[IGN]Top Five Reasons Dark Souls Will Eat Skyrim's Face
- Thread starter dantoddd
- Start date
You can't spell ignorant without IGN.
Damn, ninjas!
This article sounds a bit too much like someone got payed to write it in favor of Dark Souls. Jeez, they could have at least made it less obvious. Corrupt idiots.
Damn, ninjas!
This article sounds a bit too much like someone got payed to write it in favor of Dark Souls. Jeez, they could have at least made it less obvious. Corrupt idiots.
Multiplayer
Bethesda's reasoning is sound. Time spent creating multiplayer is time lost on single player. Yeah, I'd love to be able to have my friends drop in on my game, that would be amazing. But hell, Bethesda's games are unpolished enough as they are, spending less time on that isn't a good idea.
DLC
Can we stop complaining about DLC? So what if there's plans for DLC already? There will always be ideas that don't make it into the game because they don't have the budget or time or whatever, and DLC is a way for publishers to deliver the content they wanted, after they don't have the pressure of releasing the game, or the sales bolster their budget.
Epic Scope
Morrowind felt large, without feeling empty. At least it did to me. Yeah, Oblivion's generated meadows made travel very boring, but Morrowind was a unique map, full of ruins and all sorts of other shit to explore. I spend hours just wandering the wilds of Vvardenfell. Maybe Skyrim will be the same. And why is it in one paragraph they complain that the size of Oblivion made it seem empty in places, and then to sum up they say Skyrim should have been bigger?
Combat
Bethesda's games were never built on combat itself. You level up, increase in strength, equip yourself with better weapons, armour and spells. That's why Morrowind was basically a dice roll system. Of course Dark Souls will have better combat, it has to have a tight combat system to provide challenge without artificial difficulty.
Dragons
Seriously? The dragons are better? Don't you think that's trying too hard? Especially since all you have to go on is footage right now, and it's kind of cheating to say the dragon fights will be better when you've already made combat part of your argument.
Just to make it clear, I'm playing devil's advocate here, but I do think some of the arguments are ridiculous. That said, if I can get a PS3, I shall be buying Dark Souls. It sounds like a great game.
EDIT: No 360 either guys. Thanks, but I'll be getting a PS3 first, assuming I ever have the money.
Bethesda's reasoning is sound. Time spent creating multiplayer is time lost on single player. Yeah, I'd love to be able to have my friends drop in on my game, that would be amazing. But hell, Bethesda's games are unpolished enough as they are, spending less time on that isn't a good idea.
DLC
Can we stop complaining about DLC? So what if there's plans for DLC already? There will always be ideas that don't make it into the game because they don't have the budget or time or whatever, and DLC is a way for publishers to deliver the content they wanted, after they don't have the pressure of releasing the game, or the sales bolster their budget.
Epic Scope
Morrowind felt large, without feeling empty. At least it did to me. Yeah, Oblivion's generated meadows made travel very boring, but Morrowind was a unique map, full of ruins and all sorts of other shit to explore. I spend hours just wandering the wilds of Vvardenfell. Maybe Skyrim will be the same. And why is it in one paragraph they complain that the size of Oblivion made it seem empty in places, and then to sum up they say Skyrim should have been bigger?
Combat
Bethesda's games were never built on combat itself. You level up, increase in strength, equip yourself with better weapons, armour and spells. That's why Morrowind was basically a dice roll system. Of course Dark Souls will have better combat, it has to have a tight combat system to provide challenge without artificial difficulty.
Dragons
Seriously? The dragons are better? Don't you think that's trying too hard? Especially since all you have to go on is footage right now, and it's kind of cheating to say the dragon fights will be better when you've already made combat part of your argument.
Just to make it clear, I'm playing devil's advocate here, but I do think some of the arguments are ridiculous. That said, if I can get a PS3, I shall be buying Dark Souls. It sounds like a great game.
EDIT: No 360 either guys. Thanks, but I'll be getting a PS3 first, assuming I ever have the money.
Yeh, I'm gonna have to agree, those are some pretty terrible arguments. I mean, to actually argue about which will be better before either is out is bad enough as it is, but I can understand it, given that most games websites hype games up well in advance.
But those reasons are just ridiculously asinine. Aside from anything else, the two games are so different that you can't really compare them anyway. People who might favour Skyrim are hardly likely to read that list and think 'oh, well I was completely wrong, I'd best pre-order Dark Souls'.
But those reasons are just ridiculously asinine. Aside from anything else, the two games are so different that you can't really compare them anyway. People who might favour Skyrim are hardly likely to read that list and think 'oh, well I was completely wrong, I'd best pre-order Dark Souls'.
