What would you want from a Dark Souls clone?

Fox12

AccursedT- see you space cowboy
Jun 6, 2013
4,828
0
0
Casual Shinji said:
Fox12 said:
Casual Shinji said:
Don't we sort of have enough of these games now?

We got Demon's Souls, Dark Souls, Dark Souls 2, Dark Souls 3, and Bloodborne, which most likely will get a sequel of it's own. Then there's Nioh coming out early next year.

I think we're good Souls wise, wouldn't you say?
The answer to that question is always no
I don't know man. After DS3 I felt rather Soul'd out.

I'm a bit tired of the formula.
I think From is tired too. Bloodborne was good, but DS2 and 3 felt like they phoned it in. The worlds feel smaller and less interconnected in every game, while there has been way less diversity in types of builds. I can't believe they essentially ruined poise and magic, forcing you to play a certain type of character. While this has been going on the lore has become more convoluted and formulaic. The Lore from the different games don't make sense together. Every game has a crestfallen warrior. Every game has a maiden in black. Every game has patches. Multiple games have an Astraea character. Enough already!

I'm fine with similar gameplay, but I want some originality as well. Something like Bloodborne. As for other companies, I want them to take inspiration from the Souls games, but I want them to do their own thing. Most people don't know that the biggest inspiration for Demon/Dark Souls was Ico and Shadow of the Collosus. That's where Miyazaki got the whole interconnected locations thing. I want someone to be inspired by Dark Souls in the way that Dark Souls was inspired by Ico. In other words, I want something different.
 

omega 616

New member
May 1, 2009
5,883
1
0
Casual Shinji said:
Don't we sort of have enough of these games now?

We got Demon's Souls, Dark Souls, Dark Souls 2, Dark Souls 3, and Bloodborne, which most likely will get a sequel of it's own. Then there's Nioh coming out early next year.

I think we're good Souls wise, wouldn't you say?
I'd also throw "lords of the fallen" in with that list.

I agree with the sentiment though, any "clone" would be the homefront to COD ... why are you taking the clone over the original. To put it another way, the new MGS game ... it's MGS in name but it hasn't got the mind of the person that made it great, so it will probably flop.
 

CritialGaming

New member
Mar 25, 2015
2,170
0
0
I want a Bloodborne stype of hyper agressive gameplay, but I want a different setting. I think something sci with badass killer robots and cyborgs could be cool. There is a whole new level of gameplay you can do with sci-fi I feel. I mean these souls games have been mostly swords and such for a long time, but think of what can be done with lasers, projectiles, and such. Maybe the hero has something of a lightsaber weapon, and must take out foes that have a far greater arsenal than he/she does. You can collect cyber parts from the robots you kill to enhance yourself and grant new abilities to your character. It could be awesome!
 

Neurotic Void Melody

Bound to escape
Legacy
Jul 15, 2013
4,953
6
13
CritialGaming said:
I want a Bloodborne stype of hyper agressive gameplay, but I want a different setting. I think something sci with badass killer robots and cyborgs could be cool. There is a whole new level of gameplay you can do with sci-fi I feel. I mean these souls games have been mostly swords and such for a long time, but think of what can be done with lasers, projectiles, and such. Maybe the hero has something of a lightsaber weapon, and must take out foes that have a far greater arsenal than he/she does. You can collect cyber parts from the robots you kill to enhance yourself and grant new abilities to your character. It could be awesome!
You may well be in luck there;

 

CaitSeith

Formely Gone Gonzo
Legacy
Jun 30, 2014
5,231
240
68
Have you tried Salt and Sanctuary or DarkMaus? Those are games that present some of the gameplay mechanics in a different view (S&S is a side-scroller, and DarkMaus is top-down).

What I would expect from a DS-clone would be:
1. Different weapons with different reach, speed and power and attack types (at least a weak attack and a strong attack).
2. Action commitment. Once you do an attack or dodge, you can't cancel it.
3. Enemies attacks are varied and strong, but reasonably dodgeable and telegraphed.
4. Level layout can be used for your advantage or the enemies'.
5. When you die, you lose something that can be recovered by returning to where you died.
6. Level design allows exploration and have shortcuts to the checkpoints.
7. You can recover in checkpoints, but normal enemies respawn.

Not all is required, but the point is that they should be used to make the world feel oppressive, but ultimately beatable with practice, planning and smart thinking.
 

KoudelkaMorgan

New member
Jul 31, 2009
1,365
0
0
I've gotten (barring weeks of grinding for covenant items in DS3) platinum in all the Fromsoft games. Meaningless of course, but a point of reference.

