Is Dark Souls really that good?

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

You claim Dark Souls isn't a RPG and then base your argument on the fact that you roleplay. Just... amazing.

You also state that Bioshock Infinite has platforming.

I hereby elect not to take you seriously. Thanks for the laugh, though.

You jump from platform to platform in Bioshock Infinite, that's just a fact. To be an RPG, a game needs to primarily focus on role-playing, not just have some in it like Bioshock Infinite having some platforming, but I guess you don't understand analogies. There's a role-playing section in Batman: Arkham City as Catwoman, I guess that makes it an RPG according to your logic.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

You claim Dark Souls isn't a RPG and then base your argument on the fact that you roleplay. Just... amazing.

You also state that Bioshock Infinite has platforming.

I hereby elect not to take you seriously. Thanks for the laugh, though.

You jump from platform to platform in Bioshock Infinite, that's just a fact. To be an RPG, a game needs to primarily focus on role-playing, not just have some in it like Bioshock Infinite having some platforming, but I guess you don't understand analogies. There's a role-playing section in Batman: Arkham City as Catwoman, I guess that makes it an RPG according to your logic.

I understand analogies pretty well.


How about this one for size: Your argument is as coherent and grounded on reality as the farts of a rainbow striped baboon are actual deep musings on the meaning of life and the secret behind Mona Lisa's smile.


And with that I'm off to play Skyrim the platformer.

What? It's totally a platformer, don't you see the jump button?

And you continue to not understand what an analogy is. I said Bioshock Infinite has platforming, not that it is a platformer.

 

[crispskittlez]

You claim Dark Souls isn't a RPG and then base your argument on the fact that you roleplay. Just... amazing.

You also state that Bioshock Infinite has platforming.

I hereby elect not to take you seriously. Thanks for the laugh, though.

You jump from platform to platform in Bioshock Infinite, that's just a fact. To be an RPG, a game needs to primarily focus on role-playing, not just have some in it like Bioshock Infinite having some platforming, but I guess you don't understand analogies. There's a role-playing section in Batman: Arkham City as Catwoman, I guess that makes it an RPG according to your logic.

I understand analogies pretty well.


How about this one for size: Your argument is as coherent and grounded on reality as the farts of a rainbow striped baboon are actual deep musings on the meaning of life and the secret behind Mona Lisa's smile.


And with that I'm off to play Skyrim the platformer.

What? It's totally a platformer, don't you see the jump button?

And you continue to not understand what an analogy is. I said Bioshock Infinite has platforming, not that it is a platformer.

Okay, then let's get back to talking about Dark Souls being an RPG. You talked a bit about character improvement but argue that it doesn't actually change much. I disagree, as character building and weapon/armour upgrades do play a large part in how situations turn out, especially close to the beginning of the game. It's an action-RPG; nobody's going to make progress with stats alone, but they are important and an integral part of the game. Even in the case of disregarding the player's stats in a SL1 playthrough, what equipment you use and how you upgrade all of it is important.

OP, I'd say give Dark Souls a shot. Generally, I'd to give Dark Souls a shot, because if they can muscle through what many consider to be a challenging game taking note of a lot of the design choices in it, they'll see how deliberately set up many of the enemy encounters and level designs are. It only punishes the player by toying with their expectations of how things should work and asking them to play with a slower, more observant style of play.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Okay, then let's get back to talking about Dark Souls being an RPG. You talked a bit about character improvement but argue that it doesn't actually change much. I disagree, as character building and weapon/armour upgrades do play a large part in how situations turn out, especially close to the beginning of the game. It's an action-RPG; nobody's going to make progress with stats alone, but they are important and an integral part of the game. Even in the case of disregarding the player's stats in a SL1 playthrough, what equipment you use and how you upgrade all of it is important.

Stats don't really matter in Dark Souls, you can get by just leveling vitality and endurance. You can put an element on a weapon to not need to scale its damage with a stat. You can use fire magic to use magic without needing any stat investment. The other poster said stats matter "to a very tight degree" and that is complete BS. I'm not even referencing SL1 playthroughs at all. For any player, I would recommend evenly leveling vitality, endurance, dex or str (for the kind of weapons you want to use), and int or faith (for a type of magic to use). You can easily get through the game allocating stat points just like that and have a wealth of options at your disposal. Dark Souls is very far from say DnD where literally every point you put into stats is extremely important. All these Souls players make the game out to be way more than it is, weapon/armor upgrades are really only important with regards of where you want to take said piece of equipment like make it divine, lightning, fire, occult, etc. It's not like if you don't level up your shield properly, you can't block attacks or anything like that. I was able to block just about every enemy's attacks with a level 5 light shield as a dex-based character. Dark Souls disappointed me greatly because I wanted to play a rogue-like character but I never felt like a rogue, I just felt like normal fighter that was slightly quicker and that was about it, I blocked enemy attacks and then attacked them afterward, that's how a strength-based character will play as well. In my opinion, Bayonetta (through different weapons and accessories and its combat system) has more playstyles than Dark Souls. Lastly, all stats in Dark Souls only affect combat so I can't see how the game can be classified as an RPG just due to that alone.

