Much

The Gif That Keeps on Giffing
Member
Feb 24, 2018
6,069
Playing through Dark Souls Remastered right now, nearing the end. I originally played through Dark Souls 3 and then Bloodborne, and with the remaster out, I thought I'd give this a spin since I enjoyed the other two.

This isn't necessarily a thread to shit on Dark Souls 1, but this has aged poorly. The level design is pretty poor after Anor Londo and is by no means complimented by the stiff controls of the character in some cases.

As for combat, it's not all bad. It can be somewhat fun if it plays in your favour and you near the end with stronger weapons, but half the time I feel as though I've been crippled tremendously. Let's use Seath the Scaleless for instance. The boss room is rather large, but so is the boss as he fills the majority of the room. Now, try to move around this boss who fills the majority of the room and also dodge his attacks which fill the majority of the room. It's hard to do so when player movement is so damn stiff. I really don't want to mention the part of Dark Souls where, upon dying to a curse, you are permanently at half health until you cure yourself with a purging stone, that which costs souls (you just lost these in a boss room).

This may seem like a rant thread, and maybe it is. But I feel like this game is put on a pedestal, when in fact it really is flawed and has aged poorly compared to its successive games. I still enjoyed this game, but man, this was the worst experience in the Souls series so far, and I'm put off from playing Dark Souls 2 now. :(

TL;DR:

This is how I feel:
"I wouldn't say the level design is poor, but I wasn't blown away either even as a huge fan of the series, it was certainly above average though. Compared to other modern games, it looks masterclass because of just how brainless most games were back then, and generally still are from the mainstream. Biggest problem is the game straight up sucks after Anor Londo and it feels worse to play in general, especially with that archaic 4 way movement.

EDIT: changed stuff in OP, removing what I no longer believed to be true after reading much of the thread and replies. Though I do still sit in the camp that the game drops in quality after Anor Londo. Otherwise, the game is still exceptional.
 
Last edited:

ghostcrew

The Shrouded Ghost
Administrator
Oct 27, 2017
30,449
Hey, no games perfect. Dark Souls is one of my top three games of all time but of course it has flaws. Still, I think the level design (or world design? I dunno) is one of my favourite things about it. I love how it all interweaves. Favourite level design in a Souls game for me.
 

super-famicom

Avenger
Oct 26, 2017
25,360
The way the world is interconnected is a work of art. You can see landmarks in the distance and make your way there. You're supposed to explore, get lost, and feel relief when finding a bonfire after going through tough shit. This game doesn't hold hands.

Did you not feel this way playing through Dark Souls 3? I remember gritting my teeth in the Catacombs of Carthus my first playthrough.

Edit-

Gaze upon the beauty of the interconnected world of Dark Souls here: https://www.polygon.com/pc/2015/3/15/8218879/dark-souls-lordran-map-picture-image
 
Last edited:
Oct 25, 2017
7,320
new jersey
Dark Souls 1 has the best level design in the series. Bloodborne is close 2nd. If you're gonna mention flaws with Dark Souls 1, atleast mention its actual flaws. Lost Izalith and Bed of Chaos is the flaws every hardcore Souls fan agrees on. Duke's Archives isn't bad.

I also liked how DS1 controls, I have 0 problems with it.
 

Meatfist

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,300
Nah - there's a big dip in quality once you get the lord vessel but up until that point is some of the best level design and atmosphere of all time
 

Deleted member 16908

Oct 27, 2017
9,377
The level design isn't poor, you're supposed to explore. I'm sorry there isn't a trail of breadcrumbs leading you to the next bonfire.

So many games lead you around like a child these days, if anything Dark Souls is more refreshing to play now than it was when it originally released.
 

Cybersai

Banned
Jan 8, 2018
11,631
It's rough around the edges. The lack of fast travel and some bosses being impossible to kill without upgrading your pyromancy is why I like Dark Souls II and III more.
 

Deleted member 22750

Oct 28, 2017
13,267
You're allowed to not like it.


