Dark Souls 3 Critique 

made me giggle a bite

Gotim

Late to this party, but I was thinking the same thing xD And I wonder if these Patches will be... Unbreakable? ;D

:)))))))))

King Metal Zel LMAO

That boss is my favourite

Lol

Is is easy

@@seraphimxo3123 yeah but If you didnt have a guide it will probably take you ages to find it

The fucking. Pit. In. The. Waterfall. Why. Just why

Same

They can prey with the scimitar

lol they can parry with scimitar

@@johnhatvik5556 we realized but how doe

@@tezkyflex7304 parrying

Don’t suggest things that may happen in the future :-)

this is ominous

there was a boss fight in dark souls 2 where its 3 dudes who can use estus, somewhere in Shulva

@@ponglenis3128 you're right, the tomb raiders. Hateful bosses

He says this during the twin princes fight of all things

I know.

It’s kinda a stereotype, I’ve talked to a lot of veterans and might be called one by some and they have all said the game wasn’t that hard.

I think the games difficult but knowing mechanics makes it alot easier but that’ll take time I’ve seen speed runners born because of learning how builds work mechanics net coding Ai etc. I personally think it gets hard some times on ng+7 running like normal trying to get to pontiff for pvp but killing all enemy’s exploring every level. But I don’t complain About the difficultly it’s apart of it and of it. If it was easy I Wouldn’t even play from soft games lol. That’s why I played kings field to demons souls to dark souls blood borne and Sekiro and I love it for it because it’s not about being hard in my opinion it’s about overcoming the paths ahead and persevering through it like a bad Ass that can be a deprived, glass cannon some type of twink or a soul lvl 1 noob

@@Pontificate ds3 was my introduction to the series and I didnt find it particularly difficult. I beat nameless king first try, I found ds2 more troubling and I'm on my 1st playthrough of ds remastered right now and ds1 is the hardest souls game in my opinion. However bloodborne is more difficult than every souls game

@@shiloh1422 If you beat Nameless first try congrats. He is one of the only bosses I and most people have consistent trouble with. Although I'm definitely not qualified to discuss DS2's difficult I struggled alot more on DS1 then 3. I do think alot of that perceived difficulty came from broken and dumb shit, but even without it DS3 and DS1 are close.

Yes they could vary up environments. Interconnection does not prevent creativity as long as they have smooth and logical transition between them.

@@1God1Fury Not if they don't have the resources (time, money, personnel) to invest in proper integration.

It's a level design. It doesn't cost more than interconnected or separated level. Only requires brains and coordination

@@1God1Fury That's a pretty ignorant comment. There's a reason games take YEARS to make.

@His Dudeness , like any other soul game with or with out interconnected world design - regardless it would take years to make

I don't think it's Pontiff's moveset that is unfair, it's the infinite stamina, which is fucking bullshit of course.

I think it's just me but when I fail one parry on this I have a hard time getting back into his rhythm. With his frantic movements

Maybe that's an unpopular opinion, but I find Pontiff harder that Nameless King. I died like 50-60 times to Sulyvahn, while Nameless King took me about 10 tries. It might sound like trolling, but I don't understand why people find Nameless so difficult.

@@wiedzmakBober I agree with my terrible rythm It can be a real issue

I think the main issue is boiled down to 2 patterns The first you have to mash rolls through to not get hit. The second is 2 mashes and a slight delay. Both have the same parry time for the first swing. When I learned to parry him, getting into that pattern was basically a loss condition. You know they sat there, thought the boss wasn’t hard enough, and made that slight animation delay There are dozens of similar animations that do that in the game too. Sometimes they punish spam rollling. Sometimes they punish taking your time. Only Sullivan you can’t stagger you death.

They took all that and were like "let's crank it up to 100" and thought this was a good idea.

Elden Ring is the worst to play, which sucks to say, but it’s true IMO.

Really, the only thing that stands out to me is how most of the boss fights that he showed have the boss dealing like 1/7 or 1/10 of his health depending on the weight of the attack. In Elden Ring, almost every single boss attack deals 1/3 or 1/2 or 90% of your health regardless of vigor. At 60 vigor + crimson + erdtree (+2 both) talismans, you still get like 3 shot from all the end game bosses and 4 shot from the optional freeroam bosses. Elden ring bosses should not deal that much damage. They should also have twice the health that they have. The devs know how broken these attacks are and that's why the bosses can be pretty much dead by spamming easy to spam weapon arts (corpse piler, hoarfrost stomp (nerfed), moon light greatsword, etc.)

@@HakcerCD Fully agree with this and the previous person. whichever way we want to summarise it something is off with the balance that takes it from a 10/10 to something like a 3/10 (for me) just because IT ISN'T HARD IN A FUN WAY

Perspective of.... poor design choices? Because I'd agree

I usual leave a message that says "Try gesture but King required ahead" with the Path of the Dragon gesture.

Still haven't beaten that guy, much like with Friede, but I find those fights to be the most fun as well. Going to get my copy back out and play from the beginning again, along with regular sights of the You Died.

@@TheSlammurai unfortunately because of Those Messages I'm instantly going to read this as "Try Gesture. Butt King Required Ahead"

jakers141 try finger, but hole

I can't stand the tacked-on multiplayer in souls games so I play in offline mode. I also normally hate having messages tell me about secrets. Overall, offline is the definitive way to experience a soulsborne game, but it does lead to me having to look things up occasionally. Regardless, I don't think the game should be designed with secrets that are as convoluted as getting to Nameless or DS1's DLC; they feel out of place in a series where secrets are often hidden in brilliant ways with little details nudging you towards them. Notes don't make up for convoluted design.

@bigevilworldwide1 nothing i said was about difficulty

I'm hoping he goes over Sekiro just so we can get another extremely gratifying FromSoft's Funniest Framedata Videos

Grabs in Sekiro aren't really a problem unless you're fighting Snake Eyes because that shit reaches you across the map and deletes your health bar

Taki2H there are other people with the broken grab range. It’s not even a complaint about difficulty, it’s objectively all over in the game. I don’t really have a problem with it but it’s obviously there. You will be grabbed from the side at least a few times in every playthrough. That being said, sekiro is way better than ds3

@@HieronymousLex This is because of how From Soft seems to code their grab attacks. Rather then coding it as a grab with the enemy's weapon/hand/whatever they instead make the enemy's entire body part of the grab attack's hitxbox, or at least that's how it works for Mimic's, Slime-Puddles, and the Chained Ogres.

Admire the view, take a leak off the edge, drink a few bottles, and generally chillax? Yup.

@@jgkitarel BloodBorne Wolf Monster: *VIBE CHECK*

I screenshotted right when I saw that

Suffering

Im a witcher

I'm a witcher

"I'm not a RU-vidr, I'm a witcher"

I’m a witcher

Sulyvahn is the hardest boss after Nameless King for me. I suck at parrying, still haven't pulled one off, only partials.

Good Green Goy He is so easy to parry that it practically feels like abuse

Vape God being Old Demon King?

@@Vesterpester Yeah, but at a certain point it feels like the same problem Force Unleashed bosses had.