 

[crispskittlez]

Stats don't really matter in Dark Souls, you can get by just leveling vitality and endurance. You can put an element on a weapon to not need to scale its damage with a stat. You can use fire magic to use magic without needing any stat investment. The other poster said stats matter "to a very tight degree" and that is complete BS. I'm not even referencing SL1 playthroughs at all. For any player, I would recommend evenly leveling vitality, endurance, dex or str (for the kind of weapons you want to use), and int or faith (for a type of magic to use). You can easily get through the game allocating stat points just like that and have a wealth of options at your disposal. Dark Souls is very far from say DnD where literally every point you put into stats is extremely important. All these Souls players make the game out to be way more than it is, weapon/armor upgrades are really only important with regards of where you want to take said piece of equipment like make it divine, lightning, fire, occult, etc. It's not like if you don't level up your shield properly, you can't block attacks or anything like that. I was able to block just about every enemy's attacks with a level 5 light shield as a dex-based character. Dark Souls disappointed me greatly because I wanted to play a rogue-like character but I never felt like a rogue, I just felt like normal fighter that was slightly quicker and that was about it, I blocked enemy attacks and then attacked them afterward, that's how a strength-based character will play as well. In my opinion, Bayonetta (through different weapons and accessories and its combat system) has more playstyles than Dark Souls. Lastly, all stats in Dark Souls only affect combat so I can't see how the game can be classified as an RPG just due to that alone.

In Devil Survivor, stats effect combat only, and it's an RPG. In WoW, stats effect combat only, and it's an RPG. In GW2, stats effect combat only, and it's an RPG. In Pokemon, stats effect combat only, and it's an RPG. And then there are RPGs where stats effect more than just combat, etc. Dark Souls may not fit your definition of RPG, because you're defining it too narrowly/incorrectly.

Pyromancy in Dark Souls needs to be invested in to become more powerful like most things in the game. Upgrading weapons along paths that don't take influence from a character's stats frees up the player to invest in things like health and stamina, but they won't reach the raw damage output of a player using a fully upgraded divine weapon with high faith. You wanted to play a rogue-ish character, so I'm assuming you wore armour light enough to move around quickly in. Others decide they want a higher defense at the expense of speed and dodges. This is an outlet for the player's playstyle, and the very definition of orthogonal unit differentiation; balancing the raw statistics against one's ability to perform execution challenges.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

In Devil Survivor, stats effect combat only, and it's an RPG. In WoW, stats effect combat only, and it's an RPG. In GW2, stats effect combat only, and it's an RPG. In Pokemon, stats effect combat only, and it's an RPG. And then there are RPGs where stats effect more than just combat, etc. Dark Souls may not fit your definition of RPG, because you're defining it too narrowly/incorrectly.

Pyromancy in Dark Souls needs to be invested in to become more powerful like most things in the game. Upgrading weapons along paths that don't take influence from a character's stats frees up the player to invest in things like health and stamina, but they won't reach the raw damage output of a player using a fully upgraded divine weapon with high faith. You wanted to play a rogue-ish character, so I'm assuming you wore armour light enough to move around quickly in. Others decide they want a higher defense at the expense of speed and dodges. This is an outlet for the player's playstyle, and the very definition of orthogonal unit differentiation; balancing the raw statistics against one's ability to perform execution challenges.

I don't think any of those are RPGs (at least the ones I know of from that list aren't RPGs). The problem is people define RPGs far too broadly to the point where people say "well, any game can be an RPG" since you play as a character in just about every one of them. Here's a rather simple definition of an RPG:
A role-playing game is a game in which players assume the roles of characters in a fictional setting. Players take responsibility for acting out these roles within a narrative, either through literal acting or through a process of structured decision-making or character development.

Most video game RPGs don't qualify as RPGs under that definition. An RPG needs to primarily focus on the role-playing to be an RPG just like a shooter has to primarily focus on the shooting that's why COD is a shooter and Mirror's Edge is not. A game where you dungeon crawl pretty much all game is not an RPG, it's a hack and slash or dungeon crawler at that point. Dark Souls is really like DnD if you took the role-playing out of DnD and only fought monsters in dungeons.