But it's just an opinion that is rare at the end of the day
 

Res

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,643
It has it's flaws but in general, the level design is not poor. You can make an argument for later areas in the game, but it wasn't that bad imo
 

White Glint

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,617
This isn't necessarily a thread to shit on Dark Souls 1, but by god, this has aged poorly. The level design is VERY poor and is by no means complimented by the stiff controls of the character. The level design is further hampered when you take damage from a two feet fall. Moreover, the level design is misleading and in no way as clear as the following games. I spent nearly 45 minutes in the Duke Archives trying to find my way, and the fact that you have videos online with tens of thousands of views on how to reach a bonfire or next location is truly telling of how poor the level design is.

So do you have any actual critique towards the design of Duke's Archives? It's pretty straightforward.
 

Opa-Pa

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,810
You probably won't find satisfactory answer because the general concensus is that, outside of some areas in the late game, Dark Souls is agreed to be a master class in level and world design and there are simply no games like it in that regard.

It blew me away in that respect back then and it did again with the remaster after having experienced every other Souls content available. And for the record, Bloodborne is still my favorite.
So do you have any actual critique towards the design of Duke's Archives? It's pretty straightforward.
Yeah that was weird. I'm not crazy about the archives so I forgot most about it and still got through it relatively quickly last time.
 

Smash-It Stan

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,319
I agree, the game stops being fun right after Anor Londo, literally every level sucks after that and you have to go through them in a certain order. Before hand you could visit any place at any time, but you can't go through the catacombs/tomb of giants without the sunlight bug, and you can't fight the 4 kings without having a special ring on that the game never tells you about.

You'd probably like Dark Souls 2 better, it doesn't even attempt to make the world coherent or connected so it's not really an issue if the game itself doesn't care.
 

Imperfected

Member
Nov 9, 2017
11,737
Dark Souls is about trade-offs in design.

You trade the ease of use and steady, confident feeling of progression that comes with a straight-forward level design for the sense of exploration and discovery that comes with a more maze-like structure. There are times when it doesn't work--when the player's left completely befuddled or exasperated ("What do they even expect me to do, here?!" answered by "They actually expect me to cross this eye-searing mess of lava that unavoidably damages me?!")--but the times when it does work, the player is left feeling a great sense of relief or personal accomplishment from having opened a shortcut or reached a particularly tricky bonfire.

That's not to say it's an automatic zero-sum game. There are areas where the game misses more than hits (basically everything after you drop the Soul Bowl), and places where it hits way more than it misses (the DLC). That's just down to it being very much an unpolished gem that could have used more development time, especially in the back half of the game.
 

Dylan

Member
Oct 28, 2017
3,260
Interesting take..

I'm also playing through Dark Souls Remastered and I'm actually surprised just how much more enjoyable it is compared to Dark Souls 3, which I played recently. I'm still finding new secrets and pieces of story that I never discovered. The NPC's are for the most part super interesting and well-acted (shout out to the ravine merchant), and despite the common belief, the game does a masterful job of pointing you in the right direction with tips and clues as to how to solve every incoming situation. You just have to pay attention, and listen.

The game is a masterpiece through and through. I really don't understand your critique of level design.... nearly every inch of the map is carefully thought out, from both a gameplay and lore perspective. If you can survive a fall, it's because the designers intended you to explore that way. If you can fit into a hole, it's because you'll find something on the other side, or open a shortcut, etc.

As for design decisions such as curses.... tangible threats and difficult near-death situations are kind of what Dark Souls is all about. If they removed these aspects of the game, it would just be a button-mash action-adventure game. That's not what we sign up for when we play Souls'.
 
OP
OP
Much

Much

The Gif That Keeps on Giffing
Member
Feb 24, 2018
6,069
The fuck am I reading. Dark Souls has literally the best level design ever.

Bloodborne and Dark Souls 3 is leagues better in level design, or at least exploration anyway. Tomb of Giants: can't see shit and a single misstep and you're dead, same from Crystal Cave. Perhpas I'm being to hyperbolic, but my ponit seems to be proven that this game is put on a pedestal. It can be criticised. Blighttown? Come on, level design is not the best ever in Dark Souls 1.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 16908

Oct 27, 2017
9,377
It's rough around the edges. The lack of fast travel and some bosses being impossible to kill without upgrading your pyromancy is why I like Dark Souls II and III more.

