Reviews VideoGame / Dark Souls I

So half the review is not getting the point of the game and the other half is RAGE I HATE THIS GAME. The game is suppose to be hard yet you're talking about graduality, and save points too apart. That's the point, you have to "learn" to "earn", you have to learn what's the best weapon and or tactic to defeat the enemy you're presented with. You'll fail if you're not careful and try to just run from point A to point B. You'll die, a lot, and to stop dying you'll have to get better at the game.

So half the review is not getting the point of the game and the other half is RAGE I HATE THIS GAME. The game is suppose to be hard yet you're talking about graduality, and save points too apart. That's the point, you have to "learn" to "earn", you have to learn what's the best weapon and or tactic to defeat the enemy you're presented with. You'll fail if you're not careful and try to just run from point A to point B. You'll die, a lot, and to stop dying you'll have to get better at the game.

Oh, I get the point of the game. I just feel that a game should have more to it than "its really hard". I just don't feel like my time is valued by this game.

I dislike when people say "Oh you will totally hate me for this.", as if they expected everyone to be a butthurt fanboy.

^ pretty much, a pre-entive strike to people who disagree with me. ^^ No you're not, you're complaining "that" is really hard, also there are many games that just focus on their goals, and even then IMO this game is not exactly minimalistic. If you're looking for a short game that you can beat on a few hours, then you chose the wrong game.

^^ seeing how I was flamed to hell and back for my review of Bioshock Infinite, I'd say a preemptive strike is necessary.

Okay fine: I knew the game was going to be hard, that's why I rented it int the first place. I wasn't expecting I'd have to fight the game itself.

See, a difficulty should come naturally from the game's design. Dark Souls opts for the easy way of ramping up the difficulty by omitting features that should be there on principle. This is not 1989, there is no excuse for checkpoints to be this sparse.

Hell, maybe the game just isn't for me. Maybe I found the one game I can't beat.

See this is what I mean, closer check points was in fact made to make games easier, it's not some primordial thing, the game's difficulty does come naturally, what you're not considering is that it's increasing it to the point that you'll be on your toes on the current level, and when you get the hang of it and beat the level, you'll be on your toes on the next level, hence why it's hard.

Now since you bring that review up, you also did a pre-emtive strike there, it seems that the issue is that you don't see the difference between I don't like this (which is ok) and the developers made this with my unenjoyment in mind, then again you changed the review so there's no way to tell now what were the issues of the original review and or the tropers that commented.

Ever play Metal Gear Rising? Sure you mow down basic mooks by the bucket load, but the game is hard, and it's hard in the good way.

The bosses are totally fair; almost all the attacks are blockable, and those that aren't can be dodged. The key is timing, and using the parry move which requires skill to get down properly.

I believe Dark Souls has a parry-counter maneuver, but I don't know for sure because the game doesn't tell me shit.

I just hate this game. I think the design sucks donkey scrotum. End of story.

Aaaaand now you're just trying to take the easy way out by presenting your viewpoint and trying to cut off the discussion before anyone else can present theirs. Fantastic.

game is hard but beatable and enjoyable. just because you die, excuse me, just because you die A LOT does not mean you lost the game. it's quite normal and expected to die a lot. pay attention, upgrade gear, take your time, learn the mobs and layouts of zones. you are NOT smarter than this game and it will let you know that every time you think you are.

Unless I'm mistaken the parry it's done by hitting L2 (not that hard to figure out since you block with L1 and R1 and R2 do two different attacks), which I think it's told in the tutorial, also note that there are simply different kinds of difficulty, here instead of a you can block/parry/dodge every attack, it's more figure out if you can parry that attack or just block, or neither and dodge, or you can block but he leaves itself wide open when he does that particular attack so play smarter not harder, dodge and nail'im on the back, etc. etc.

also, the game looked far from dull to me. i found it really interesting, dark, eerie and at times beautiful(anor londo). a video game is meant to waste your time so you avoid boredom. if you're upset it did just that then don't play it and find another game to waste your time with that you like better.

it is L2. and i'm almost positive the game tells you that at the beginning in undead asylum.

^^^^^ Oh, like I give a rat's ass what you think. I hate this game. I wrote a review saying I hate this game. I spent most of the comments section telling you guys why I hate this game.