The reason pyromancy is broken is because it doesn't factor into your level and due to Dark Souls having an online component. A level 20 character who uses pryomancy can be easily made stronger than a level 20 character that uses scorcery or miracles due to there being not stat investment needed for pyromancy. Dark Souls 2 will fix that and many other things like resistance actually doing something (how did a stat literally not doing anything make it into the final game when something like that should not have never even made it out of the conceptual stages? And Dark Souls is the SECOND game in the series, it's not like it was the developers 1st try at an RPG, that's why I have no faith in From Software to actually make a good game when they can't even get something so basic right). Another problem with Dark Souls' stats is the diminishing returns so it's not worth it to keep investing in say dex after a certain point. I played with my weight below 25% but I didn't feel any different than a fighter since I could block everything with a light shield, which I thought was stupid. Even in freaking Kingdom of Amalur my rogue had worse blocking when compared to Dark Souls. A dex-based character doesn't get anything for stealth like a rogue should. Dark Souls doesn't play much different if you go full dex or full strength as you'll still be fighting very similarly, dex character will swing faster as with less damage per hit vs a strength character swinging slower with more damage per hit, both characters can still block just about everything. Like I said before, Bayonetta has more differences in playstyle than Dark Souls, which is pretty sad.

 

[crispskittlez]

A role-playing game is a game in which players assume the roles of characters in a fictional setting. Players take responsibility for acting out these roles within a narrative, either through literal acting or through a process of structured decision-making or character development.

As long as we're pulling definitions off of Wikipedia, I should mention every game I named is defined as an RPG there as well. Dark Souls does fall under that definition, too, as well as having the macro gameplay being largely stat based. Don't get me wrong, the micro is almost entirely an execution challenge, but that alone doesn't forfeit it from being an RPG. Give me some examples of what you'd consider an RPG. Tabletop is the mother of all RPGs, sure, but I'd imagine some people forgo most of the actually roleplaying in favour of exploration and combat. That doesn't suddenly make a group's DnD campaign "not an RPG".

I agree that Mirror's Edge is not a shooter. I don't have much to add to that point, but you're right about it.

The reason pyromancy is broken is because it doesn't factor into your level and due to Dark Souls having an online component. A level 20 character who uses pryomancy can be easily made stronger than a level 20 character that uses scorcery or miracles due to there being not stat investment needed for pyromancy. Dark Souls 2 will fix that and many other things like resistance actually doing something (how did a stat literally not doing anything make it into the final game when something like that should not have never even made it out of the conceptual stages? And Dark Souls is the SECOND game in the series, it's not like it was the developers 1st try at an RPG, that's why I have no faith in From Software to actually make a good game when they can't even get something so basic right). Another problem with Dark Souls' stats is the diminishing returns so it's not worth it to keep investing in say dex after a certain point. I played with my weight below 25% but I didn't feel any different than a fighter since I could block everything with a light shield, which I thought was stupid. Even in freaking Kingdom of Amalur my rogue had worse blocking when compared to Dark Souls. A dex-based character doesn't get anything for stealth like a rogue should. Dark Souls doesn't play much different if you go full dex or full strength as you'll still be fighting very similarly, dex character will swing faster as with less damage per hit vs a strength character swinging slower with more damage per hit, both characters can still block just about everything. Like I said before, Bayonetta has more differences in playstyle than Dark Souls, which is pretty sad.

The bit about pyromancy is half-true, yes. Low level characters forgoing leveling up for upgrading pyromancy for one reason of another can be annoying if they fashion themselves as a ganker, but choosing to level up pyromancy with no regards for player stats will leave them vulnerable in a lot of the later areas they will no do be in while trying to gather souls for pyromancy. Resistance technically did do something, but it was so minor and dumb that I can't disagree with you.

Surely you weren't blocking everything with your light shield while playing. With the lower stability, you probably had to dodge a lot of the largest enemies attacks when a heavy guy with a greatshield could have just stood there and taken it. I'd bet you had a much easier time just plain dodging attacks when compared to a player with heavy armour. That's something that has a large impact on playstyle for sure. I haven't played Bayonetta in a few years, so I can't really comment on differences of playstyles in that game, but I don't see any reason why having more differences in playstyle in one game makes the other sad, even when comparing games from different genres.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

A role-playing game is a game in which players assume the roles of characters in a fictional setting. Players take responsibility for acting out these roles within a narrative, either through literal acting or through a process of structured decision-making or character development.