???

I've beaten the game multiple times without using pyromancy at all.

The lack of fast travel makes you feel more connected to the world, and the numerous shortcuts you can unlock ensure that, if you explore each area properly, you never have to go the long way around more than once or twice.

Bloodborne and Dark Souls 3 is leagues better in level design. Tomb of Giants: can't see shit and a single misstep and you're dead, same from Crystal Cave. Perhpas I'm being to hyperbolic, but my ponit seems to be proven that this game is put on a pedestal. It can be criticised. Blighttown? Come on, level design is not the best ever in Dark Souls 1.

Tomb of Giants does suck, but the Crystal Cave is a cakewalk by comparison. The worst thing about that place is that final chamber before Seath where you have to fight like 6 of those clam things.

The first half of the game, before you get fast travel, features some amazing level & world design.
 

Mr.Branding

Banned
May 11, 2018
1,407
Most ppl started with this one so it is understandable they will sugar coat their memory of the game. To be honest, you're not wrong and the late game is kinda eh. After playing Ds3, BB and Nioh it's hard to go back to this one
 

'3y Kingdom

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,496
This isn't necessarily a thread to shit on Dark Souls 1, but by god, this has aged poorly. The level design is VERY poor

The level design is as good as this series has ever been.

and is by no means complimented by the stiff controls of the character.

Different, but not really stiff. Coming off BB/DS3 it takes some getting used to, as would going in the opposite direction.

The level design is further hampered when you take damage from a two feet fall.

I fail to see the connection here.

Moreover, the level design is misleading and in no way as clear as the following games. I spent nearly 45 minutes in the Duke Archives trying to find my way, and the fact that you have videos online with tens of thousands of views on how to reach a bonfire or next location is truly telling of how poor the level design is.

I don't think that this is really unique to DS1 at all. There are tons of videos for lots of obscure actions/discoveries in these games. DS1's level design is more intricate than what followed, though, which may not sit well with all players who want more of a streamlined experience.

I really don't want to mention the part of Dark Souls where, upon dying to a curse, you are permanently at half health until you cure yourself with a purging stone, that which costs souls (you just lost these in a boss room).

There are lots of these risk/reward mechanics throughout the series. I had more of an issue with having to farm Blood Vials than regaining souls for items in DS1 (especially given the presence of persistent soul-granting items).

This may seem like a rant thread, and maybe it is. But I feel like this game is put on a pedestal, when in fact it really is flawed and has aged poorly compared to its successive games. I still enjoyed this game, but man, this was the worst experience in the Souls series so far, and I'm put off from playing Dark Souls 2 now. :(

It's put on a pedestal for lots of reasons. Personally, I love the mazy level design, the somber atmosphere, the variety in locales, and the methodical pace of combat and exploration. The sequels have all gone in different directions, deviating in many cases from this blueprint, but not always for the better in my opinion.
 

PSqueak

Member
Oct 25, 2017
12,464
Disagree, had no problem going from DS3 to DS:R, if i had to complain about something it would be that it is much more easier than BB or DS3. But that's on me for playing them before DS:R.

I liked the much less linear design of the world too.
 

Deleted member 13155

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
2,604
The world design and level layout is unmatched. I was really impressed by it coming from DS2 and 3, after all those years. Its just the bosses that didn't hold up well, the majority of them is shit.

Lost Izalith is poor, Crystal cave is barely an area. Tomb of Giants isn't great but its tense at least. Even with these DS1 is still the best one in the series imo.
 

silva1991

Member
Oct 26, 2017
10,552
It's the best game ever made

The level design is VERY poor

1a9.gif
 
OP
OP
Much

Much

The Gif That Keeps on Giffing
Member
Feb 24, 2018
6,069
???


