL into cosmic horror, gothic or Lovecraftian stuffs, this a must-play. I feel that Bloodborne has a very balanced and cohesive feel through and through, and there really isn't a single aspect of the game that feels cheap or artificially difficult. Even the limited Blood Vials and Blood Echoes and "farming" aspect of the game is fairly balanced and awards the player for not becoming an overpowered juggernaut. Like it reinforces the speedrunning aspect, which I think is a big part of the Souls experience.
My next would be Dark Souls and Dark Souls 3. 3 in particular lets you explore a lot more options in terms of gameplay and setting variety, but it might be overwhelming if you're not familiar with RPG's. If you like magic, shields, a wide amount of armor selection, and pretty much an unlimited (based on how many times you die) healing flask, then this game is for you. The maps are also huge, like way more big than Bloodborne, so you'll definitely get lost in the labyrinthian despair of castles, dungeons, catacombs and deep, dark forests and wild areas. Honestly, some areas are downright terrifying, but oh so worth playing.
My next would be Dark Souls and Dark Souls 3. 3 in particular lets you explore a lot more options in terms of gameplay and setting variety, but it might be overwhelming if you're not familiar with RPG's. If you like magic, shields, a wide amount of armor selection, and pretty much an unlimited (based on how many times you die) healing flask, then this game is for you. The maps are also huge, like way more big than Bloodborne, so you'll definitely get lost in the labyrinthian despair of castles, dungeons, catacombs and deep, dark forests and wild areas. Honestly, some areas are downright terrifying, but oh so worth playing.
Last edited:
You can't skip any of them. There's only 3 (4 if you count Bloodborne) of them! 😳
Play them on release order: DS > SOTFS > Bloodborne > DS3.
Also, play something else between games to avoid burnout. The games are pretty similar to one another.
Just play them all, in release order. If you're truly short on time, just get through them at your own pace.
Demon's -> Dark -> 2 / SotFS -> Bloodborne -> 3
The only thing to note is that you should also get/do all of the DLC available for each title. DLC bosses are always some of the best in the series, across the board for every game.
Demon's -> Dark -> 2 / SotFS -> Bloodborne -> 3
The only thing to note is that you should also get/do all of the DLC available for each title. DLC bosses are always some of the best in the series, across the board for every game.