As long as we're pulling definitions off of Wikipedia, I should mention every game I named is defined as an RPG there as well. Dark Souls does fall under that definition, too, as well as having the macro gameplay being largely stat based. Don't get me wrong, the micro is almost entirely an execution challenge, but that alone doesn't forfeit it from being an RPG. Give me some examples of what you'd consider an RPG. Tabletop is the mother of all RPGs, sure, but I'd imagine some people forgo most of the actually roleplaying in favour of exploration and combat. That doesn't suddenly make a group's DnD campaign "not an RPG".

I agree that Mirror's Edge is not a shooter. I don't have much to add to that point, but you're right about it.

Video games aren't categorized by the simple definition of an RPG for some stupid reason. Dark Souls does not fall under that definition as Dark Souls has nothing along the lines of the bolded section of the definition, which is the key part of the definition as without that any game can be categorized as an RPG. I don't care if an RPG is purely based on character stats or player skill, that has nothing to do with whether a game is an RPG or not.

I used Mirror's Edge as an example because it has shooting but it's not a shooter because it has a whole lot more platforming than shooting. Same thing with Dark Souls, it has way more dungeon crawling/fighting than role-playing so it's first and foremost a dungeon crawler or hack and slash so it's not an RPG even though it has some role-playing.

The bit about pyromancy is half-true, yes. Low level characters forgoing leveling up for upgrading pyromancy for one reason of another can be annoying if they fashion themselves as a ganker, but choosing to level up pyromancy with no regards for player stats will leave them vulnerable in a lot of the later areas they will no do be in while trying to gather souls for pyromancy. Resistance technically did do something, but it was so minor and dumb that I can't disagree with you.

Surely you weren't blocking everything with your light shield while playing. With the lower stability, you probably had to dodge a lot of the largest enemies attacks when a heavy guy with a greatshield could have just stood there and taken it. I'd bet you had a much easier time just plain dodging attacks when compared to a player with heavy armour. That's something that has a large impact on playstyle for sure. I haven't played Bayonetta in a few years, so I can't really comment on differences of playstyles in that game, but I don't see any reason why having more differences in playstyle in one game makes the other sad, even when comparing games from different genres.

When you have players VSing each other as a part of the game, you can't allow for builds where one character is much better than another character at the same level. If Dark Souls was purely an offline game, then it's not really an issue.

You can block most boss attacks with a light shield and almost all regular enemies as well. A dex-based character shouldn't be able to block the knights for example. I'm fully aware there's a few enemies you can't block but they are very few in number. The reason I say it's sad is because in Bayonetta, you only play as Bayonetta (I think there's a character or 2 you can unlock though). In Dark Souls, it's an RPG where you build a character from scratch and the playstyles don't vary as much as the playstyles in a game where you just play as one character.

 

[Skin]

You can block most boss attacks with a light shield and almost all regular enemies as well. A dex-based character shouldn't be able to block the knights for example. I'm fully aware there's a few enemies you can't block but they are very few in number. The reason I say it's sad is because in Bayonetta, you only play as Bayonetta (I think there's a character or 2 you can unlock though). In Dark Souls, it's an RPG where you build a character from scratch and the playstyles don't vary as much as the playstyles in a game where you just play as one character.

What? There is a huge variation in playstyles. End game PVP has thousands and thousands of different builds. Some min/max, others "Roleplaying" and everything you could want inbetween. And if we are talking PvE, there are all the challenge runs/cosplay runs, etc that people have done.

Now, to a certain extent, I do agree with you that equipment is overpowered in the game. You can finish the game as a level 1, but you cannot finish without good equipment. I guess all you can do is say "well, thats Dark Souls" and move on. It is just another learning mechanic of the game. They don't tell you that equipment is much more important than levels, you just find out on your own.

As for the role playing/blocking thing you keep bringing up, later in the game, blocking without a heavy set of armor on, will not help you at all (4K for example) and you will need to get rolling. Also, if you have anything to do with PvP at all, you will find that just blocking your opponents attacks will lead to your swift demise. It is only really just the start of the game where all you need to do is block-hit-move to go on.

 

[crispskittlez]

When you have players VSing each other as a part of the game, you can't allow for builds where one character is much better than another character at the same level. If Dark Souls was purely an offline game, then it's not really an issue.