@@jerubaal101 no high Lord wolnir

That's a good point I hadn't considered before.

@@asiamatron Looks like most of us didn't

@@TheManWithTheFryingPan True.

that being said. this bonfire complaint seems so nitpicky as well. its not like the game is littered with bonfires or anything. not sure why poeple even mention this

@@mr.madhatter5538 Good point.

Idk man, I found ds3 to be much more difficult than ds1 and I played ds1 first

idk i think your first couple of hours are the hardest, until you get used to the mechanics and then it depends on your playstyle/actual difficulty. i played BB first and central yharnam and the first two bosses kicked my ass so much, but after that the game was fairly easy for me. Then i played ds3 and while it was never as difficult as my first few hours in BB in general it was much harder imo

I played 3 first and hated both 1 and 2. 2 was definitely harder

I played DS2 first, then 3, and then 1. DS1 gave me the hardest time back then but with how much knowledge of the games I have now I would rank them in descending difficulty now as DS3, DS1, DS2. I think this is because I have found pve in 1 and 2 to be very easily exploitable and DS3 is more balanced in this regard, which is just my opinion. NPC summons are also dog water in DS3 so I think it is much less forgiving to more casual players, especially with how many bosses in the game are endurance rounds with multiple boss phases.

@@Moebamba22 That's the truth since DS3 balances things out and fixes certain cheeses like poise that could carry you through DS1.

Thats not a great argument, Yhorm could have easily stored the sword in another convenient place if the level was larger. In fact It would make more sense to store the sword away from his future hostile version.

@@samuelmartin390 imagine having to fight Yohrm, going in there no storm ruler in sight. You deal 50 damage a hit. You need to scour the entire level to get the item that lets you actually fight the boss. Yeah, no.

@@tahaelhour690 There already bosses greatly altered by factors outside the fog gate in the souls series. Fools Idol comes first to mind but there are others. Anyways I wasn't talking about mechanics/gameplay. I was saying that the lore justification you gave remains true with the stormruler outside the boss arena

@@tahaelhour690 if were putting lore and meta design to the side, imagine if they made his hp normal and actually expected you to fight him like a real boss and Lord of Cinder :v

@@swishyb at best he's gonna be a fire giant, at worst a DS2 boss.

Jacob Craz I think it’s fair

@@approveddust8367 either you get it or you don't how the hell is that fair in anyway? Punished for landing the parry what kind of idiotic nonsense.

@@jacobcraz8487 I've replayed ds1 and ds3 and ds1 is wayyyyy too generous with parrys and it's kind of ridiculous I liked it in ds3 best I don't remember the parrying in ds2 but I assume it's somewhere in between

Jacob Craz you got punished because didn’t parry on the prefect time

@WinnieTheGrizzly he... literally has footage of him landing perfect parries? I think you just have a hate boner for the dude. Why the hell are you watching his videos?

It’s still bad, then; nothing changes for your first encounter being stupid. Unless there is some way to detect them, it’s still bullshit; they don’t attack, and are LITERALLY invisible. Theres no reason for just these two to be like this, it’s still stupid

@@kabershshkabersh4272 Dark souls has always had stuff that can't reasonably be learned without dying. Dying is barely punished at all and once you know about them you should never be die to them ever again.

@@keeganwullaert4996 this doesn’t excuse them or make them good. Everything you said is true, but those jailers are still bullshit.

Dying is learning.

If other enemies of this type could go invisible, or if you could still slightly see them, I'd maybe think its more okay. They didn't kill me the first time, and now it's just an extra thing to remember when going through the area, and it's a little bs. I don't hate it, but it's not good. I'd hate it more if they ever actually killed me. If they kill you, It's a cheap death.

I don't like those kinds of attacks but not to the point where they ruin any bosses for me. I'm more disappointed that the camera adjusting for huge bosses that they had in Sekiro just isn't in Elden Ring. I think it would've made certain fights like Fire Giant and some of the dragons feel way better as a melee build.

@@endub6551 true true I don't think i even saw the entirety of lichdragon fortisaxx because i was trying to hack at his feet for so long

@@bluecloud4652 Youre supposed to hit his head but due to input reading if you try and punish him after dodging a combo he simply continues the combo with an extension meaning trying to hit his head becomes a guessing game of hmm will I get or not? Who knows.

@@dylanschmeichel2008 yeah it was a problem with most dragons

Not really. Elden Ring’s problem is that the wind-up for the start of an attack string is too short while Dark Souls 3 has a short wind up for attacks that are already in the combo. His whole point about Pontiff’s stab’s windup being too short is stupid and makes no sense because it’s always part of the same combo and you should be able to predict it. Elden Ring’s Windup issues come from combo *starts*, which have to have a reactable windup. If it’s starting up, it has to be reactable. If it’s in a combo, it has to be consistent. Elden Ring fucks up both of these and DS3 does both of these things perfectly with the exception of Oceiros’s charge.

I wasn't much for weapon skills but I found Warcry to have a good utility in PvE, especially against ruthless combo enemies and the Irithyll Jailers since it also buffed you up a bit to deal with nearby enemies, not to mention gave you hyper armor allowing you to attack straigh away even if an enemy was flailing you. Other than that, I hardly if ever used weapon skills, even in the rare cases of PvP I'd do.

They could have maybe implemented a max ratio for one estus compared to the other, something like 2:1 so you would have mix it up maybe that's too limiting but having like 12-15 healing estus made a lot of the lategame(after Pontiff) way too easy

This is a good point, but I'd argue that the problem then lies in the balancing of the weapon arts. If they're going to cost a limited and valuable resource I think players expect them to have major effects, and they often don't. It's just too attractive to simply go all regular estus instead. On the contrary, imagine they weren't tied to FP - I actually wonder if they'd see more use simply because you end up thinking of the whole thing differently. It's rather drastic, but I wonder if not letting the player reassign their Estus could have been a better overall design choice. Imagine the ratio sits naturally at a 2:1 health/fp throughout the game as you find upgrades for each. This would result in the sort of "natural" reference point for how much healing you should have that Joseph mentions. Then you could find an item that lets you assign flasks later in the game. This might have goaded players more naturally into utilizing both resources, since the game is pretty explicitly suggesting it with finding specific ashen flask upgrades, while not removing the option to adjust playstyles for later cycles. Maybe also tuck the item away behind Dancer so that experienced players could get it really early if they want to. This would probably screw up magic balancing but I admit I'm not in a position to comment on that since I so rarely use it.

I was a Pyromancer and there was some strategy to how many of each Estus I needed. I think an easy solution would be to have magic and health have totally separate refills instead of tying them both to Estus. All it did was make magic harder to use while making melee a lot stronger.

the problem is because it's too easy to spam r1 which renders weapon arts less useful (and also makes the game too easy for most of the encounters).

Yeah, he'd clearly lowered his shield the moment it made contact. But that is some very unfortunate timing. :P

Holy shit I didn't even catch that the first three times I saw it, it does look like his shield is up but you can see that veeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeery slight lower animation beginning

Yes, let's dismiss one hour of well put together criticism because he may have misunderstood one of his clips.