Tomb of Giants does suck, but the Crystal Cave is a cakewalk by comparison. The worst thing about that place is that final chamber before Seath where you have to fight like 6 of those clam things.

The first half of the game, before you get fast travel, features some amazing level & world design.

Agree 100%
 

Azoor

Member
Oct 25, 2017
682
Kuwait
IMO, the game starts to decline in quality after Anor Londo, it plummets in the worst zone in Souls history, Lost Izalith.
 

Deleted member 16908

Oct 27, 2017
9,377
Blighttown's design is fine. It sucked in the original because the framerate was atrocious but in the remaster it runs at a locked 60.
 

super-famicom

Avenger
Oct 26, 2017
25,360
Bloodborne and Dark Souls 3 is leagues better in level design. Tomb of Giants: can't see shit and a single misstep and you're dead, same from Crystal Cave. Perhpas I'm being to hyperbolic, but my ponit seems to be proven that this game is put on a pedestal. It can be criticised. Blighttown? Come on, level design is not the best ever in Dark Souls 1.

The game is not 100% and does have its flaws (Lozt Izalith being a big negative many people agree on), but the game provides tools to get through the areas you mentioned, if you search carefully. You can use a lantern, spell, or the Sunlight Maggot helm to see in Tomb of Giants, and you can also pay careful attention to the snow falling in the Crystal Caves. The snowflakes stop falling when they hit the invisible paths. You can also wear the Rusted Iron Ring to run around the bottom of the Blighttown swamp as well.
 

sapien85

Banned
Nov 8, 2017
5,427
You can enjoy something where the highs are very high and the lows lower versus something mostly middling. I'd rather experience something great but heavily flawed than something slightly good.
 
Jan 4, 2018
4,041
I do think Dark Souls 1 has aged very poorly. I liked it a lot at the time, but it's my least favorite Souls game to go back and replay. It's a very good game in regards to what it gets right and what kind of game it tries to be, but that comes with several glaring flaws, both technically and mechanically.
 
Nov 13, 2017
9,537
I have to agree. DS3 was my first DS. I just recently beat DSR and I didn't really enjoy it at all (outside of finally understanding all the references in DS3)
 

Rangerx

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,554
Dangleberry
The level design in Dark Souls is perfection. Thats one criticism I never thought I'd see of DS1 so props for originality I guess.
 

Opa-Pa

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,810
Yeah, everything after Anor Londo is not good. Everything before Anor Londo and Anor Londo is great! Just exclude Blighttown.
This is a much more agreeable opinion, most people who praise the game think like this. Personally I think pre Anor Londo is so good that it makes up for trash like Lost Izalith and then some.

Blighttown is awesome tho.
 

JudgmentJay

Member
Nov 14, 2017
5,261
Texas
It's the best game of all time and the level design is great. The world design and how all the areas fit together is the best in the series. Controls are great. Blighttown is one of the best areas in the game. Lots of post-Lordvessel areas are really good as well. Duke's Archives, Catacombs (I save it for post-Lordvessel at least), Tomb of the Giants, New Londo Ruins, and of course the DLC are all fantastic. The whole "second half is garbage" is nothing short of hyperbolic.
 
Last edited:

DaciaJC

Banned
Oct 29, 2017
6,685
This may seem like a rant thread, and maybe it is.

I don't want to be mean, but yeah, this thread does come off as a bit of a rant, and I don't agree with many of your points. The level design is generally good in Dark Souls. There are a couple of areas - which you may not have reached yet - that are indeed pretty shit, owing to very simplistic layouts and nonsensical encounter design. But the great majority of areas are fine or even excellent (did you find the Painted World of Ariamis?). That you found yourself lost in Duke's Archives is not a knock against the level design, it's a natural outcome from exploring a complex area. I have to say, though, I'm surprised that it threw you for such a loop, considering how similar it is in structure to Research Hall in Bloodborne.

Seath is blind. Use that to your advantage. And if you just stick close to him and move with his rotation, it's pretty easy to evade his attacks.

3,000 souls for a Purging Stone is a pittance.