You can block most boss attacks with a light shield and almost all regular enemies as well. A dex-based character shouldn't be able to block the knights for example. I'm fully aware there's a few enemies you can't block but they are very few in number. The reason I say it's sad is because in Bayonetta, you only play as Bayonetta (I think there's a character or 2 you can unlock though). In Dark Souls, it's an RPG where you build a character from scratch and the playstyles don't vary as much as the playstyles in a game where you just play as one character.

When you say a dex-based character shouldn't be able to block larger attacks, it feels like you're supporting genre conventions for no solid reason other than "this is the way it's been before, so why stray from it." As for the PvP elements, I'm right there with you that it's not entirely balanced. Being ganked by groups of players equipped with much better gear who are obviously farming other players is not fun or balanced, and I really hope DS2 is better balanced for it. Also, it shouldn't be sad that Bayonetta has a large variety of playstyles supported when games with more characters/player created characters don't have as much. It just makes it sound like Bayonetta is really good. (which it is from what I remember about it)

Video games aren't categorized by the simple definition of an RPG for some stupid reason. Dark Souls does not fall under that definition as Dark Souls has nothing along the lines of the bolded section of the definition, which is the key part of the definition as without that any game can be categorized as an RPG. I don't care if an RPG is purely based on character stats or player skill, that has nothing to do with whether a game is an RPG or not.

I used Mirror's Edge as an example because it has shooting but it's not a shooter because it has a whole lot more platforming than shooting. Same thing with Dark Souls, it has way more dungeon crawling/fighting than role-playing so it's first and foremost a dungeon crawler or hack and slash so it's not an RPG even though it has some role-playing.

Dungeon Crawlers are subsets of RPGs, anyway, and Dark Souls does indeed fall under the bold portion of the definition. There are structured decisions that players make in DS, potentially without even realizing it, while taking responsibility for being the chosen undead in the story. That definition mentions nothing about how much agency the player has over their character or the story, and any game can have varying amounts while still being an RPG. Disregarding player stats and required skill, every game I've previously mentioned is also covered by that definition, and it's such a broad definition in the first place. That's why there are so many sub-genres, because defining everything by things like 'RPG', 'Shooter', or 'Adventure' leads to so much overlap between gameplay mechanics, individual player preferences, and possibility spaces, that two games that seem barely similar on the surface can still be shadowed by the same genre.

 

[barbzilla]

It's very clear that I suck at video games and I have a very hard time learning the ins and outs of a game's mechanics. Dark souls is scrotum-twistingly difficult and REQUIRES you to learn the ins and outs of it's mechanics, otherwise it will leave you as little more than a red smear on the sidewalk.

Personally, I think Dark Souls is incredible simple in its mechanics. It's strength is that it takes these simple mechanics and and turns them into a surprisingly deep and difficult experience. Then again, I tend to find most games simple to pick up, so maybe I'm not that trustworthy on the matter.

Anyways, if you've already accepted the fact that you're going to die a lot, that will certainly take out a lot of the frustration. If you don't like dying a lot, then maybe the game isn't for you because dying is just a major part of the game, but at the same time, I don't think anyone likes dying a lot, yet Dark Souls manages to be fun even while dying. To me, the biggest turn-off of the game is how slowly you move through it. If you don't mind investing a lot of time to make comparatively little progress, then go for it. If you don't feel like investing that kind of time, then maybe you should think about giving it a pass.

I think this post sums my feelings up the best. While I love Dark Souls, and still boot it up to this day to play on my Faithromancer who is on his 4th ng+, the progression rate in the early levels is frustratingly slow. I probably spent 2 whole days playing about in the first real area of the game (after you fly away from the starting area). After those two days were spent though, I did fairly well. Anytime I hit a difficulty wall, I'd step back and see what I could change, improve upon, or otherwise adjust to get my stats, gear, and tactics just so that I could pass that spot.

So, if you are patient, and don't mind potentially losing all the souls you have been farming for hours to upgrade your weapon because you died twice in a row, then definitely give this game a go. If you aren't patient, and get frustrated when things don't go your way (which it doesn't sound likely to be like you since you still game, despite any hardships you may endure), then definitely stay away from Dark Souls.

Oh, and if you are just someone who loves exploring into little nooks and crannies to find something wonderful someone else left behind, this game may just be for you.

 

[barbzilla]

Video games aren't categorized by the simple definition of an RPG for some stupid reason. Dark Souls does not fall under that definition as Dark Souls has nothing along the lines of the bolded section of the definition, which is the key part of the definition as without that any game can be categorized as an RPG. I don't care if an RPG is purely based on character stats or player skill, that has nothing to do with whether a game is an RPG or not.