@WinnieTheGrizzly Where did you get the impression that he thinks DS2 is gold? If anything, there was close to nothing about DS2, maybe like two clips I remember, and overall I got a feeling that he loves DS3. He compared DS3 much more to DS1 and Bloodborne.

@WinnieTheGrizzly My dude, he literally says that he likes DS3 the best when it comes to the base games

qewr rg I don’t enjoy anything more than finding tidbits of info in the least expected places.

@@Kirokill1 glad i could help you learn a fun fact! I work in audio so ive got a whole bunch of audio and hearing related facts of varying usefulness

@@ether49 Gimme all of 'em, I work a little bit in audio too, but I seem to lack these fun facts and I find them highly enjoyable!

Oh yeah, and the game may not have BGM, but the ambient sounds give you a lot of information. You learn to pay attention to them, I've avoided a number of ambushes because I heard them coming. It's when things go completely silent, even the background noise is gone, save for your footfalls that you start worrying. And suddenly, Boss Music and you suddenly see You Died on your screen the first time you get there.

i work with robotics and the fact that processing image take longer than audio isn't that surprising

Enter halflight

"DS1 perfected the healing with kindling" Me walking through Gwyn's fog gate with 20 estus and has perfect parries- U W0t M8?

@@Rascal1214 honestly hated the kindling in dark souls 1,very janky mechanic and isn't very progressive

@@yab3146 same, I just finished another run through DSR and I though it was pretty janky.

@@yab3146 I agree, it wasn't very well done. Kindling to 20 makes any boss a joke, and that's why I suspect bosses like Gwyn and Artorias and the Sanctuary Guardian are faster than usual, because if they were the speed of bosses like Taurus Demon they would be too easy w/ max kindling.

Souls games have demanded many tests of situational awareness. There are the equally-invisible walls, the famous double invisible wall to enter Ash Lake in DS1, the use of unmarked gestures like Make Contact in Bloodborne and Meditate in this game to get special things, enemies hidden in spots you can barely see or can't see at all, horrible traps and fakeout traps, everything about Mimics, and etc. The spot where these enemies are hidden is incredibly suspicious. There's a bunch of alcoves for no reason, a long hallway that should set off extreme alarms to any player who's gotten this far, and most threateningly you can *hear* the invisible enemies. It's a change from the normal thing, but that's a good thing, different kinds of danger is what keeps the player engaged. It is entirely within the established gameplay of Souls that "if you ignore this suspicious feeling, you're gonna get fucked and you deserve it". I myself discovered the jailers my first time through. I should also point out that Hidden Body is an available spell (as is Chameleon), and so expecting such things is not out of nowhere.

On the other hand, no enemy in that area was able to turn invisible, so the player has no reason to expect it. And the enemies who were invisible in the previous area had big glowy eyes, which you couldn't see with the jailors. And most people would not extensively double-think every bit of architecture or level design. And even if they did, they'd probably just get closer to have a better look, making them easy targets regardless.

Would a lone item in a long hallway give cause for alarm for an ambush? I certainly would, and I found the jailers on my first playthrough because I was given enough clues, hints, and souls-playing experience to find out about the jailors. It's not cheap, it's situational awareness and logical thinking.

Also, you could actually see those Jailers from outside in the rat pit if you looked at the windows. I found them on my first time through the game when I went to try looking out that window and bumped into them.

I agree with you, but almost feel like it's almost fair because the level before the Dungeon (Boreal Valley) has invisible enemies, so it's teaching you that there may be some invisible enemies after that as well. That said, they have no major tells and the idea is never really used again, so I think I side towards calling it a weird gotcha moment.

To be fair, it’s not like any sun I’ve ever seen… lol

Yeah it’s an eclipse

Normies: oh look and eclipse Souls players: The first flame is fading again.

Design issues like the atrocious spell selection carrying over is an even bigger surprise to me. Especially when ER focusses more on magic than all games before it.

@@807D14M0ND5 Dude, facts. I really want From to start from scratch with everything (lore, combat, engine, etc.) in the next game

Revolzio I never played a Dark Souls game before, but i played Dark souls 3 and beat the game easily. I just played Dark Souls 1 and it’s way more difficult than 3.

Cosmonaut Kimchi funny, I had the exact opposite experience. I managed to slog my way through 3, but kicked 1’s ass easily and in much less time. I also found 1’s combat much too slow and easy to exploit, and much preferred 3’s quick and theatrical combat.

@@ducky8075 My experience consisted of starting with one and quitting at the capra demon. Years later i played and finished 3. Went back to one and couldn't believe how much easier it was.

i started with demons souls and felt it was way easier than DS3, DS3 kicked my ass badly. Havent played the rest though only those 2

I don't think thats a fair reason. Why wouldnt you start off with the dark souls 1? He cant forget about his expierence. But that doesnt matter because his points would still stand, you get way too much healing and acsses to op equipment in dark souls 3. On my first playthrough of ds1 I cycled through 12 weapons, trying to figure which one worked. On my first playthrough of ds3 I cycled through 4 weapons. The fact is so many op weapons that trivalize game mechanics are provided its hard to call ds3 hard. When I can kill bosses first try solely because I have so much healing I cant call ds3 hard. Beginners and vetetans are given so many chances compared to the first game it doesnt even feel fair. And its not like its diffucult to know how these things work, all you need to do is explore. You dont need to be expierenced in the game at all, if you can dodge 50% of attacks you'd still survive because you can heal off the other 50%. I had a harder time killing the 2 bell gargoyales then most fights in ds3. Because in ds1 I had to actually manage my estus and didnt have 10 different ways to heal. I found dark souls 3 to be the easiest of course previous expierence or lack of expierence can produce variables but objectivily speaking dark souls 3 is much easier because it gives you too much help.

Asylum demon shockwave is easy to block with a shield with high makig or fire defense. But i understand your point if you were a non shield player.

+Somecooltoad One of My biggest problems with DS1, is that it almost forces you to use shields in some areas. I never used a shield in the other souls games at all.

toolshedvideo s

+MikeD Iframes? What about them? Dark Souls 1 is loaded with enemies and areas where s don't help you. It's the only game where I used a shield. Not sure what your point is

If you stay behind the demons then the wave doesn't hit you...

And the dog appearing is also intentional

@@Frog_Wizard801 Dog?

When you first cross irithil bridge the giant dog thing appears behind you, I know it’s intentional because it has an animation to it

Go a few seconds before the time stamp, though after rewatching it I realized that he knew that so disregard the comment

@@Frog_Wizard801 That thing, right. Sorry. Scared the crap out of me the first time through.

Taking you comment at face value we'd have to assume that since you have to do it, your friend also spam rolls?

This. alot of his complaints on some of the bosses or level layouts is due to him not really investing in the lore or story

@@abaxmanjr not really lol ...most of his criticisms are valid.

@@avish878 nah

Yes they are, yes you can.