1. I don't want, nor do I need, multiplayer in a game that I will dump at least 100 hours into just in the singleplayer.
2. Honestly, I'm tired of this argument. Just because there's DLC does NOT mean that there is a lack of content in the original package. It just means that. eventually, I can fork over some extra cash to add to over 100 hours of content already. And if I don't? Then I still have my 100+ hours. Besides, I'd rather see a company continue to support a game (If a game has DLC, that generally means there will also be patches, bugfixes, etc. along the way) rather than just sell it to me and forget about it.
3. "Look! Our game isn't linear anymore! Clearly, since we've improved, that automatically makes us better than our competition who already have a huge game world! What's that? They HAVE made their wilderness seem less like a wasteland? Oh well, let's just ignore that."
4. "Oh my god, guys! Dark Souls is SOOOOOO HARDCORE! RAAAAH!"
5. "Skyrim has dragons? Well, our dragons are SOOO much cooler!" Oh really, now? And you're comparing this to what? The grand total of two different types of dragons that have been detailed so far?
2. Honestly, I'm tired of this argument. Just because there's DLC does NOT mean that there is a lack of content in the original package. It just means that. eventually, I can fork over some extra cash to add to over 100 hours of content already. And if I don't? Then I still have my 100+ hours. Besides, I'd rather see a company continue to support a game (If a game has DLC, that generally means there will also be patches, bugfixes, etc. along the way) rather than just sell it to me and forget about it.
3. "Look! Our game isn't linear anymore! Clearly, since we've improved, that automatically makes us better than our competition who already have a huge game world! What's that? They HAVE made their wilderness seem less like a wasteland? Oh well, let's just ignore that."
4. "Oh my god, guys! Dark Souls is SOOOOOO HARDCORE! RAAAAH!"
5. "Skyrim has dragons? Well, our dragons are SOOO much cooler!" Oh really, now? And you're comparing this to what? The grand total of two different types of dragons that have been detailed so far?
Actually, I think Dark Souls probably will be better than Skyrim. Not for those reasons alone, but counting out Dark Souls based on this horrible article is pretty unfair, honestly.
The combat in Demon's Souls was much better than Oblivion, and even from what we've seen, the combat in Skyrim doesn't look like much has changed.
The combat in Demon's Souls was much better than Oblivion, and even from what we've seen, the combat in Skyrim doesn't look like much has changed.
IGN is brilliant in their tactics and I can't believe people on this site keep falling for it. There seems to be a weekly thread about how IGN is so biased and so wrong.
What's a good way to get traffic? Agree with everyone and say how much Skyrim is going to rock or saying that Skyrim is going to be the worst thing ever? You're playing right into their hand by not only reading what they wrote but by spreading it to other sites, saying how outraged you are about this.
What's a good way to get traffic? Agree with everyone and say how much Skyrim is going to rock or saying that Skyrim is going to be the worst thing ever? You're playing right into their hand by not only reading what they wrote but by spreading it to other sites, saying how outraged you are about this.
Oh god, the massive ignorant fanboyism, it hurts!
I mean, I'm looking forward to Dark souls, but this article is pretty much just "Dark souls will be better. Why? BECAUSE I SAID SO LOOK IT'S SO BETTER EVERY GAME NEEDS MULTIPLAYER BLAAAAGH"
I mean, I'm looking forward to Dark souls, but this article is pretty much just "Dark souls will be better. Why? BECAUSE I SAID SO LOOK IT'S SO BETTER EVERY GAME NEEDS MULTIPLAYER BLAAAAGH"
They're too dumb to have such a strategy. Just look at all the things they've said and done over the years. You're giving them way too much credit.tippy2k2 said:
I somewhat agree with them, especially combat. The only difficulty in Oblivion was due to level scaling (a buddy of mine was a high level and upped the difficulty to max, then spent close to 15 minutes trying to kill a crab). Skyrim will have an improved system, but level scaling is still present. I don't like level scaling. You level up to become more powerful, but the enemies are still just the same as before. In Demon's Souls, if you go to the wrong areas you get schooled. The feeling you get from finally defeating that red knight in 1-1 that slaughtered you before is what makes leveling up worthwhile. Scaling enemies gets rid of that fact.
As with the other points, not much else to say besides I'm getting Dark Souls and not Skyrim.
As with the other points, not much else to say besides I'm getting Dark Souls and not Skyrim.
They must be idiots, getting all those people riled up, running to sites to ***** about how dumb they are, and handing them traffic. How many people in this forum went to IGN to read this article? How many forums like this are going to pop up on various gaming sites?Adam Jensen said:
This is the exact same reason someone like Lindsay Lohan is still relevant. "Wow! What a stupid lady, why do people keep talking about her?" says the masses. "Let's continue to buy the stuff that talks about her because she's so stupid! Why doesn't she just go away? All well, I'm going to go buy some more stuff talking about Lindsay Lohan, that's bound to help!"
I have played Demon's Souls and I didn't like it so I won't be getting Dark Souls. Also the bias in this article hurts my brain.