But, NOOOOOOOOOOO. Apparently my reasons for hating this game aren't good enough for you. Apparently I just don't get it. I think you don't get it; this isn't a game, it's a fucking punishment. It's FROM Software waving their willy in your face and charging sixty bucks for the privilege. I was dumb enough to believe that this game was a good, challenging experience. It's an exercise in hair tearing. Every time I die, I have to will myself to not just pop the disc out and play a game that's actually fun. Every time I think I'm master of my own destiny, some ridiculous shit kills me and sends me thirty minutes back. That's thirty minutes of my life wasted. That's basically murder ('cept slower).

"I dislike when people say "Oh you will totally hate me for this.", as if they expected everyone to be a butthurt fanboy."

In this case the prejudice seems to have been warranted. I dunno guys, 'not enough checkpoints' sounds like a valid criticism of a game to me. 'No fun to play' seems like a good reason not to like a game. Not all games can appeal to all people.

Ok get this through your thick narcissistic skull, this isn't about you. This is a review, the purpose of a review is to inform people. You hate it? that's completely fine but that doesn't mean that other people who have also played the game can't just say, hey every potential future player of this game, here's another view other than: this game basically murdered me and it's made purposelessly to be unenjoyable (though I think the insane overreaction should cue them on unreliability). You made a review on tv tropes, you should had been prepared for criticism, so stop whining so much.

not enough checkpoints would normally be, but on a game that it's premise is being hard, not so much, that's like saying Shadow Of The Colossus lacks things to do, and no fun to play is suggestive, that's why we discuss the specific reasons s/he gave.

Hey, the only whining I ever saw during this monkey fest of a discourse (apologies in advance) is from the people who like this game. They rush to it's defense because someone dared speak ill of their beloved Dark Souls.

You might want to look up what narcissist means, because I don't believe it means what you hink it's means. This pales in comparison to you rageing based on a comment that wasn't actually aimed at you. When I hear people defending this game, all I hear is a smug superiority, because they managed to bust down the brick wall with their foreheads, while I realized that I'm just hurting myself and quit before I did serious damage to myself.

So go ahead, keep projecting so hard you show off powerpoint presentations. I don't care. Keep pushing until the mods come down. I don't give a fuck, it's a good day to die.

See what I mean about being narcissistic. You even outright "lied" dude, you said the game didn't told you how to parry when it did (like 2 minutes into the game) you're simply view the world, I'm right and everyone else is wrong, and then just project yourself on to other, then when you're on the ropes you resort to run away with an I didn't care about it to begin with, even when I went through all the trouble of making a review, replying to the comments, etc. Not to mention how utterly flawed your, only people who liked it can defend it. I really dislike Twilight (among other tropers that replied), that doesn't mean that I'm gonna agree with this review.

Not that it matters, nothing I or anyone say can top your own words as evidence against you. You're your own worst enemy here.

Uh, huh.

Say, how long does the prompt onscreen tell you about parrying? 2-3 seconds? All I know is NOT FUCKING MANY.

And all you seem to want is an enemy to fight.

I'm here all day motherfucker.

Remember kids, arguments over the internet are serious business.

Yeah, you're right.

It stayed on the screen until you hit X. Also how much time do you need to read "L2 Parry". I think you could had also read the manual. Not that any of this matters since you said it didn't tell you at all, not that it told you too quickly.

I'm on the 360 and it's a rental from gamefly. I don't have a manual.

While I've never played the game myself (for great, great fear of everything you stated here), I'll take this as reinforcement that I should never, ever, ever pick this up. Ever. Because I'm 99% sure that I would agree with you to the letter on this game (and that's just based on all of the praise I've heard about it). I thoroughly dislike games that are frustrating. Hard and frustrating are not always one and the same, but it would appear this game assumes that they are interchangeable.

And the fact that I've yet to agree with one of your game reviews (except maybe Mass Effect 3, I can't recall) just makes this stand out all the more. So I guess I'll offer thanks for basically confirming my suspicions.

Cool. You are welcome.

I only review games and things I either really love, or despise with every fibre of my being. I don't do middle ground.

I rather enjoy both Dark Souls and Demons Souls, so feel free to take what I'm about to say with a grain of salt.