Yep, that's correct, they're invisible. The first time that I was in that area, I could even see their eyes, which is how I knew that they were there before they could attack me. (I'm pretty sure that you can't see their eyes all the time; maybe only from certain angles?)

You can also see them from outside the cell, if you're in the area with the giant, I think. That's supposed to be the clue that they are there, but when you get there and you don't see an enemy it's easy to see how it might seem unfair.

LOL i can thankyou in person then. Thanks!

MonsterHunter Banjo I remember attacking them because hint signs told me to

This was my major complaint. DS3 doesn't have close to the same level variety as any other game. DS2 actually did this the best. It really took chances and made some wild areas that are still incredibly impressive today. Iron Keep, Lost Bastille, Doors of Pharos (my favorite), Huntsman's Copse, Heide's Tower of Flame, etc... Every area felt completely distinct from every other, and included some incredibly creative design decisions. Even the multiple castles (Aldia's Keep, Dragon Shrine, Drangleic Castle, and the DLCs) felt totally different. You'd never confuse them. I just wish DS3 had taken more chances in design. Where's the giant crystal cavern? The enormous, maze-like windmill? The underground port city? Or the Gutter, a web of rickety scaffolding suspended in the center of a black gulf? Instead, DS3 feels like they took the Undead Burg, the Duke's Archives, and Anor Londo, and just made the whole game that. It's just sepia-toned rubble, followed by blue-toned castles. I hate it.

Makes for really good pets though, so can't blame them.

You wear that profile pic and you expect me to believe you don't want a hellhound teleporting to you?

So in a world where threes with genitalia are being worshiped and undead fat ladies with giant machetes also read books, a teleporting dog is what worries you 🤔

@@Kostadin_Arolski You could literally say something like that with every fantasy game.

It's a feature, not a bug -todd miyazaki

I only discovered accidentally by running for my life over that exact spot from a crab and the ballista. At least I survived. XD

its so interesting, I played this game with a friend who loves the series and its hard to imagine going through it blind hahah

TheSlammurai same

Exactly this.

Also late to the party but DS1 gave you up to 20 at one time simply for killing the easiest boss in that game

@Filip Gasic Wrong. You don't need the Lordvessel to get 20 Just the rite. I got the anor londo bonfire to 20 on my first playthrough to fight O&S Wanna know what they guard? The Lordvessel. Again you can get to 20 for beating arguably the easiest boss in game

@Filip Gasic Literally word for word from the wiki With the Rite of Kindling, all bonfires may be kindled up to three times for a total of 20 Estus Flask charges. Each act of kindling requires one Humanity. Please don't say someone is wrong when you don't know what you're talking about

@Filip Gasic you are a dunce cap

Seems like sloppy writing.

Yorm is a great boss, people just don't want to understand the lore behind the bosses and their game mechanics

The boss is meant to be killed with the help of the aforementioned NPC who wields Stormruler, it is the culmination of his questline. Unfortunately Yorm is also a main boss which needs to be killed for the sake of the main story. As such the corpse of the NPC with Stormruler on it is in the boss room after he failed to kill Yorm. This comes off as very random if you have missed the NPC's quest line and I think Yorm would have made a better optional side boss which had to be challenged with the NPC rather than them shoehorning a way to kill him for those who missed/skipped the quest line.

the body in the room is not the npc is just that he had 2 storm rulers, he keep one and give the other to his friend

LeadFaun except it is, Just because they wrote it that way doesn't mean it's smart, Like someone else said it would have been better if it was just an optional boss to do with siegmeyer using the strom ruler, or just you dealing little damage, Instead of just leaving the item on the floor in the main bosses room and writing a story about how he kept it there, just cause. It's shit boss design and world design

You could add the baby is invisible for the ones that still don't get it...

we don’t have enough insight to see it

@Snpaul Nice one

People took long time to reply lol

It got cencured because of the gore image of a dead baby

Many “veteran” souls players consider melee + rolling as the only true way to play the games. I’m personally glad From has added random combo changes and delayed attacks to mess with these players

@@chantzgaming Even then, you can roll and hit with many different weapons that all have different movesets, ranges, stat requirements etc. So it doesn't really change my point

He also always seems to use the same weapon, kinda weird idk

​@@chantzgaming They upped the difficulty for that in Elden Ring. But the weapons by in large are much stronger in Elden Ring now especially with the buffs. There isn't just rolling as well, as you can use your crouch to move under Loretta's attacks and there are moves you can dodge with a jump (such as AOEs). It's refusing to change which is causing problems. It's ironic because those very same people who call it just big Dark Souls, Dark Souls but open world, or Dark Souls 4...5...and 6, expected them to not change boss design from Ds3. Except certain directions, jumping, and even gimmicks were used in these boss fights. Especially with the new stance mechanic incentivising aggression. They also complain about how spirit summons are the easy mode and that the game becomes too easy or too hard, but you don't have to upgrade the summon to +10. It's also a difficulty option. Which is great. But after fighting these bosses after 3 playthroughs I can say that the main rememberances are actually great outside of Godskin Duo.

@@shawnmarcum8078ppreciate you mentioning how summons are an option to change difficulty. people say “easy mode” with such derision but it’s like, some people want or need an easy mode to be able to progress. or a medium mode, or kinda-hard mode, or whatever. the ability to adjust the difficulty of an encounter is FS showing trust to its players. they trust each individual will only modify their experience if it’s just blatantly *too hard*, and will only bring it down to a good “challenge” level of difficulty. maybe some people don’t need summons, but some people do if they want to have fun. that’s also not to say some of the balancing is kinda bad but that’s a separate issue.

Not sure I'd call it more involved. Visually pleasing, sure, but easy/boring from a gameplay perspective. While we're talking about Sekiro, did he ever talk about revieving it? Seeing as he loves soulsbornes so much it's weird that there's no video of his about it.

@@RimshotKiller He mostly finished a script for it, but then his life was sucked into the enormous abyss that was his Witcher project. He's finished the Witcher One video and the Witcher Two one should be out this Sunday, but there's still the Wicther Three one, which will definitely be the longest by a wide margin, and the break after that where he recovers the will to live, before he will get back to the Sekiro video.

@@runningcommentary2125 Oh, I see. Thank you for the info!

Its sort of meant to be a first phase, the boss is still bad but you were expecting aldrich, which you do fight as an extension of the deacons (thats how i see it anyway)

@@RimshotKiller I guess I'm the only one who died to the divine dragon, huh? I actually died to it three times and yet beat the headless ape and both of the corrupted monk fights first try.

Eddie I know this comment is probably too late but also it seems like you’re expected to at least take some of those estus vials and turn them into your FP vials considering no mater if you play a caster, a two weapon fighter, a two handed weapon fighter, a sword and board fighter , anything, you always have a use for FP vials.

not really I played dex build and never used an fp flask I put all the shards in estus

piklelion666 eh, I’m pure melee and have never had any use for FP, I don’t use the weapon abilities really and have done just fine in PVP, and I’m level 300+, usually win 3 out of 4 matches. Granted though, I’m an experienced player and know my weapon very thoroughly. Idk. You’re still right though, I’m just a special case.