About Lord's of the Fallen
I've watched a fair amount of Lords of the Fallen, enough to be interested in if the story was actually going anywhere but totally disinterested in ever playing it. The spells just did nothing interesting for me, looked visually similar/boring, and the melee was too slow and the levels weren't well laid out. The characters though seemed interesting, and having an actual plot is definitely a plus. The emphasis on micromanaging EVERY piece of your gear like you are playing Champion's of Norrath isn't my preference in these kinds of games.

In fact Bloodborne and Dark Souls 3 doing away with armor upgrades was a huge improvement to me. I can just wear what I want, or what I need for the situation without its stats being arbitrarily gimped by how recently I found it compared to upgrade materials after I've used them on my weapon of choice.

Maybe you find a new weapon you like but its heavy. Well you used to have 4 pieces of gear to eat up your materials plus whatever different ones you ended up using to accommodate the new weapon, which is fine if materials can be repeatably (if not cheaply or even consistently) obtained. The problem comes from things like weapons and armors using the same materials like in Dark Souls instead of different ones like in Demons's Souls. Or making the highest tier of material a once per cycle item on top of that like in Bloodborne or very limited like Dark Souls. Dark Souls 2 let you farm for Slabs and Dark Souls 3 kinda gave them out like Halloween candy, and the games didn't suffer for it.

They also let you change your stats, something Bloodborne does not let you do which is not a deal breaker but then again stats in that game pretty much end up averaging out anyways due to severe diminishing returns/they are all pretty useful for most builds. I can't really think of a niche build in that game due to how few the weapon/gun/tool choices are and armor/weight/poise not really being a concern. I mean there are combinations I would never use, but its purely based on playstyle rather than utility.

About movement and systems
I liked Bloodborne's quickstepping as opposed to the somewhat silly "dodge roll" mechanic. I mean if I'm walking about and I get jumped I think instantly hurling yourself armor and all to the ground in an attempt to evade an attack you didn't see coming seems comparatively reasonable if standing and blocking/parrying/tanking/counter attacking quickly isn't an option. But locked on, or even chasing a target why would you fling yourself to the side if a quick dash to the side would suffice and have you remain on your feet and ready to attack? Wouldn't you rather dash towards your fleeing target and quickly attack from a standing position instead of do an awkward gymnastic maneuver, regain your stance, and often do a rather useless slow attack that will never hit a sprinting target anyways?

Do you prefer dancing back and forth in and out of range of each other's attacks or mindlessly iframe rollspamming to pivot backstab each other? I prefer criticals taking charged R2s or parries, not "I'm vaguely within 3 feet of your rear 190 degrees for 1 frame, so I'm gonna chainstab you to death because your ping and mine are on 2 different wavelengths."

I don't PVP anymore in these games, because its hot trash and always has been, so having actually good pvp would be fun. I haven't tried it in BB due to no PS+ but I think it would be fun.

Invasions and co op aren't my thing really, but they can be fun sometimes. The key being sometimes. Getting invaded literally nonstop in Dark Souls 1, preventing me from sitting at the bonfire since they just run away through Duke's Archives like a troll every time is not an element of danger or excitement. Personally I think both invaders and people that like being invaded would probably prefer it if you could only be invaded in areas that weren't within 10 feet of a bonfire. Look at the areas where NPC invaders show up in Dark Souls 2, nice and trolly right? Right. They show up in difficult areas, not camping next to every damn bonfire.

Dark Souls 2 also has the best menu system of any of the games. It neatly separates items from equipment, and separates equipment into different categories. It doesn't lump everything together into a giant pile of crap like Dark Souls 3, or into pointless sub-subcategories like Bloodborne.

About Nioh
I played the Nioh beta. I played the boring tutorial, and the utterly boring first 15 minutes of the first level. I had no idea how to use my spirit animal thingy at first but when I figured it out it was basically Mousou mode which was cool. I liked the different weapon classes, and even the 3 stances I thought was alright if not a little cumbersome compared to just having 2 with more complete movesets. I found High Stance to be pretty lackluster with all weapons, and low stance to be great but lacking in damage except for dual swords which seemed to kick ass.

Mid stance was meh, and I doubt I'd bother not just using it for convenience. The ki pulse mechanic seemed pointless fluff added to combat as stamina was never an issue even with highstanced axe, but it does do that purify thing I'm sure is important if I intended to ever played it again.