The games are definitely hard (Demon's Souls moreso, I think,) sometimes due to legitimate difficulty, sometimes due to poor design. However, I don't think the bonfire locations qualify as the second one. They're usually spaced about 15-20 minutes apart, and, apart from Sen's Fortress, have some sort of shortcut that lets you skip most of the level before it and go straight there once you've made it that far once.

As for death by traps and enemy swarms— this is the kind of game where everything is always a trap. Boulder precariously placed on a staircase? Probably some dude ready to push it. Long narrow hallway? Expect an arrow trap. One lone guy who tries to run away when you come to him? He's got friends right around the corner. It's not the kind of game where you just run from point A to point B all willy nilly, and by the third or fourth time you get crushed to death or shot with arrows or set on fire, you learn to be patient and pay attention. If you take the time to look around, there's (nearly) always a hint of some sort of what to expect. Mimics look slightly different than regular treasure chests. Pressure plates are always visible if you watch your step. You can always outrun boulders. And if you play while connected to the internet, you can read other peoples' warnings and watch playbacks of what happened 30 seconds before they died to know what's coming, by touching their bloodstains. If you try to just run ahead to the next boss, you WILL die, no questions asked, because this game's difficulty is as much about the boss fights as it is getting there. More importantly, if you can't be arsed to take it slow and pay attention throughout the levels, the bosses will kill you, and kill you quickly.

Now, are there some areas that are shittily designed? Absolutely. The Capra Demon fight basically requires you to the first couple of times you get to it because there's not really any room to maneuver to see what's going on. The (optional) hydra fight doesn't really give you any indication that some of the water is too deep to walk in and will instant-kill you if you get too close. They should have been more clear about what Covenants do and are and how Humanity works.

As for knowing about where to go— talk to the NP Cs in Firelink Shrine. Literally the first dude you see when you get there after the tutorial will tell you "Hey, go ring the bells up in the church and down in the swamp."

That would be great if I had a goddamned map. There's one instance that stood out in my mind as incredibly bullshit, and that was the bridge that' opposite Solie or whatever his name is; long empty bridge, can see to baddies in the distance, clearly this is the arena for a huge battle with a zombie army. NOPE! A big fuck-off red dragon materializes behind me and torches me with it's fire breath before I could even react. Granted it only took off a small portion of health, but still.

Also, I have to ask, people defending this game, are you only saying "oh it's not so hard" because there's secretly an asterisk by your statement that says "once you've reached level fifty, consulted the wiki on an optimal build, found all the secret weapons, memorized the trap locations and utterly forgot what it was like starting out"?

It's hard, that's the gimmick of the game, the point is that you seem to keep forgetting that and complaining about that. The traps and enemies are there, some are hard to see or figure out but you still can if you're careful, that's what we meant with you can't just run from point A to point B. It's not about being overleveled (which the game makes it hard to be anyway) is about being careful and attentive. No one said or even implied consulting wikis for optimal builds or secret weapons.

ps. people have different opinions, why does it seem like you just can't let people like this game. We have discussed with you like in all other reviews but no one has chastised you for the simple act of not liking this game.

Why is it you can't seem to grasp the fact that I don't like the game for the reasons you like it?

I know that the gimmick is its difficulty, but difficulty and frustration are not one and the same.

And why can't you grasp that again, this is not about you, it's about the game, I said way before, you don't like it, that's completely fine, you already made your point, now why can't people theirs. You're still free to make point about the ones that people made but instead you're just getting mad at people for daring to not share your opinion. The replies while directed at your review and your points is not "for" you, it's for the people who haven't played this game and are

but difficulty and frustration are not one and the same

See but that's the root of the issue, that's an Ad Hoc fallacy. Your opinion is not a fact, hence why the reviews are open to discussion, "frustration" like great, horrible, boring, fun, etc. are subjective words, they're not factual. Don't you think it's unfair that someone trying to decide between getting the game or not came to your review and read "I believe Dark Souls has a parry-counter maneuver, but I don't know for sure because the game doesn't tell me shit." and "how long does the prompt onscreen tell you about parrying? 2-3 seconds? All I know is NOT FUCKING MANY." which is not true. Does the game has it's faults, of course it does, I myself and probably the other guys can list a few, but going out of your way by even lying is just not a reliable outlook.