I didn't find DS3 rewarded aggresion over defense at all. Go too hard in and enemies will swarm you. Quite a few bosses also are aggressive enough that they require that you be reactive instead of being aggressive, the biggest example being Pontiff.

+Mordalon I could give endless examples, such as enemies that chain attacks into your shield and rip out all your stamina, the raven enemies that turn into raven monsters so you have to rush them and kill them while transforming, the enemies with such crazy-hard-to-read attacks (like the first boss' second form) that it's easier to just spam attacks rather than figure out the pattern (and if it's easier, why bother with any other way?) the plentiful healing that makes it more effective to trade hits with bosses, spawning mob enemies or slightly delayed ambushes that overwhelm you if you're too cautious, the insanely-short reaction times of many attacks and how the telegraph animation maps to multiple attacks (better to kill them quick and hope to get lucky on the boss not using many of the too-fast ones or you guessing wrong on how you're supposed to dodge the exact same telegraph) and etc. and etc. Note that charging in blindly isn't what I'm talking about. It's, once you know your enemy, new players are encouraged to attack as madly and furiously as possible - alternating between this and rolling. It's the easiest way to win. In Dark Souls 1 you were encouraged to keep your shield up and watch the enemy as a new player - alternating with picking your shots and the occasional roll early game.

Dan Felder Dark Souls has always had sequences where you need to alternate between defensiveness and aggressively capitalizing on openings. When confronted with an enemy that assaults your shield, back away and/or dodge. Just because you can't be defensive in one way doesn't mean you can't and aren't encouraged to be defensive in other ways. It was the same with Manus' berserk attack, you most likely couldn't block all of it so you had to back away until an opening appeared. You can also read the 1st bosses 2nd form if you know what to look for. The trick is to stay close to him and don't get too greedy with attacks. Healing is no more plentiful than in prior games. In DS1 you got 20 Estus eventually along normal progression, where as in 3 you only get 15 after managing to locate every shard, some of which you might miss, and then you might use some of those for Ashen Estus. Just because attacks are harder to react to doesn't mean going aggressive is the only solution, it just means you have to get better at reacting.

They are big games. There will be some variation in all of them. But the opening of DS3 is hugely different. You can feel the contrast when playing DS1 and DS3. Also, I didn't say going that aggressive is the only option. I said it is the incentivized option. The easiest way to progress in most of DS3 is to play extremely aggressively once engaged with an enemy. This isn't the case in DS1. It's not impossible to play defensively and win, and you'll take less damage if you perfect this technique, but it's not the most effective way to progess for most players - particularly since early enemies before bosses can mostly be avoided entirely. You pay little price for getting through an area wounded to the next bonfire. You can either die in trial and error a lot against many enemies to learn their patterns (unlike DS1 where you can hold up your shield and watch several times without taking damage) or you can spam attacks to win. Take some damage? Not a big deal. Many, many encounters are set up this way (such as with archers all around you, so killing enemies fast is important because you can't block or dodge all of them) and the other situations I mentioned. The fact that you have to *guess* which attack an enemy is going to use because multiple attacks use the same telegraph animation means killing them faster minimizes the number of times you need to guess correctly to win. It also reduces your sense of mastery, because you don't feel like you understand the enemy as well as in DS1. You are at the mercy of RNG and it isn't your fault. While possible to overcome all of this, just like it's possible to play through many games, it isn't as satisfying an experience. You may enjoy DS3 more than DS1, but the game is unquestionably designed to punish standing around with your shield up far more than DS1. This makes the game much, much faster paced (good) but at the expense of other aspects of the experience (bad, and game-breaking for the series in my opinion). I loved DS1 and had a phenomenal first impression of DS3. I eventually just put it down despite making rapid progress, because I didn't feel like I was mastering each area.I didn't feel triumphant. I felt like I was madly spamming attacks and hoping to hit first/harder. It worked. It definitely worked. But it wasn't the experience I valued.

Dan Felder You can use all of those defensive tactics just as easily in 3 as in 1. You don't need to die to enemies to learn their patterns. Just play defensively just like you did in 1 and you can learn the enemy patterns. The archers scenario forces you to make a decision between playing defensively and carefully observing the locations of each archer, or rush in, and different builds are better for each tactic. I have no idea why you think enemies in 3 have the same attack windups for multiple attacks. They are quicker, but the differences in the tells are still there.

Also have you heard about the teledogs? During speedruns when you run past a dog it will constantly teleport directly behind you and appear in the animation where it jumps at you, very broken.

41:25

Ik this is an old comment but here's one experience from me. Me and my friend were attempting nameless king and he went to charge his lunge/lightning stab attack. He was looking in my direction so my friend didn't roll and got hit by the attack, he was behind the boss...

honestly thought i was alone in thinking that oceiros is difficult. i always have a tough time with him because of that charge (doesnt help that my build is heavy)

DS3 is insanely inconsistent when it comes to hitboxes. Sometimes they work almost perfectly (search up good DS3 hitboxes on youtube) but sometimes they literally ruin the game

But damn does it ever feel good going back at higher level and spanking them.

Two words: Git Gud

RogerRogerDaze you’re sooooooo original. GIT GUD, NO ONE HAS EVER SAID IT!

skrotosd and yet it’s still an effective teaching tool to this day

@@bruski4120 "Teaching tool" is a stretch. It's just a meme phrase. People 'git gud' intrinsically whether the phrase is uttered or not.

Well it’s clear that the developers tried to balance this because there is an obvious difference in stamina consumption between DS1/DS2 and DS3, at least as far as the amount of stamina consumed for rolling.

yup..running a pyro build & those estus heals gets sacrificed..its plenty on a pure melee build..

Sure but its still a poor balancing decision if they made a system where they had to give melee builds stupid ammounts of sunny d just for mage builds to get enough energy

@@sernoddicusthegallant6986 no its good for balancing. Mages and magic have always been OP in souls games. By limiting their heals or ability to use magic it adds a good source of balance and prioritization.

@@ForgedHorizons Im not denying that but it dosent change my point that its a poor balancing decision if they had to make melee builds op in pve just to balance mages more

@@ForgedHorizons It would have been good if Magic was actually good in DS 3 lol. I get the idea and honestly the balancing of flasks is pretty subjective. With weapon arts tied into FP, it becomes a trick of whether or not the player will use WA, which I never did in DS 3. So some players might find themselves low on flasks while others have too many.

Jiba The Clown but that would make Yhorm close to impossible for a lot of players. I feel like Yhorm is a spectacle/lore fight as a whole.

"Oh, my friend! Thank you for killing my favorite person! Have this slab!"

Slab is tasty tho

peaCeCeful no no no the annoying thing is if you grab storm ruler more then once, multiple playthroughs.. you will be carrying 1000

This quest can be failed, no reason to double punish the players that failed it.