Now, there are a couple of areas in which Dark Souls is pretty clearly outdone by its successors. Being restricted to a four-way roll feels cumbersome after playing the newer games, and the lack of certain attacks and weapon arts can make the combat feel a bit simplistic compared to, say, Dark Souls III. But to say the game is greatly flawed and doesn't hold up today is quite the exaggeration.
 
Oct 27, 2017
5,494
It's rough around the edges. The lack of fast travel and some bosses being impossible to kill without upgrading your pyromancy is why I like Dark Souls II and III more.

What? There's fast travel (not to every bonfire as in the follow ups, but there is fast travel nonetheless). And every single boss can be killed without using Pyromancy. What boss is "impossible" with out?
 

Imperfected

Member
Nov 9, 2017
11,737
The Crystal Cave gets away with being shit because it's like a fifteen second fun-run even without speedrun tech.

Listen mate, you don't need any of that rubbish, leave it be. This isn't a marathon, it's a sprint.
 

Furisco

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,084
The level design is further hampered when you take damage from a two feet fall. Moreover, the level design is misleading and in no way as clear as the following games. I spent nearly 45 minutes in the Duke Archives trying to find my way, and the fact that you have videos online with tens of thousands of views on how to reach a bonfire or next location is truly telling of how poor the level design is.

This reminds me of the people that complain about the escort mission in RE4, Ashley was a gameplay mechanic just like The Archives are designed in a way to make you confused, it isn't bad just because it kicks your ass.

Let's use Seath the Scaleless for instance. The boss room is rather large, but so is the boss as he fills the majority of the room. Now, try to move around this boss who fills the majority of the room and also dodge his attacks which fill the majority of the room. It's hard to do so when player movement is so damn stiff.
He's a boss, it's not supposed to be a walk in the park. the movement in this game is perfectly balanced around the encounters and enemies that you face , But it get how it can feel bad after coming from DS3 and Bloodborne.

I really don't want to mention the part of Dark Souls where, upon dying to a curse, you are permanently at half health until you cure yourself with a purging stone, that which costs souls (you just lost these in a boss room).
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 

Dylan

Member
Oct 28, 2017
3,260
You can do it with the lantern or the spell, which is arguably the way it was intended for most players to do it, since the bug is hidden.

Yeah. I get the critique of places like Lost Izalith, but Tomb of Giants is among the best experiences in the series.

By tomb of giants, you've finally upgraded all your shit and have mastered the combat, and suddenly they take away your eyes and/or your shield. It's absolutely brilliant.
 
OP
OP
Much

Much

The Gif That Keeps on Giffing
Member
Feb 24, 2018
6,069
I don't want to be mean, but yeah, this thread does come off as a bit of a rant, and I don't agree with many of your points. The level design is generally good in Dark Souls. There are a couple of areas - which you may not have reached yet - that are indeed pretty shit, owing to very simplistic layouts and nonsensical encounter design. But the great majority of areas are fine or even excellent (did you find the Painted World of Ariamis?). That you found yourself lost in Duke's Archives is not a knock against the level design, it's a natural outcome from exploring a complex area. I have to say, though, I'm surprised that it threw you for such a loop, considering how similar it is in structure to Research Hall in Bloodborne.

Seath is blind. Use that to your advantage. And if you just stick close to him and move with his rotation, it's pretty easy to evade his attacks.

3,000 souls for a Purging Stone is a pittance.

Now, there are a couple of areas in which Dark Souls is pretty clearly outdone by its successors. Being restricted to a four-way roll feels cumbersome after playing the newer games, and the lack of certain attacks and weapon arts can make the combat feel a bit simplistic compared to, say, Dark Souls III. But to say the game is greatly flawed and doesn't hold up today is quite the exaggeration.

Yeah, everything after Anor Londo is not good. Everything before Anor Londo and Anor Londo is great! Just exclude Blighttown. Should've clarified that beforehand.
 

Irrotational

Prophet of Truth
Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,272
You have an opinion.. Unfortunately it's objectively wrong! (not really!)

Lots of people love the level design in the first half. You can't unlock the elevator and not be amazed!