So in summary, like I said before, you don't like the game, in fact you said you hated the game, and that's completely ok, however if you didn't wanted people to discuss with different views, then you've come to the wrong place.

Okay I miss typed, I readily admit that. I typed this up after a pissing contest on the Escapist over this fucking game and I was confused to what I had already said.

And you made about me, seeing as this back and forth is about a review I wrote, to a game I played.

What I've been getting is that I'm not allowed to dislike it for asinine reasons. When I say "end of story" I mean that's all I have to say about the game. That's the extent I'm willing to go discussing it. I'm sorry if that isn't enough but thems the ropes.

I tried taking a stab at this game last year and I just couldn't get into it. It came of as a grind and the atmosphere just too oppressive for my taste, which is weird because I like the kind of Dark Fantasy that Dark Souls is. On top of that, it wasn't the difficulty that turned me off; It was the controls. They came off as too slow and slippery for my taste.

The cheap shots turned me off the most.

Okay, I'm just going to go out on a limb here and say that while I like the game, I agree that the lack of checkpoints borders on Fake Difficulty. Yes, it puts a lot more emphasis on being careful, but the problem is that when bosses come into the picture it just becomes a pain in the ass. I'm going to use the Taurus demon as an example, because that was where I first noticed the issue:

It took me a dozen tries to kill him. That's fine; learning the pattern and figuring out how best to counter the attacks, etc. that's all part of the legitimate difficulty. The Fake Difficulty bit is the fact that every time the Taurus Demon kills me, I have to waste ten minutes climbing back up to it and killing all the enemies I already killed ten times. That's where I felt it crossed the line from "challenging" to "bullshit" because it wasn't testing my ability or anything. I knew how to get to there without getting killed, but because the damn checkpoints are so far apart killing the Taurus Demon took three times longer than it needed to because every time I wanted to fight it I had to waste time getting to it. If they would have just put a bonfire in the room preceding it so I didn't have to replay Undead Burg every damn time he kills me.

The other gripe I have is the lack of any pause function. I get that the game doesn't want you to cheese it by being able to change equipment at will, but sometimes I have to answer the phone, or go to the bathroom, or take care of some other real life business where I don't have the luxury of spending the time to find a safe location.

I know! Though, I was feeling pretty silly when I figured out I could drop attack the fucker over and over from the tower.

I should be able to pause a game when I'm offline. Online? I've got other players to watch my butt/distract monsters while I change gear. But having no pause offline is inexcusable, it's been around since the introduction of home consoles and it baffles me why From thought it be a good idea to nix it.

"Put a simple checkpoint right before a boss" I believe is somewhere in the front half of game-design 101, right next to "have a fucking pause button."

—There is no reason for checkpoints to be that far apart There is. It keeps you afraid and it strengthens the bonfires' status as beacons of hope. No other game will evoke that cathartic relief at finding another checkpoint.

— I get angry because that means I'd have to fight through the last dozen dirty tricks to make up for lost time, only to get killed again in the next area That's the entire point of the game. It's the central mechanic. You'll go through everything again, but you can still retrieve the experience points you 'lost' while armed with the knowledge you gained from your previous deaths. (Most games don't even allow you that luxury.) Furthermore, you also risk losing all those experience points, giving you a long-term risk factor in your gameplay. That risk is something most games nowadays don't have given with the current ubiquity of save scumming.

—I should not feel miserable while playing a game. It is the misery you endure that makes the hard-won victories sweeter.

—I don't have the time or patience to take the excruciatingly slow pace the game has. My recommendation is to put this on bold, if possible, so people with the time and patience can properly disregard your review and people without will be more inclined to agree.

Lastly: —I have no idea where to go, what I'm supposed to be doing here —I wanted to be part of the cult following, to be part of a tight knit community, to prove that I'm a real gamer, and that I don't need all these modern conveniences that today's games have. It is apparent to me that from your complaints so far, you DO need the modern conveniences that today's games have. Fret not, it does not make you any less of a real gamer; you're just not one of us who enjoyed all the things that you hated in this game.

To be honest, this review is blatant flame-bait. You even said so in the text, and that's all you seem to do on the forums in general. Don't bother responding to this, people.

All I seem to do on forums? Oh and I suppose you've gone through every single one of my posts (in which case you have even less of a life than me) to come to this conclusion, or your just spewing bullshit like every other Souls fanboy I've encountered whenever I talk shit about this garbage.