OTOH, the change actually worked in this case. The buildup to getting to that fight, the fact that Aldritch is worshiped by them, , and then you fight them and nothing. He's already left. Cue going through Farron Keep to Catacombs and then Irithyl. Climb to Anor Londo, and then you fight him there. And he's eaten and absorbed Gwyndolin. So yes, it's obvious that the Deacons fight was intended to be more than it was, but the entire get there to fight Aldritch, which was subtly built up on your way there, only to find that he's already left. Well played, From, well played. And then your fight him in Anor Londo, and it is decently difficult, a good mid-late game boss. And one that can really screw you over if you're careless or RNJesus hates you.

@@joelbiden442 I really liked Aldrich as a boss fight

@@jgkitarel I love this layout for aldritch in theory and I wish that's how it felt your first time through. Unfortunately Fromsofts super niche storytelling means theres no way to understand this context your first time through, you dont know who or what aldritch is or why that big box is there or why the deacons matter until you've gotten to anor londo and killed aldritch, and by that point the deacons are far FAR out of your mind

i though the same thing lmao

30 fps on ps4. 45 fps on ps4 pro. 60 fps on the playstation 5.

I personally didnt have a problem with this

Bloodborne is entirely in 30fps and most people manage

Actually, with the way i-frames work, higher frame rates give you a smaller window to dodge, but also show more of the tells, so you can predict the timing more easily. Meanwhile, lower frames make the tells more choppy and therefore makes it harder to predict the timing, but you also have more time of invincibility when dodging, so it balances out

@@rogue_0314 is that really how it works? For example, if the number of i-frames at 60fps is 20, then shouldn't it be 10 in 30fps, so effectively the invincibility period is the same?

Thank you

No

Yes!

@BulletTraj I don't have a problem with losing your souls on death considering it's not too hard to rebuild the amount you lost, or better yet do a corpse run to get it back. My problem is with the pure tedium of having to do a long run back through a pre-defined area over and over everytime you die to a boss that most people need a few attempts to learn how to deal with. An issue that only gets worse considering how quickly you die in these games often means learning the boss slowly over multiple deaths with long backtracking in-between attempts. It may not be an issue for people who have mastered this game, but it is a huge deterrent to new players and a waste of time to veterans. It's essentially needless padding that doesn't add anything but frustration to the experience. I'd like to see some kind of compromise Maybe a system where there is a unique kind of bonfire outside of a boss room that only lets you respawn a certain number of times, before it sends you back to the beginning of the area. That way you get a few attempts uninterrupted to learn the boss, while still having that sense of dread that comes with a punishing death.

Since the invisible jailers fade in smoothly when you hit them, it's intentional. Plus, that preview of them from the window ought to be a good hint that it was an intentional design.

Lol that's great

ds3 was my first souls game and pontiff on the first run was so difficult for me that i went out of my way to learn parrying in the first area of the game. then i just flawlessed him

Yes!!! I really feel like it is the natural evolution for From Software

Nice bernkastel pic

ah shit, what is the witch of miracles doing on a dark souls video?

i honestly dont know why his first reaction wasnt just to bone out.

He even had Estus left to tank the poison

Yeah dude, "it's meant to be" isn't a good enough excuse for lazy game design.

Ochunpo, NEW it was Artorias multiplied, heck, they even directly ripped attacks from Artorias and the lost sinner, that's not new.

Ochinpo like out of all the new bosses that were original you picked the one that's all ripped from previous games, why not nameless king? Pontiff?

parry and riposte

Imagine if the phase 2 was 11-15 of the abyss watchers reviving and each has a partner including you and you have to fight your opponent while avoiding other duelists

You'd have to conduct a survey in order to determine a game's difficulty on an objective level.

Kidwoohda pontiff was legit the hardest boss (next to orphan of kos) that I've ever fought.

Darko2862412 first run through he killed me at many times because I just couldn't find a chance to hit him due to his crazy combos, then on my SL1 run he killed me even more times. On my new game +2 run though I think I finally mastered him and now he's one of my favorite bosses.

Darko2862412 it was the opposite for me though. Lothric Prince I found pretty easy.

@LanternVG hope you did Midir than;)

Pontiff was extremly hard, but I somehow got him after the 5th try. Lorian was quite easy, 2 tries needed. However, Soul of Cinder destroyed me (also thanks to frame frops - 10fps fights aren't fun), needed 10 tries and then there is the dragonslayer armour.... 15 fucking tries. Probably second most dies after ~30 and counting for Fume Knight.

Dark souls 3 seems faster thanks to its stupid rolling mechanics first and foremost, you can roll 8 times straight in dark souls 3 covering a huge distance and getting supreme amounts of i frames and combined with the fact equip load is almost non existant as a mechanic and poise and defence stats not doing anything realy alltogether is what makes it seem so much faster.

"Muh immersion"

@@George_Rakkas the reason you can roll so much is because the entire game is faster. Imagine fighting champion gundyr with ds1 rolls, it would be literally impossible. The rolling isnt stupid, its designed that way to give you a fair chance against the faster enemies and bosses. And before you say anything about roll spam in pvp, its easily punishable. Just learn the timing

I personally feel like ds3 is the best souls game. The faster pace feels more natural. Try playing through the game without a shield, it increases the enjoyment tenfold. Dont expect to go in and play like Dks, because you will get smacked hard.

I say the clunkiness of dark souls 1’s movement kinda ruined my immersion.

What are you referring to?

​@@Mr-Hakimrennala probably

@@randorandom9494 Ah, I see. Makes sense

His thing was he felt he died from something that wasnt his weapon due to him losing so much health so quickly. But he's just trying to lie to everyone. Look at his weapon and shield while its slowed down. He obviously had pressed the light attack button when he was hit, which causes his shield to lower opening him up for higher damage. He wants to make you believe it's the game glitching when he made a mistake and got punished for it.

@@volcanolord100 He didn't "obviously" press that. To me it looks like the start of a stagger animation as he absorbs damage. And why would he attack at that time? He's being lunged at and there's no opening.

He was dodging though and the shotel didn't hit him at all.

@@jasonhymes3382 Actually I'm pretty sure that the enemy dead-angled him. Shields only block attacks that hit their hitboxes: attacks that go over them, or hit you from behind, don't get blocked even if your shield is raised. Dead-angling is more usually used in PVP since you can manually dead-angle your opponent with certain weapons to get around turtling enemies, but AI enemies can occasionally do it too. In this case, like Joseph said, the entire enemy's body became a damage zone, and the skeleton's skull hit Joseph in the head, completely bypassing his shield.

That, and those guys clearly got on the wrong train. They meant to go to Bloodboenw and ended up in Dark Souls III.

re: bonfires, while it's true that some of them are simply useless, others do have the issue where there's just too many of them. Particularly the Road of Sacrifices and Farron Keep area, the place has 7 bonfires! That's excluding the boss ones. There's no way it's large enough to warrant that many even though it is a big stretch of game. In these areas it feels like they made sure to have a bonfire ready every time players might start to feel mildly inconvenienced, and that's not really ideal for DS imo. That feeling of really starting to wish for a fire or shortcut, and then finally finding one after heavy ordeals, is what they should be shooting for just like the best parts of both this game and DS1. I feel like the more open level design of these areas might be to blame, harder to place shortcuts when it's just big open spaces. But the first Road bonfire could have been made to connect down to the woods somehow if the level was designed slightly differently, for example. And in Farron Keep a bonfire could have been right in the middle, letting you explore to all sides easily, instead of one at the start, one 2/3rds through and then one near the boss. So now you'd have to trek into the swamp and find yourself that bonfire instead of being neatly given one to start off with, and then another as soon as you might start feeling a little nervous. Right there you might be able to cut three or four fires completely and make the balancing better to boot.