I was having some fun just summoning dead spirits to duel with, the actual enemies bored me completely. I mean yeah they both kill you in 2 or 3 hits, but fighting the dead players was actually fun.

What eventually told me I didn't need to play it any further was how much I hated the menu, the controls, and the gear systems. I know people say its like Dark Souls, but to me it was closer to Onimusha or Ninja gaiden meets Diablo with the random loot drops and super fast combat. I mean its not terrible, but its not Dark Souls just because you have a stamina meter, equipment load, and weak/strong attacks. I mean sure you refill your supply of healing things at a shrine which respawns the area, so it pretty much is Dark Souls in that way, but that's about it that I could see.

The hud and menus were just too busy to keep me interested, and combat seemed to be very rudimentary. Block and take no damage until they get tired, stab them, repeat. Being able to see their stamina actually go down kinda made it predictable.

About gear and magic
Ideally I would prefer any new clone game to have each weapon be unique rather than bloat the game with dozens of near identicals within weapon classes. Maybe not as limited as Bloodborne but definitely less than Dark Souls 3 where about half the weapons/shields are practically reskins.

I would also have a good system of magic. Dark Souls 2 had the best. Variety, utility, accessibility, and scalability. Magic wasn't too overpowered at first, but with the right gear and build it was more than good enough and eventually it was pretty devastating.

Demons's Souls was good as well but a lot of the spells were hard to get or you needed a ton of stats to remember more than a few of them/spell tools were few to be found. But they certainly each had their uses and they were sufficiently powerful. No area was just filled with enemies that were all resistant to all forms of magic like in Dark Souls 2.

Magic in Dark Souls 1 was boring. Sorcery was weak, the spells mostly identical only slightly more powerful etc. Pyromancy was where it was at, even if you couldn't throw a fireball further than 4 feet in front of you, and miracles were okay but the good ones were tied to one covenant entirely.

Dark Souls 3's magic is garbage. Or at least its sorcery is garbage. Too many good looking spells just do not work properly or due pathetic damage. I essentially just used Heavy Soul Arrow until I got Great Heavy Soul Arrow, and then I used that and Soul Greatsword until I got White Dragon Breath and then I got Soul Stream and pretty much still used GHSA 90% of the time. Pestilent Mercury is trash, Farron Rain is trash, Farron Darts are trash, Crystal Soul Spear is sadly kinda trash given its FP cost relative to GHSA or a more powerful spell.

The dark sorceries all really suck, though I didn't use the Izalith catalyst. I do know that they would still suck with it.

I bet pyromancy and miracles will be better though. I won't know until I grind my lot of soul dregs for my final sorcery and start a new game.

About drops
I would definitely recommend, almost above everything else, that any game avoid ridiculously rare drops. I mean its okay for a few things, like a Sunlight Medal or a Titanite Slab to be a rare drop.

But not rarer than getting the Gutsy Bat, The Sword of Kings, and the Gaia Beam on the same Earthbound file which I have done with far less trouble than getting say PURE BLADESTONE, or literally ANY of the covenant items in DS3. Grinding up sunlight medals in DS2 was also a pain but I got enough along with Pursuer co-op spam to get it sorted.

With no PS+ DS3 trophies are gated behind weeks of pointless grinding for most.

My playstyle tends toward using quicker weapons or weapons with reach as opposed to slow heavy hitting weapons or even magic unless I'm in the mood for it.

In Demons's Souls I used practically everything because it was literally all good, and all viable. Top choices were the Kilij and Winged Spear though.

In Dark Souls I preferred the Winged Spear, Halberd, and Iaito.

In Dark Souls 2 I preferred the Dragonrider Twinblade, Shortsword, Pyromancy, Sorcery, and Halberd.

In Bloodborne I preferred the Threaded Cane, Blade of Mercy, and Kirk Hammer (I call it IHOP cause you got pancakes for daaays).

In Dark Souls 3 I actually used the whip more than anything when sorcery wasn't doing it but most of the weapons were pretty good.
 

Danbo Jambo

New member
Sep 26, 2014
585
0
0
A bit more clarity to the story would be nice. And I may be in a minoroty, but for the love of God please make enemies disappear after 10 or so kills like in DS2, it just gets so, so boring killing the same things over & over & over again.

Personally I'd like to see a Golden Axe sequel given the DS treatment. Slimlined to make it more accessable, but with bags of that classic fantasy base to give it some depth.
 