The only person who I don't immediately want to flay alive, dunk in sea water, and gouge the eyes out of with a rusty melon baller is Elmion up there. He/She actually seems like a reasonable, likable person, who I'd love to discuss the game with.

Oh, and Bee Tee Dubs, every comment moves this review to the top of the list, so it's automatically the first one anyone sees

Speaking as one who hasn't played the game, doesn't know much about it, but is interested in it for much the same reasons the OP is, I'd like to share a similar experiment I did with another game.

I attempted playing Castlevania III without using save states. I knew going in that the game was notoriously hard and I wanted to see how well I stacked up. I had a blast playing it, even if I didn't manage to beat it, and that was because it never felt like the game was cheating me out of anything. Losing enough lives would make me lose significant progress in a stage, but it always, always felt like it was my fault because the game didn't try to ambush me with things that I didn't know how to deal with or that might kill me instantly, not to mention that it was always clear what buttons I needed to press and what direction I needed to go. The difficulty did scale naturally with the stage progression, never seeming to jump or drop with no warning.

Dark Souls sounds as if it has none of these elements that made me enjoy Castlevania III so much, which quite frankly makes me curious as to what it is that people do seem to enjoy in it. I've heard of the pleasure of overcoming a difficult challenge, but from what I've read here, I'd question the validity of anything in this game as an actual challenge, as it sounds like the entire point is to see what enemies do before you die so you can kill them when you come back. That, to me, sounds as if it's testing patience rather than gaming skill, and there's nothing I can stand less than a video game that deliberately wastes my time.

Now perhaps my comparions here are unfair since I haven't played Dark Souls and I'm speaking of different genres regardless, but what has been described to me as Dark Souls sounds to me as if it's essentially a 3D version of I Wanna Be The Guy on Hard mode, minus the part about it being a silly pastiche. So I'd like to ask: what is it that drives people to play this game, other than being able to say they beat it? Because of what I've looked at, no one's touched upon anything other than the difficulty of the gameplay, because apparently the controls, presentation, story details, etc are all nonexistant/so unmemorable as to be not worth mentioning.

Speaking as one who hasn't played the game, doesn't know much about it, but is interested in it for much the same reasons the OP is, I'd like to share a similar experiment I did with another game.

I attempted playing Castlevania III without using save states. I knew going in that the game was notoriously hard and I wanted to see how well I stacked up. I had a blast playing it, even if I didn't manage to beat it, and that was because it never felt like the game was cheating me out of anything. Losing enough lives would make me lose significant progress in a stage, but it always, always felt like it was my fault because the game didn't try to ambush me with things that I didn't know how to deal with or that might kill me instantly, not to mention that it was always clear what buttons I needed to press and what direction I needed to go. The difficulty did scale naturally with the stage progression, never seeming to jump or drop with no warning.

Dark Souls sounds as if it has none of these elements that made me enjoy Castlevania III so much, which quite frankly makes me curious as to what it is that people do seem to enjoy in it. I've heard of the pleasure of overcoming a difficult challenge, but from what I've read here, I'd question the validity of anything in this game as an actual challenge, as it sounds like the entire point is to see what enemies do before you die so you can kill them when you come back. That, to me, sounds as if it's testing patience rather than gaming skill, and there's nothing I can stand less than a video game that deliberately wastes my time.

Now perhaps my comparions here are unfair since I haven't played Dark Souls and I'm speaking of different genres regardless, but what has been described to me as Dark Souls sounds to me as if it's essentially a 3D version of I Wanna Be The Guy on Hard mode, minus the part about it being a silly pastiche. So I'd like to ask: what is it that drives people to play this game, other than being able to say they beat it? Because of what I've looked at, no one's touched upon anything other than the difficulty of the gameplay, because apparently the controls, presentation, story details, etc are all nonexistant/so unmemorable as to be not worth mentioning.

Erm, sorry about that...

You're pretty much right on the money.

The fans of this game say that it's supposed to be a throw back to old action games of the 80's and 90's. In which case I have to seriously question the validity of claims, because I've tried old school games like this. Hell, my very first platformer was a little game called Dangerous Dave, and that game didn't do mich have a difficulty curve as a difficulty wall. But I loved that game, partly because I was about 5 at the time, but mostly because it didn't pull bullshit on me like Dark Souls does.