Joacim Torneus Regarding Farron Keep and Crucifiction Wood the thing is they are quite expansive areas where it's easy to get lost on your first playthrough. So even with the many bonfires, exploring them isn't such an easy task. Of course, once you know the most efficient path to go through the level, it becomes easy to go from one to another, get the items you want and avoid the fucking crabs/elder gruus, but that's the point of the game, once you know it, it's not that hard to beat. That's why it's impossible to recreate the same degree of challenge for series' veterans : they already know what to expect. Anyway, on my first playthrough, I felt genuinely lost and vulnerable in this area. And once I got toknow it and went on to try the bosses, I was glad to have a bonfire relatively close. I don't think it would have made the game better if they suppressed the bonfire in the middle of the swamp and I had to go through it each time I tried the Abyss watchers. But if you think some bonfire hinder your experience, do the test. Make a list of those you find are superfluous, go through the game without lighting them and see if it makes the experience better for you. My guess is it won't change much. It probably won't make your experience worse since, true enough, some are completly pointless, but I doubt it will make it that much more thrilling.

MrTrollaid None of the changes I mentioned would make the game any harsher than some stuff in DS1, or even some things in DS3 itself. So I don't think difficulty can justify the placements. With the changes I described the boss runs could be pretty much the same length, actually. The boss runs aren't the issue, they're fine. The game handing out so many bonfires it reduces the feeling of tension is an issue however. The areas just aren't large enough to warrant so many so close to each other. Yes, I know it's easy to say when you've played it before but I've replayed DS1 levels since then and the difference is still markedly clear. If it was good enough for DS1 it's good enough for DS3, in my opinion. That doesn't really work either since it might end up making stretches too long. Say they're a length of 1.0 now. I'd say the fires should ideally be placed to make them 1.5 but if I just cut out bonfires they'd be 2.0, y'know? While some could perhaps be outright cut that won't be the same either when you already know the game, so this can't really move much beyond a discussion of hypotheticals.

> 1) I can't understand this complaint about "too many bonfires". I remember in your DS1 video when you noticed how painful it was to have to start from Firelink Shrine whenever you wanted to go to New Londo and I can agree with that, having to retrace so much ground is a waste of time. Depends on if the bonfire is cutting out time that you're walking/waiting doing nothing, like I criticized in Dark Souls 1. Or if it's another shortcut that skips over enemies and learning the layout of an area. I think the connecting corridors in Dark Souls 3 are pretty boring for learning their layout, but they DO have a gauntlet of enemies that these extra bonfires skip. Some of them being so close without any enemies between them at all also comes across as unrefined. On the other hand, I also think it's cool that Dancer uses the bonfire you get from killing Vordt as an unexpected checkpoint. I wish I had put that in the video. > 2) Regarding estus, I prefer DS3's system. The way you describe kindling in DS1 makes it seem like a tough choice, but it isn't if you consider there was plenty enough of humanity to kindle all bonfires in the game at least once without the need for farming or buying it. So there was no reason not to kindle a new bonfire whenever you found one. That's going to depend on a lot. I remember humanity being rare enough that I never wanted to waste it. So I always tried each area a few times first before thinking about kindling. Especially since you need to restore your humanity first so it's 2 humanity to get from 5 to 10. The fact that it's a choice alone means a lot. > Plus, you could get up to 20 flasks which is quite ridiculous. I agree, but that's also another choice. That's going from Very Hard -> Hard -> Normal -> Easy, with kindling. I like that! > It's nothing new, but I still can't understand your refusal to address DS's story. One of the things I like in this game is that the degree of engagement you have with their plot depends on you and you can, as the player, decide to ignore them completely. But when, as a critic, you pretend said plot doesn't exist it becomes quite problematic. I don't know if there is something "deep" about DS's universe, for me, this word doesn't mean anything, but you can't deny that things aren't put at random. There is a reason each enemy you fight is where he is and there is a reason why you have to fight them... This has been asked a lot. And every time it is I say the same thing: prove it. Prove it to me, through explanation or a link to a video somewhere, the shows the story that people say is in the series. The things you're describing here are lore and the setting. Enemies being placed in appropriate places isn't a story. That's part of the setting. The background history of the world you're moving through, and the events and people that came before, while potentially interesting, do not make a story. Just like journal entries you can find in other games, while also possibly interesting, are complementary to the story you're meant to be experiencing while you play. > If people tell you the weird crow thing the Nameless King is mounting is a drake, it's because the game specifically tells you that in an item description, it's not pure speculation. For me, your analysis was lacking something, because the greatest strength of DS is how all its elements interact and reinforce each other, and trying to completely ignore one reduces the global experience and understanding of it all. Well it gets particularly messy here since that "drake" is clearly a bird. You can't argue that it's a bird. Feathers. Talons. Beak. Wings. It flies. Call it a storm drake--it's still a bird. If an item description said it was a cat would you say "oh well, I guess it must be a cat then..." No you would say it's a bird. In the video I showed how much the attention to detail was lacking in the game for really simple things like textures, glitches, and animations. The same thing can be extended to the lore. I love these games. I would love them even more if there was an engrossing story that ties everything together. I want to be wrong about dismissing it. But even really simple questions about the player character's motivations can't be answered in a satisfactory way.

Joseph Anderson Thanks for your answer. Now, regarding the story, you are right about one point : most of it is lore and the "plot" is very vague, but there is a reason why : your character is NOT DS's story protagonist. the Dark Souls game tell the story of a world, the chosen undead/ashen one/DS2 fuckwad is nothing but a pawn for greater powers. He is not unique, he is replaceable and thus doesn't deserve any specific trait. He is pretty much the definition of a blank slate. There is only one thing that defines the DS protag : he is an undead, and thus can only go forward with his own goal, or renounce and go hollow. I remember Miyazaki saying in an interview that the protag of a DS game goes hollow whenever the player ragequits and give up on his character. So, yeah, I can't tell you much about my character because he is basically me, same as yours is you. But the hero of the story is the one we hear about : the world. The cycle of the flame, the lord souls and the abyss, the primodial serpents and the dark sign... All of these elements are the core of the story and you are only a witness to it all. That's why "lore" is so important, the lore IS the plot, or, more precisely, the plot is in the lore. I don't see how that doesn't count as a story. And you already know that. You knew the Soul of Cinder was a combination of all the previous lord of cinders (players) and Gwyn from your fight with it. You knoew it from the moveset, the enthronement, the music... everything was told to you without a word. I bet you didn't need to watch a video explaining who this boss was, or even to read his soul's description to know all that, because, the game knew what it wanted to tell you and did so in an effective way. There certainly are different interpretations and unclear elements in the community, but there is also a common base that most people agree upon. This wouldn't be the case if the game didn't care about its universe.

sry for bad english

hello from russia

this guys reviews are so shit its amazing.

k

You need to learn the difference between a reveiw and a critique lol

Wasn't the whole point that this is the end of the time of fire and all of the previous kindled versions are coming to and end and meshing together? That is why a lot of the areas are being reused or merged together and showing us how all of the games are actually linked.