Saelune

Trump put kids in cages!
Legacy
Mar 8, 2011
8,411
16
23
Danbo Jambo said:
A bit more clarity to the story would be nice. And I may be in a minoroty, but for the love of God please make enemies disappear after 10 or so kills like in DS2, it just gets so, so boring killing the same things over & over & over again.

Personally I'd like to see a Golden Axe sequel given the DS treatment. Slimlined to make it more accessable, but with bags of that classic fantasy base to give it some depth.
I dont like the respawn limit because it makes me worry about having a finite amount of souls in the game, aka exp/money. If there is a costless way to revive them, fine, but Dark Souls 2's way of returning them sucks. On top of that is Soul Memory which leaves me feeling every single soul I fail to recover. I dont know how many souls I lost in DS1, cause I didnt keep any count. In DS2 so far, its just above 10k, and thats because I am extra cautious now, and am nowhere near as far as I should be.
 

Danbo Jambo

New member
Sep 26, 2014
585
0
0
Saelune said:
Danbo Jambo said:
A bit more clarity to the story would be nice. And I may be in a minoroty, but for the love of God please make enemies disappear after 10 or so kills like in DS2, it just gets so, so boring killing the same things over & over & over again.

Personally I'd like to see a Golden Axe sequel given the DS treatment. Slimlined to make it more accessable, but with bags of that classic fantasy base to give it some depth.
I dont like the respawn limit because it makes me worry about having a finite amount of souls in the game, aka exp/money. If there is a costless way to revive them, fine, but Dark Souls 2's way of returning them sucks. On top of that is Soul Memory which leaves me feeling every single soul I fail to recover. I dont know how many souls I lost in DS1, cause I didnt keep any count. In DS2 so far, its just above 10k, and thats because I am extra cautious now, and am nowhere near as far as I should be.
It's absolutely no problem at all mate. You can burn bonfire aesthetics to respawn enemies, but you really don't need to as some enemies provide more than enough souls, and the bosses definitely do that too.

I just think it gets way to repetitive and boring killing the same enemies over & over. As a gaming experience, I much prefer the limited respawn setup.
 

meiam

Elite Member
Dec 9, 2010
2,225
744
118
Do away with invincibility frame on the dodge mechanic, if something hit me, it should hurt me. The I-frame really limit what the game can do because no matter what all you need to do is dodge at the right time, so positioning become meaningless and since dodge use relatively little stamina, stamina management is also far less important (in BB I usually don't even bother increase my stamina). And its just so ridiculous to see your character clip trough enemy attacks.

Otherwise new setting would be nice, definitely keep telling story element trough environment, and I'll echo what was said before, fuck cut scenes.

Obviously keep the sense of fairness about it, punish me for my mistake but no need to go over board. Oh and keep the single difficulty setting, no point in wasting the team effort on multiple difficulty setting. People who want the game to be harder can play with self impose rule, people who want it easier can just win trough repetition by dying and reviving.
 

bartholen_v1legacy

A dyslexic man walks into a bra.
Jan 24, 2009
3,056
0
0
New settings. DS3 was just lazy with its environments: oh yay, more generic castles, cathedrals, caves, cathedrals, snowy towns, delapitated towns, cathedrals, ruins, cathedrals and did I also mention cathedrals? How about shuffling through the tight streets of middle ages Timbuktu? Or Mayan temples? Jungles? Indian palaces? This extends to all of gaming by the way, but especially to Souls.

More focus on character storylines. I don't need every character to show up in the most blatant locations, but even one or two questlines which every player would see to the end on their first playthrough would make a difference. Judging by how many people were sad over Solaire's storyline in DS1, imagine seeing that with multiple characters. And I don't only mean jackasses who only sit in one spot and occasionally serve as summons, I mean characters who are vital to the plot and whose backstory isn't relegated only to item descriptions. Siegmeyer's questline in DS1 is one of the saddest in the series, yet its last three stages (him being in Blighttown, then in Izalith, and finally in Ash Lake) are nigh impossible to discover without a wiki. I want to feel sad to see these characters die, and not just because they've helped me in gameplay terms, but also because I care about them as a character and wish to see them succeed.

More oomph in the combat. The system is quite robust as it already is, but with little touches it could be even more satisfying. Imagine if when you managed to hit a zombie's head with a mace the body doesn't just fall limp, but you actually hear the sound of and see the skull cracking open! Dismemberment, visible damage on the models, gore that doesn't just disappear, changing animations and AI patterns on enemies depending on where they're injured... there's so much you can do!