I used Mirror's Edge as an example because it has shooting but it's not a shooter because it has a whole lot more platforming than shooting. Same thing with Dark Souls, it has way more dungeon crawling/fighting than role-playing so it's first and foremost a dungeon crawler or hack and slash so it's not an RPG even though it has some role-playing

Sorry to interrupt here, but I'd have to say that Dark Souls is more of an RPG than most games that get categorized as an RPG, seeing as how in Dark Souls you can make choices to sway the entire story one way or the other, meanwhile in 90% of what I see called RPGs these days, you go through a linear story line where you are fed narrative (often with your character speaking their own mind without any input from you, or you having only one or two options to push that typically don't really represent what is about to be said).

I do know that there are some out there that manage to really make an experience that feels like you are walking in someone else's shoes and running their life, and that is great. But, saying Dark Souls isn't an RPG because there isn't a spoken narrative for you to explore is just false when something as simple as choosing to kill something can change your entire path from bringer of light, to bringer of darkness.

 

[CannibalCorpses]

Well, to start with let me say that Dark souls isn't a hard game...it's a tedious game. Do you like tedious games that feel like a grind from start to finish? It's not an unfair game either...it just requires you to guess correctly which way to attack something or to die a few times until you work it out. Most of the enemies are obvious...just dodge roll around like a spaz and then backstab or peck them to death when you get an opening. Thats it really...thats the entire game summed up from my perspective. The bosses get more and more HP which means you spend more and more time pecking...boring plain and simple.

 

[KoudelkaMorgan]

I think I read each post enough to see that no one has yet mentioned Demon's Souls.

While there are a couple things about Dark Souls that I love, and are in fact better than its predecessor to me, the huge majority of the game falls short of it IMO.

I don't wish to list every reason why here, but if you hadn't even considered Demon's Souls I would definitely recommend you start there.

As for Dark Souls, I never considered it difficult or tedious. One thing it has over Demon's Souls is that grinding levels was NOWHERE close to as time consuming or repetitive due to the differing of the methodology. In Demon's you basically farmed the reaper or the mantas for HOURS on end just to be able to be able to use your chosen loadout properly.

In Dark Souls, you don't really need to do that at all, but if you feel like it you can go to one area and kill a few npcs in a min, repeat for an hour or so to gain a ton of levels.

The penalty for death in Dark, is basically nothing. In Demon's you lose half your HP, which you can boost to only 25% loss with a ring, but you gain attack power and move quieter...which makes the game easier.

 

[Rutabaga_swe]

If you need to grind in either game you are playing it wrong. In a new game of Dark Souls you'll get to around level 70-75 with little issue, more than enough to see you through the game. Haven't played Demon's Souls in a LONG time, but i can't remember griding being mandatory there either, in any sense. Well, perhaps for some upgrade materials, but that's about it.

 

[monkey_man]

I like bleak games, monster games, zombie games whatever. But usually there's a mild amount of hope. A drive to win. Dark souls is basically only bleak. You die, and find your body again, and get your xp again, or if you fail you lose it. Any unspent xp is lost, your important human-attribute points are gone. It's not a restart, it's gone. Just gone. it's punishing for the sake of punishing. a three hit combo, that's the game. Guitar hero could do that.

Dark souls is actually less punishing than most games, it just masks it well.

If you die in most other checkpoint based games you lose everything you collected since then.
If you die in Dark souls you can keep any items you found AND have a chance to regain even your souls

It's a shame then, the one thing they advertise and they dont even do it properly. "prepare to die, a lot". A checkpoint death does mean you get to do over, dark souls means backtracking, or losing your xp

A checkpoint death means you get to do it over and you will have to backtrack to where you died and you lose anything you gained since then. A Dark souls death means you get to do it over and you will have to backtrack to where you died and you keep most of what you lost + you have a chance to recover the rest

no, that's not entirely true. you don't backtrack. you reprogress. that's not the same. It's playing the game, retrying. Backtracking means wading through fucking miles of land to find your loot and THEN continue. It's a lot less fun, because the constant threat of "if i fuck up I just lost 2 hours worth of xp". It;'s a lot less fun, because it can mean having to go to an area you're not yet ready for. It's a lot less fun, because you may have been traveling the lands, and just died, only to have to walk fucking half an hour just to get your gear. There's a character element here too, and it just breaks if you have to take the exact same steps after death, just to find your money. "oh I died just then, that's number 400! guess i'm a really special little snowflake, let's just find my corpse and cuddle it, or else he'll get lonely" what kind of fucking character momentum is there. It's not "yeah i'm ready to beat this ugly monster down! *fails, rewind* Yeah I'm ready to beat this ugly monster down!" it's more like "ugh i fucking died again, let me get my gear, again, let me then try again, again." It's a bleak and depressing game already, but without the element of end, it's just rubbish. The entire evil end gets nullified anyway, seeing as you apparently are impossible to die anyway.