The similarities are entirely intentional, as DS3 represents a world that is on its last legs and has been going to shit since before DS1, with the implication that it has been so many thousands of years before DS3 that everything is built on the ruins of older periods and that the linking of the Fire's actual purpose has long since been forgotten. Also, it was a send up to the entire franchise, with the final DLC ending the most epic boss fight against someone who has been an Undead for so long that he's been around _since_ the age of Gwyn. the DeModcracy summed it up best when he said it up front when you face him. He is You. The single minded determination to see it through, to collect every scrap of Humanity and the Dark Soul out there. It's You. If the Soul of Cinder is the ultimate send up to the players, with them fighting all the Chosen Undead, all previous Lords of Cinder and finally, Gwyn, then Slave Knight Gael is the send up to the player themself, the swan song of the Souls Franchise.

The beginning cutscene says, and I quote: "Where the transitory lands of the lords of cinders converge." The whole point of this game is to have all those lands scarred by time united into one big land we now call Lothric.

Demon souls had the land of defilement, ds1 blighttown, ds2 black gulch, and..... ds3: farron keep. When the game first released; I felt like this was the laziest design choice I'd ever seen. However, as has been said, it is the last hurrah to a world and the whole thing is winding down and all previous cycles are colliding into the current.... This allows me to have some appreciation. That said. I'm glad that Dark Souls is done. I'm super excited for Mortal Shell, I love Nioh, and the Surge. I like creativity... I don't want anymore levels where I have to stockpile purple moss. NO MORE!!!!

Doesn't matter how you word it. Its still unoriginal and blatant fan service

I know I'm one year late for complaining but if it was shorter it'd had been a better place, the section were the traders are is annoyingly big for no real reason.

nah Majula is a safe heaven. firelink shrine is just bad design, cause they couldn't make it fit into the world

HAHAHA THURST ATTACKS AHAHHAHA

just walk right lol

Easily parriable to death lol

Turns out you just have to level ADP

walk left

I know this reply is late but I just want to wish you luck on any covenant farming. That shit is such a chore, even when the game was new and had massive amounts of players. I gave up on that pretty quick.

@@arbiter- yeah that sucked. i have all achievements for 1,2 and 3 and the covenant farming was so fucking irritating.

Hitbox dissonance has been a consistent problem throughout the series.

The point is that simple is always best. The best songs people remember? Simple ones.

Profaned Capital definitely felt like it was rushed or had content cut out tbh, but atleast there is some interesting speculations about the Profaned flame and Yhorm's lore is great aswell. I felt like the mid story climax was more by the time you encounter Pontiff though - you had seen his lackeys, noticed he had an influence in some of the prior bosses and when you finally encounter and defeat him, you learn an even bigger secret of his.

I feel like if you think there's no twists, you never paid much attention to Untended Graves and the eyes of the fire keeper. That part was like if Kaathe was a whole area of his own. It shows an alternate perspective on the world and the consequences of your actions. You also must have missed out on Yuria entirely, which is basically a secondary plot running alongside the main stories and gives you many more options in terms of lore. Also, the climax was probably supposed to be with Aldrich, it's just that most people happen to go to Profaned Capital after him rather than the other way around.

+Sadsharks The only issue as far as I'm aware of is that by doing Aldritch first you are able to complete both Seigward's and Greirat's questlines. If you go to Yhorm first after freeing Seigward, Greirat will die in Irithyll. The only other way Greirat can survive Irithyll is if you didn't save Seigward and allowed Patches to keep his armor.

Mordalon wait I'm quite certain you can send of Greirat, speak to Siegward at the kitchen in Irithyll WITHOUT lighting the first bonfire in Irithyll Dungeon, beat Pontiff and Greirat will be back all fine and dandy? Atleast that worked for me.

0/10 No ridge racer references

You have to time it thats the issue that he encountered

Just did the boss today, the problem most certainly no longer exists. You can dodge roll out of this now, so it was likely fixed in a patch or something

This is false. There is a very specific move Gundyr does that knocks you down. This is the only, and I really mean the *only* instance where you cannot roll to get up. I’m not sure why it’s here either.

It's an issue with how the game detects you falling. If the game thinks you fell, then fell again before you recover, it forces you to be stuck through the entire animation. Patches have severely decreased the occurrences of this, but they do still exist. Not just with Gundyr but any enemy that can knock you down.

The inside is pretty good imo. But the run outside is cancer souls.

that's what the game is, that is it's theme it is a world where the cycle has happened so many times that it all starts blending together it's all a huge re-enactment of the earlier games and it's especially obvious in the ringed city DLC where some areas from the previous games straight up come back like earthen peak from DS2 with the desert pyromancers, the final boss is literally an amalgamation of all of those who linked the flame including gwyn and all the chosen undead, you may think it's uninspired but most people i know liked all the call backs to the previous games, especially since this is the final dark souls game, it's a last hurrah and look back at the previous entries to send off the series

@Zetadar yeah agreed. First time playing I rolled my eyes when I hit anor londo and the archers, or fucked up gwyndolin. but when I reached the last level everything clicked, these ARE callbacks but it's all twisted, broken and used up. the final boss being an amalgamation of your player characters and a bit of gwyn in the second phase just hammers that point home, I had a friend tell me he cried when that part started. the music is crawling to a halt, it doesn't even get to the second jingle, it just slows down and fades out until he is dead. and the easiest ending is the same. the flame is barely able to sustain itself off of you. ash lake being all burned up and dry was a gut punch. And if you play the ringed city you'll actually see the end of the world. To me that completely validates all these callbacks. dark souls 1 link the fire ending is the end of a cycle and start of a new one. ds3's link the fire ending is understanding that it can't go on like this. and the dlc ending is the death of the world, where nearly everything and everyone has been burnt to ash. Dark Souls 3 is my favourite videogame of all time.

I thought the same a couple of years ago. Now I look at such comments as the whining of people who are corny tired of games.

Wildpie would like to know your location

With darkness and silence through the night...

I have never parried in Dark Souls 1, taken damage, and still succeeded in the parry. Does it only happen in PvP?

It can happen with large parriable weapons in pvp, i actually haven't checked in pve though

His post isn't really accurate. Partial parries have been around since DaS1, but in that game they aren't "successful", they just reduce damage and cancel hitstun. You can't riposte and the enemy is completely unharmed. Apparently in DaS3 some partial parries (or maybe all of them, idk) can still be riposted.

Against large parriable weapons i've frequently had successful partial parries, however it may only occur due to latency

It's only some of them, there are more times than i can count where i get a partial and don't get a riposte and there are quite a few where i get the riposte but take damage from the attack anyway.