Environment affecting gameplay more. For example, your stamina would deplete faster in a lava or fire area, requiring you to switch up your tactics. Going into water deep enough would increase your equipment load for a period of time (I haven't seen any game other than Dragon's Dogma do this, yet it adds so much to the immersion). Casting fire spells would weaken ice-based enemies. Casting lightning around metal surfaces would make it conduct, possibly damaging more enemies.

Better character mobility, or for the love of christ construct the world in a way that doesn't make me constantly go "Why can't I just go there?". Dark Souls 2 would essentially lose 2/3 of its length if your character was simply able to move over a small pile of rubble. You could skip half of the Catacombs in DS1 if your character could just crawl through a very wide gap in the rock. That kind of things breaks immersion super hard.

For the love of God, stop having the enemies being able to hit me through 20 ft of solid rock while my weapon bounces off it!

Follow DS1 in the amount of hidden nooks and crannies you can find, and have it be worth it. I only last week discovered how you find the Great Magic Barrier miracle in DS1, and I was staggered that a game I've beaten around 8 times still holds new secrets for me to find.

Make new magic types, or at least make the ones we have now more distinct from one another. Now there's rather little difference between Fireball, Lightning Spear or Great Soul Arrow aside from projectile speed, casting time and damage. Perhaps fire damage would freak out enemies in darkness, like the torch did in Old Yharnam in Bloodborne. Sudden lightning spells could blind and stun enemies. Magic could perhaps disorient enemies. Imagine introducing bending-style magic where you use the environment to your advantage! So many possibilities!

Use the horror elements more! New Londo Ruins, Tomb of the Giants, and the Upper Cathedral in Bloodborne are all incredibly atmospheric, terrifying locations. Souls already has sublime sound design, and it's one of the most vital elements of horror. Holy shit, imagine a Souls game crossed with Silent Hill's sound design!
 

stroopwafel

Elite Member
Jul 16, 2013
3,031
355
88
I would prefer just more variety to the established formula. Similarly the difference between Souls and Bloodborne. Those games are so fun for me I simply never get tired of them. I also think that From Software's rise to popularity is really that 'perfect storm' of Miyazaki's creative vision and From's collaboration with Japan Studio(both Dark Souls and DkS 3 owe pretty much everything to Demon's Souls and Bloodborne on a technical level). I mean, they basically created an entire new subgenre of action-rpg's so what would From return to? The ehmm.. less spectacular games they made pre-Demon's Souls?

So yeah, From pretty much has a patent on that specific brand of moody action-RPG's and even if they rely on partnerships to make those games a reality I really hope they don't lose focus on what they do best and fade into obscurity again. Also, Demon's Souls is from 2009 and since then you only had Dark Souls and it's few sequels and Bloodborne. I mean, it's productive since it's just one studio but they are also the only ones making those games so it's not exactly like they come in large supply. It's also the reason I think why these games have gotten so popular.

Eventually though, I can't think of a single DkS 'clone' that is actually good(atleast those that are of a similar scope). Even From's very own Dark Souls 2 struggled. Games are a team effort and all but the best games in the series(and the reason they exist in the first place) are all thanks to Miyazaki's creative talent and unbelievable imagination. Some indie games that were obviously inspired by DkS were pretty good in their own way though, like Hyperlight Drifter and Salt & Sanctuary.

If Bamco however would decide to continue Dark Souls without From's involvement, a game set completely in the Age of Dark would be cool(atleast the series should move away from that 'cycle' bullshit). I think with a capable director Dark Souls can still be pushed in lot of different directions, if however it doesn't try to be a 'clone'. :p
 

Shoggoth2588

New member
Aug 31, 2009
10,250
0
0
Just add in more insane monsters, remove some of the humanoid boss monsters and, craft a single playable character with a story about killing Dracula and you have a pretty damn good 3D Castlevania.

I've only played Demon's Souls and I'm still trying to make my way through it. I really like the atmosphere, I really like how there are multiple ways to get through certain levels and I like being able to pick which level I want to try tackling first. What I know of future installments though, I'm really looking forward to fighting gargantuan vagina-Dragons and strange humanoids who attack you with their internal organs.
 

Saelune

Trump put kids in cages!
Legacy
Mar 8, 2011
8,411
16
23
Danbo Jambo said:
Saelune said:
Danbo Jambo said:
A bit more clarity to the story would be nice. And I may be in a minoroty, but for the love of God please make enemies disappear after 10 or so kills like in DS2, it just gets so, so boring killing the same things over & over & over again.