Spoiler: more bits to consider

If i die in, say Skyrim, I try a different approach. I plan, I execute skill. I win or lose and retry. A dark souls death means first: going back to wherever you lie, same boring old road, getting your stuff, and then trying to either leave, or continue. It's not a reset, it's not a plan, it's like getting your trousers out of a tree every time you fuck up, and a bunch of ugly girls are cheering in the background. And if you fail to retrieve said trousers, they vanish, and you have to walk home in your pants.

A checkpoint death is nowadays usually a death that means a small demerit, like losing money (gta, bioshock, borderlands), or having to restart a mission (games like prototype (you do reset, but your stats stay the same, it's a partial rewind). The few games that truly abide by the hardcore checkpoint deaths are games like skyrim (quicksave does kinda nullify it) or perhaps call of duty, and if you play those campaigns you are one of the few, and I'd respect you for it, but there's no xp element. Nor a actual plot besides "yeah i'm gonna shoot those guys for not speaking english"

Spoiler: ranty bit

Almost like "yeah I'm gonna stab that guy because it's a bad guy - dark souls" I did get lost on the finer details, apparently there is some sort of why behind the monsters or something. ( sometimes you do play a game just to kill dudes, like CS, tf2, or l4d. but there's a valid reason to do so. Kill the terrorist, or rob a bank, Blow up the enemy base because that's your job, or defend your capture point because your livelihood depends on it, kill the zombies to survive, eat the survivors because you are hungry,and they are noisy and rude. it's still more valid than ds's entire plotline imo)

dark souls does not just reset your checkpoint. IT resets your character except for items and gear, you lose all your money/xp/whatever. You could have farmed for a day straight and have gone to at least 400 different areas, but you die and it's gone. all of it. unless you haul ass through dangerous territory, often in bossland which means HAVING to redo the boss or losing gold. A true checkpoint would mean your stats are saved from that point out. but if you save with a millions souls, and you die, they're all gone. poof. It's just a stupid way to force a players hand.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

As for the role playing/blocking thing you keep bringing up, later in the game, blocking without a heavy set of armor on, will not help you at all (4K for example) and you will need to get rolling. Also, if you have anything to do with PvP at all, you will find that just blocking your opponents attacks will lead to your swift demise. It is only really just the start of the game where all you need to do is block-hit-move to go on.

I blocked enemy attacks with a light shield from the start of the game to the end of the game. Those knights on the way to the final boss, I blocked their attacks with a measly level 5 light shield. If you just lower your shield in-between attacks, your stamina fills up really fast.

When you say a dex-based character shouldn't be able to block larger attacks, it feels like you're supporting genre conventions for no solid reason other than "this is the way it's been before, so why stray from it." As for the PvP elements, I'm right there with you that it's not entirely balanced. Being ganked by groups of players equipped with much better gear who are obviously farming other players is not fun or balanced, and I really hope DS2 is better balanced for it. Also, it shouldn't be sad that Bayonetta has a large variety of playstyles supported when games with more characters/player created characters don't have as much. It just makes it sound like Bayonetta is really good. (which it is from what I remember about it)

I'm not saying you have to stick to conventions. I'm saying all melee characters in DS play too similarly because you can block with any melee character. I shouldn't be able to block the knight's triple sword attack with a light shield. What's the point of using a big shield when such a small shield blocks so well? Bayonetta is considered by most the best hack and slash ever made.

Dungeon Crawlers are subsets of RPGs, anyway, and Dark Souls does indeed fall under the bold portion of the definition. There are structured decisions that players make in DS, potentially without even realizing it, while taking responsibility for being the chosen undead in the story. That definition mentions nothing about how much agency the player has over their character or the story, and any game can have varying amounts while still being an RPG. Disregarding player stats and required skill, every game I've previously mentioned is also covered by that definition, and it's such a broad definition in the first place. That's why there are so many sub-genres, because defining everything by things like 'RPG', 'Shooter', or 'Adventure' leads to so much overlap between gameplay mechanics, individual player preferences, and possibility spaces, that two games that seem barely similar on the surface can still be shadowed by the same genre.

