"Dark Souls Will Eat Skyrim's Face"
- Thread starter Chrishu
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Not really comparable. Skyrim isn't intended to be multiplayer, the logic in the DLC section is unbelievably stupid (as usual), the size comparison is based on wild speculation, the "true challenge" section is incredibly lol.
It doesn't even read like fanbaiting to me, it reads a lot more like some random fan complaining about games they don't like (and haven't played) and gushing about games they do like, with all the necessary shoehorning of incompatible aspects of the games into a weird list for comparison.
It doesn't even read like fanbaiting to me, it reads a lot more like some random fan complaining about games they don't like (and haven't played) and gushing about games they do like, with all the necessary shoehorning of incompatible aspects of the games into a weird list for comparison.
Being too young to have played Morrowind or any of the previous Elder Scrolls Games, and thinking Oblivion was insanely bad, I'm going to go with Dark Souls cos I have no reason to dislike it.
My logic is awesome.
My logic is awesome.
what an odd thread. clearly the person who wrote it has to make a decision on which they can afford. Those of us with jobs and disposable income will just buy both.
Eh, "Saints Row the Third will eat Skyrim's face" makes about as much sense.
As in, none at all.
As in, none at all.
Skyrim will do better because it comes from a far more popular series ect ect.
I wish Dark Souls all the best but it's not really my type of RPG.
I wish Dark Souls all the best but it's not really my type of RPG.
I agree with you, and I would like to point out that every one of the New Vegas DLCs was absolutely awesome. They were worth ten dollars each. Fallout New Vegas is my #1 game. I feel that there is a reason for this. Bethesda, and by extension The Elder Scrolls series has my absolute trust.kemosabi4 said:
All in all, I'm disappointed in IGN. They're usually above this kind of blatant controversy article. Not far above it, but you know, they keep their feet out of the mud. Articles like these are pretty much the equivalent of gaming tabloids.
What? didn't we already have a thread like this?
Seriously, no one cares about IGN. The only people who cares are the 13 years old.
EDIT: Also I'm going to get Dark souls as well with Skyrim...right after I get Arkham City and X-Men: Destiny then MGS: Collection. Then after that Shadow of the Collesus / Ico games and after that...
Seriously, no one cares about IGN. The only people who cares are the 13 years old.
EDIT: Also I'm going to get Dark souls as well with Skyrim...right after I get Arkham City and X-Men: Destiny then MGS: Collection. Then after that Shadow of the Collesus / Ico games and after that...
I was also pretty disappointed in IGN.
I only check the site semi-regularly, so I don't exactly read every article on the site. This was the first time I saw an article like this posted by IGN themselves. I was kind of surprised that the author was even allowed to post this article, considering the extreme bias towards Dark Souls. The 5 points raised were valid and I agree that Skyrim could use a lot of work. But picking 5 specific points in your favour, calling your game the winner and not giving the other game a fair look is not balanced at all. Personally I'd like to see more of these provocative articles on IGN, it's a fun read. I think the guy who wrote it was probably sick of hearing about Skyrim and tried to murder the hype.
I'm an Elder Scrolls fan, so the article seemed very unfair from my point of view. Though, I have now come to acknowledge that Oblivion (and probably Skyrim) are not perfect and have many flaws. I wouldn't instantly dismiss a new rpg like Dark Souls, but after seeing the videos and reading the previews, it seems to be aimed at a different audience.
Neither game is out yet, but it's safe to say that the world is big enough for the both of them. Most people here will buy both games and enjoy them. Being poor, I can only afford one and it's got to be Skyrim. With every new detail released about the game I seem to get more suspicious, and a bit nervous. I get annoyed by all the hype as much as anyone, but I am genuinely worried by the problems shown in the gameplay videos. I mainly have doubts about the combat, but there's a month to go and fingers crossed....
I only check the site semi-regularly, so I don't exactly read every article on the site. This was the first time I saw an article like this posted by IGN themselves. I was kind of surprised that the author was even allowed to post this article, considering the extreme bias towards Dark Souls. The 5 points raised were valid and I agree that Skyrim could use a lot of work. But picking 5 specific points in your favour, calling your game the winner and not giving the other game a fair look is not balanced at all. Personally I'd like to see more of these provocative articles on IGN, it's a fun read. I think the guy who wrote it was probably sick of hearing about Skyrim and tried to murder the hype.
I'm an Elder Scrolls fan, so the article seemed very unfair from my point of view. Though, I have now come to acknowledge that Oblivion (and probably Skyrim) are not perfect and have many flaws. I wouldn't instantly dismiss a new rpg like Dark Souls, but after seeing the videos and reading the previews, it seems to be aimed at a different audience.
Neither game is out yet, but it's safe to say that the world is big enough for the both of them. Most people here will buy both games and enjoy them. Being poor, I can only afford one and it's got to be Skyrim. With every new detail released about the game I seem to get more suspicious, and a bit nervous. I get annoyed by all the hype as much as anyone, but I am genuinely worried by the problems shown in the gameplay videos. I mainly have doubts about the combat, but there's a month to go and fingers crossed....