Personally I'd like to see a Golden Axe sequel given the DS treatment. Slimlined to make it more accessable, but with bags of that classic fantasy base to give it some depth.
I dont like the respawn limit because it makes me worry about having a finite amount of souls in the game, aka exp/money. If there is a costless way to revive them, fine, but Dark Souls 2's way of returning them sucks. On top of that is Soul Memory which leaves me feeling every single soul I fail to recover. I dont know how many souls I lost in DS1, cause I didnt keep any count. In DS2 so far, its just above 10k, and thats because I am extra cautious now, and am nowhere near as far as I should be.
It's absolutely no problem at all mate. You can burn bonfire aesthetics to respawn enemies, but you really don't need to as some enemies provide more than enough souls, and the bosses definitely do that too.

I just think it gets way to repetitive and boring killing the same enemies over & over. As a gaming experience, I much prefer the limited respawn setup.
Bonfire Ascetics arent exactly easy to acquire, and they increase the difficulty, when I just want some more enemies to kill for souls. Ive had little issue with enemies in DS1, cause the whole point of the series -was- to fail, die, improve, succeed.
 

Marik2

Phone Poster
Nov 10, 2009
5,462
0
0
By not being a souls clone in the first place.

Please do not let the industry get a decent idea and run it to the ground.
 

Saelune

Trump put kids in cages!
Legacy
Mar 8, 2011
8,411
16
23
I agree with a lot of points made here.

I think in a couple generations the Souls series could be considered an archaic relic if game design technology can advance even half as fast as graphics have.

This is one of the only series where I don't really mind respawning enemies because it fits the theme and the combat is fun, but as Ezekiel said the AI really needs to be more dynamic, as well as environmental navigation. Characters should be able to manipulate their body like a normal, fairly ingenuitive human would. Can't step over that low rock outcropping? Well, how about using your arms and legs to crawl over it. Is that a giant dead tree limb in your path? Well then take your trusty great sword and hack that sucker up. Or maybe it's high enough off the ground to, you guessed it, crawl underneath.

Damage models need to be more realistic too. Instead of hacking away at a health bar, how about being able to target specific weak points, or even strong points for that matter and cause the appropriate kind of damage, both visually and physically. I know better targeting that's independent of camera movement can be accomplished, but it might take an extra button press/hold. This is probably where VR could really excel if it gains meaningful traction.

Make progression more natural through actual experience with various things vs based off of points and having to farm for items. An RPG can be long without needing to be padded.

I'm divided on inventory management. On one hand I like the idea of a "do more with less" approach. I've always appreciated games that had at least a fairly accurate representation of items carried on your person. Whatever you see in the world can be picked up and used as needed. Naturally this will be more limiting as you can only fit so much in a pouch, but it would be interesting to make the design work around that. There can still be a ton of content to hunt for, but it would make you choose what you wanted and when. You could still keep stashes at various "bonfires", like the bottomless box. That's the tough part about a fantasy-based game: how "real" should you go, because keeping the gameplay fun should always be first, even if it means making some concessions with reality.

If there needs to be a new game+, then turn it into something more than just we'll let you keep your gear, but now go do all that again with tougher enemies!

The goal would be to make a continuous, dynamic game world with new things to see and do regardless of a narrative. Make the journey more self-authored. It sounds like procedural territory but this could still largely be done with dedicated algorithms in place. Complicated, but no more so than what various games have already accomplished since they first went 3D.
 

Kerg3927

New member
Jun 8, 2015
496
0
0
hanselthecaretaker said:
Characters should be able to manipulate their body like a normal, fairly ingenuitive human would. Can't step over that low rock outcropping? Well, how about using your arms and legs to crawl over it. Is that a giant dead tree limb in your path? Well then take your trusty great sword and hack that sucker up. Or maybe it's high enough off the ground to, you guessed it, crawl underneath.
I get what you're saying, but those artificial barriers are there for a reason. It's to protect you from boredom. To keep you from crawling over that rubble and wasting time discovering that there's nothing interesting behind it. Or so the devs aren't forced to put a fetch quest back there so it's not empty space.

Realism sounds great and all, but confinement can and usually does in my experience make for a more dense and fun GAME. And at the end of the day, we're playing the game to have fun and beat the obstacles presented to us, not judge it on it's real world simulation merits.

I think overall, Dark Souls (haven't played 3 yet) does a good job at making the confinement - which is there for your benefit - not seem too artificial through creative and smart environment design. I also laud From for having the balls to keep beneficial confinement in their games when most other RPG's are moving to massive open world just because they feel like they have to because it's the trendy thing to do these days.