The fact that there are so many reviewers giving this poorly designed, tedious exercise in hair pulling a free pass for shit no other game could get away with is fucking disgraceful. And it does waste your time, because the only way to figure out how to beat the bosses without extensive research beforehand is through trial and error, but since the checkpoints are so far apart, when you commit an error and have to repeat the trial, you have to fight through the same waves of the same boring, tedious enemies to get back to where you died, and you still have the chance to be killed on the way back up, wasting even more time.

"sense of accomplishment"... what crap.

Machine Man 1992 more like Dark Syde Phil

Who the hell is Dark Syde Phil?

He means The King Of Hate. Here's a vide playlist of him playing Dark Souls https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrdg0_M9O9k&list=PLC6360A0CB2A3076E&index=1

He means The King Of Hate. Here's a vidoe playlist of him playing Dark Souls https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrdg0_M9O9k&list=PLC6360A0CB2A3076E&index=1

Yeah, that ain't me. I use the same handle everywhere. Check my trope page, it even says right there.

I have to applaud the OP and the 'replys'. This was a great parody of trolling an ignorant reviewer. But please, don't clutter up the review section in the future.

It would have been stored neatly in the corner if you hadn't trudged it out again.

I'm going a different direction and will say that as a fan of the game, your review provides an interesting perspective. I can understand the frustration Dark Souls can invoke and it does test you a lot, especially in the first half. The thing about Dark Souls is that it requires a strict, no-nonsense playstyle that requires patience, at least in the first play through. The fact that you don't like Dark Souls doesn't make you without skill or a casual gamer, it means it just isn't what you're looking for.

I think the responses for this review are quite defensive, which should be rather expected (and as the pre-emptive strike indicates, was expected). The thing is, this is a review. People shouldn't dissect it like it's supposed to be the gospel or something. What one would call "not holding ones hand", someone else draws the line there and calls it "fucking bullshit" and people should look at a different review as a sincere perspective. There is a reason why this review is here and it's to sum up the feelings the reviewer felt and to share that feeling. It seems odd that people take it upon themselves to try and "fix" his opinion.

Well I agree with you OP. The game continually stacks the deck and then makes you feel like a dumbass for not expecting something stupid.

I have to say that I am very disappointed with the commemorators. I really wasn't aware that simply not liking Dark Souls automatically makes you a troll.

I really wasn't aware that simply not liking Dark Souls automatically makes you a troll.

It's really the tone of the review more than its content.

"It's really the tone of the review more than its content."

It's Dark Souls. The anger comes back.

Honestly, when you're taking more than 30 minutes to get to somewhere you've been from a Bonfire, you're doing it wrong. Dark Souls is slow when you're exploring and figuring out enemy positions and behavior, but once you've gone through an area once, you should be going through it faster each time until you're practically breezing through it.

If you think I'm crazy, try starting a new account and testing out how long it takes you to go through the Undead Burg. It originally took me several hours. I can now easily run it and grab all the noteworthy items there in less than ten minutes, and that's if I decide to go there at all instead of just taking the Master Key gift and skipping it to go straight to the Undead Parish. Dark Souls is a popular game to speedrun because it has no bullshit to interfere with the speedrun like long unskippable dialogue sequences and has a variety of shortcuts (Both intentional and uninentional) and ways to build your character fast. Most non-glitch speedruns can reach an hour. I've seen a speedrun that had the player beat every boss, including the secret ones that are off the beaten path (Like those in the DLC); it took him an hour and 45 minutes.

I'm sure the reviewer in question was banned months ago, replying to Machine Man directly is a lost cause.

I dont hate you, because I wanted to like the game too and also found it a combination of difficult combat (not a bad thing), poor design (bad thing) and very boring (bad). The tiny sad bits of lore I picked up on where neat...the lack of interesting NP Cs and that horribly delivered prophesy in the tutorial was not. Also, the player base are dicks. The tutorial was bad but asking for help just got me trolled and any time I made myself human or whatever they call it I was invaded by someone with better stuff who took me out in a about a minute and ruined all that progress. I may have missed the option to turn off unsolicited pvp attacks but I highly suspect it just doesnt exist unless I want to play on hardmode and always be undead.