It's not whether you can find parts of Dark Souls that fall under the bolded sections, it's that Dark Souls' primary focus is not on said bolded sections of the definition. Yes, I will agree that DS has some role-playing, but it's not the focus of the game. Just like Mirror's Edge has some shooting, but it's not a shooter. Wouldn't you agree that you categorize a game by what it focuses on (by what you do most in the game)? What you do most in Dark Souls is hack and slash, not role-play.

Sorry to interrupt here, but I'd have to say that Dark Souls is more of an RPG than most games that get categorized as an RPG, seeing as how in Dark Souls you can make choices to sway the entire story one way or the other, meanwhile in 90% of what I see called RPGs these days, you go through a linear story line where you are fed narrative (often with your character speaking their own mind without any input from you, or you having only one or two options to push that typically don't really represent what is about to be said).

I do know that there are some out there that manage to really make an experience that feels like you are walking in someone else's shoes and running their life, and that is great. But, saying Dark Souls isn't an RPG because there isn't a spoken narrative for you to explore is just false when something as simple as choosing to kill something can change your entire path from bringer of light, to bringer of darkness.

Most RPGs aren't RPGs. Most JRPGs are basically point and click adventure games with a combat system thrown in. Telltales' games are more of an RPG. Dark Souls focus is on combat, not role-playing. That is why it's not an RPG. Whereas the focus of Mass Effect is on role-playing, and shooting second. That's the difference.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

I'm of two minds about the game. The first and most obvious point is that the game is, by literally any metric poorly designed. You can get lost easily and even if you take all the precautions you will die unless you have access to special knowledge (that is, you have already died to some trap or another OR you consult a well constructed walkthrough). To put it simply, the game does everything it can to inconvenience you at every possible turn. But, this leads neatly to the second point.

You see, Dark Souls has this stigma of being considered "Difficult" and the stark reality is that the game isn't actually hard at all. Any fight you might encounter and any trap you might come across is trivial as long as you know how to deal with it. And that's where the game takes a sharp turn. You start the game as your chosen class and blunder your way through the easiest section of the game where even the boss is easily defeated. Then the game throws you into a place where the first group of enemies you fight can murder you. And as your death count rises, you start to learn things. For example, those hollow spearmen have the easiest attack to parry in the game and once you know that, any hollow spearman you encounter becomes little more than a minor roadblock. This goes on and on as you learn how to efficiently kill each enemy. The first black knight I ever killed I basically cheesed by running away throwing firebombs as I ran and now I just look at them as loot pinatas.

The fun of Dark Souls is not in the dying or the difficulty or any of that hogwash people throw out there; the fun is in learning. Each time you die you can figure out something that ensures this time around you'll make it at least a few steps further. And, by the end, you'll beat the game using some trusted weapon and shield and perhaps some magic here and there and think to yourself that you discovered the only way to play the game. Then you go online and find that you just found one way to play; there are lots of others. And then you go and play again with a different weapon and find that you have to learn a whole new set of things.

 

[barbzilla]

Sorry to interrupt here, but I'd have to say that Dark Souls is more of an RPG than most games that get categorized as an RPG, seeing as how in Dark Souls you can make choices to sway the entire story one way or the other, meanwhile in 90% of what I see called RPGs these days, you go through a linear story line where you are fed narrative (often with your character speaking their own mind without any input from you, or you having only one or two options to push that typically don't really represent what is about to be said).

I do know that there are some out there that manage to really make an experience that feels like you are walking in someone else's shoes and running their life, and that is great. But, saying Dark Souls isn't an RPG because there isn't a spoken narrative for you to explore is just false when something as simple as choosing to kill something can change your entire path from bringer of light, to bringer of darkness.

Most RPGs aren't RPGs. Most JRPGs are basically point and click adventure games with a combat system thrown in. Telltales' games are more of an RPG. Dark Souls focus is on combat, not role-playing. That is why it's not an RPG. Whereas the focus of Mass Effect is on role-playing, and shooting second. That's the difference.

I won't argue that Dark Souls does have a heavy focus on combat, but at what point do you get to make that decision that game A has more going on with the story so it is an rpg, while game B wanted more action.... Dark Souls is an RPG in every sense of the word. There is lore, there is character customization, there are important choices for you to make that drive the narrative, and you have to take a much more active role in the game world than you do in most games considered RPGs. There is no way you can say that Dark Souls isn't an RPG period. At the same time, I won't tell you that Dark Souls isn't a Dungeon Crawler Hack and Slash, because it is (are you starting to understand how genre blending works yet?). Dungeon Crawling is just the type of environment in the game, and hack and slash could be considered to be the base combat system, but that doesn't detract from it being an RPG (also, this game is a bit too tactical for hack and slash, I'd lean more towards action based RPG).