Bethesda didn't develop New Vegas, Obsidian did. Bethesda published it.Politi said:
I'm not a huge fan of the Elder Scrolls series, and I actually really liked Demons Soul's, so I'm more interested in Dark Souls at the moment. That doesn't mean Skyrim isn't interesting me either, but Dark Souls also looks really cool.
Demon's Souls would have been my game of the year if only it wasn't so fucking depressing. Even winning doesn't really feel like winning in that game. Other than that, it was epic. Dark Souls looks like more of the same, with the depression dialed up to 11. So I'm not going to play it (because I don't deal well with depression), but I'm pretty damn sure it's going to be a great game.
Skyrim looks like more ES, which means... not much, really. Morrowind was cool, Oblivion wasn't. Fallout 3 wass awesome, but ES not so much. So not really caring about Skyrim here.
Personal preference though.
Skyrim looks like more ES, which means... not much, really. Morrowind was cool, Oblivion wasn't. Fallout 3 wass awesome, but ES not so much. So not really caring about Skyrim here.
Personal preference though.
The article is just flame war bait. IGN hype machine is in full swing on Dark Souls. There has been a new article on that game nearly everyday on IGN.
I feel like, initially, I will enjoy Dark Souls more. But Skyrim I will enjoy for FAR longer, and I'll be able to go back to it more. It just seems to have a more lasting appeal and, obviously, greater replay value.
DLC - Dark Souls Wins because there is no DLC planned. Wait, what?
I don't care about the other points, because, frankly, they cherry-picked the topics and most of their "points" are simply opinions ("TRUE" Challenge? Sure.)
On the DLC side, however, I acknowledge that Bethesda has made some missteps in the past, but they're (supposedly) approaching it from a different angle this time. Or I should say an old angle. Rather than Horse Armor or 50 DLCs for Fallout, they're going back to Full Expansions. Howard made a comment at one point saying they're looking more at focusing on Expansions like the Bloodmoon and Tribunal from Morrowind or SI from Oblivion.
I think it's funny that they article is playing up Dark Souls's marketing so much while blatantly ignoring the information we've gotten about Skyrim, choosing to instead base everything on what the series has done before.
Oh, and Epic Scope: Dark Souls wins? Wahahahahah.....
I don't care about the other points, because, frankly, they cherry-picked the topics and most of their "points" are simply opinions ("TRUE" Challenge? Sure.)
On the DLC side, however, I acknowledge that Bethesda has made some missteps in the past, but they're (supposedly) approaching it from a different angle this time. Or I should say an old angle. Rather than Horse Armor or 50 DLCs for Fallout, they're going back to Full Expansions. Howard made a comment at one point saying they're looking more at focusing on Expansions like the Bloodmoon and Tribunal from Morrowind or SI from Oblivion.
I think it's funny that they article is playing up Dark Souls's marketing so much while blatantly ignoring the information we've gotten about Skyrim, choosing to instead base everything on what the series has done before.
Oh, and Epic Scope: Dark Souls wins? Wahahahahah.....
because you didn't win, you survived.Pingieking said:
A lot of good warriors, people died trying to control the power of the demons souls and that the good ending. The bad ending is that you basically kill everybody in the world collecting their souls for the old one. It was suppose to be bleak, this "great" kingdom had such a horrible history and the release of the soul arts brought all the corruption into the light.
Bah, this thread again. Same point I made last thread, both games are going to be good but it's down to personal preference. Also it's not exactly a fair comparison since both games have completely different design, gameplay, setting and story in general. The two games both are classified as RPG's and that's about as far as the similarities go.
There are many, many things in Dark Souls that were not in Demon's Souls. Such as the Gravelord, the Covenant System, a seamlessly open world, your own attacks with a given weapon, so forth. Actually I'd personally like to see the ability to swim. That would make for some interesting battles. xP I will agree that Dark Souls is doing a lot of the same, however. But still looks so good. Also, mind if I point out that Dark Souls isn't a sequel to Demon's Souls? It was actually stated that Dark Souls is a spiritual successor, rather than a sequel. I've got it all pre-ordered and paid off, too, and I can't wait for it to come out.^___^Ipsen said:
And the matter of DLC on Skyrim bugs me, as well. DLC exclusive to the Xbox version of Skyrim is just as bad as the whole "only the PS3 version of Batman: Arkham Asylum is allowed to play the Joker" thing. And that they're getting it early is equally crappy. They seem to be following in Oblivion's footsteps, where PS3 owners didn't get their DLC for a rather long time. For me, personally, after the way I didn't really enjoy Oblivion or Fallout 3 or Fallout New Vegas, I really don't have very high hopes for Skyrim, so I'm probably going to skip it in favor of Arkham City.