Welcome to the Achaea Forums! Please be sure to read the Forum Rules.

Dark Souls 3

RomRom Member Posts: 523 ✭✭✭✭✭ - Grand Achaean
edited April 2016 in The Universal Membrane
Not quite a week old yet but I have sunk some serious hours in. Anyone else have some thoughts on it? I'm having a blast on every boss and have been really been enjoying exploring the new areas. The PvP has been great too, and I've been alternating between beating ass and getting mine whooped at some of the more popular 1v1 spots. Thinking about rerolling to a pyromancy heavy build, miracles have felt kinda lame.

If anyone needs help on any boss (on PC) message me and we will crush them!
Chat with other players in real time on your phone, browser, or desktop client:
Come join the Achaea discord!
«1

Comments

  • AlrenaAlrena Member Posts: 647 @ - Epic Achaean
    I love the game so far! Haven't beaten it yet, mostly played a pyromancy heavy build so far. Thinking about starting a sorcerer next, the sorceries look good this time too! Miracles always have been mostly support, with the exception of lightning spears.

    I play on PS4, also willing to help a fellow Achaean. Praise the Sun!
    image
  • AhmetAhmet Wherever I wanna beMember Posts: 3,370 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    It's pretty great. I went warrior and built into greatsword rek-face, but have a pyromancer on the side.

    Most of the bosses were fun, except for Pontiff which was just unfuckingbelievably stupid, and wyvern which glitched out for me, so I had to sit where it couldn't hit me and shoot two hundred arrows to kill it.

    Nameless king was one of my favourite DS bosses of all time.

    I like the throwback to DS1 where it takes you back through the starting zone and has you fight a revamped version of its boss.

    Slightly disappointed in how easy the final boss was, but after spending an hour or so on Pontiff, I'm fine with it.

    Going to trade all my items to pickle-pee/pump-a-rum and then start NG+.

    Greatsword +10 ftw.
    Huh. Neat.
  • ShirszaeShirszae Santo DomingoMember Posts: 3,128 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Stares at people playing DS3 with envy-filled eyes :cry:

    And you won't understand the cause of your grief...


    ...But you'll always follow the voices beneath.

  • JukilianJukilian Member Posts: 1,579 @ - Epic Achaean
    I'd be playing it, but first I need to cross Demon's Souls and Bloodborne off of my list.
  • AesiAesi Member Posts: 1,222 @ - Epic Achaean
    Haven't played any, but interested. Are the stories linked, should I start from the beginning?
  • TaarkosTaarkos Member Posts: 39 ✭✭✭ - Distinguished
    The stories aren't linked closely enough for you to care too much. Actually the stories are pretty obscure...and you'd have to read many item descriptions and pay attention to many small details to get much out of the story at all. That actually makes it a little more interesting if you're into it though. I haven't played DS3, but I liked DS1 better than DS2 and Demon's Souls (before Dark Souls).
  • AhmetAhmet Wherever I wanna beMember Posts: 3,370 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Taarkos said:
    The stories aren't linked closely enough for you to care too much. Actually the stories are pretty obscure...and you'd have to read many item descriptions and pay attention to many small details to get much out of the story at all. That actually makes it a little more interesting if you're into it though. I haven't played DS3, but I liked DS1 better than DS2 and Demon's Souls (before Dark Souls).
    I played DS1 and DS2, but not demon's souls or bloodborne (fking console only), and it makes sense, enough, I guess. "Pretty obscure" is an understatement, but it's pretty impressive regardless.
    Huh. Neat.
    ShirszaeAntidas
  • TaarkosTaarkos Member Posts: 39 ✭✭✭ - Distinguished
    Demon's Souls was pretty wild if you're a completionist. I never could understand the world state or whatever it was called in the game. Bloodborne was great fun. I really loved the setting. If you don't ever intend to buy a console for it you should consider watching at least a few Let's Play videos or something. The one thing I disliked was how it was very focused on offense. I can dodge plenty but I still enjoy having a shield to hide behind.
  • DaeirDaeir AustraliaMember Posts: 6,276 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    It makes me miss Bloodborne. A lot.

    Not hugely fond of it so far, but it seems to play better than DS2 did at least.
  • AntidasAntidas Member Posts: 1,496 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    I fully recommend starting with dark souls 1, even if you don't care too much about the story, just because how awesome of a game it is. If you do care about the story, its pretty freaking cool as well. I also recommend playing through dark souls 2, merely for the sake of having done so. It wasn't a bad game, but it definitely wasn't as good as the first. Dark Souls 3 so far is pretty damn awesome. I haven't beaten it yet either, but playing as a dexterity melee-heavy build on PS4 atm. Feel free to add me if anyone needs help or whatever - I'm Timotheus92 on PSN.

    Aesi
  • JukilianJukilian Member Posts: 1,579 @ - Epic Achaean
    I found DS2 to be a cakewalk compared to DS1. I smashed almost every boss. I only really had issues with at least two of the bosses from memory. The Fume Knight and Sir Alonne.
  • AhmetAhmet Wherever I wanna beMember Posts: 3,370 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Jukilian said:
    I found DS2 to be a cakewalk compared to DS1. I smashed almost every boss. I only really had issues with at least two of the bosses from memory. The Fume Knight and Sir Alonne.
    DS3 pontiff is ridiculous, as is nameless king. I enjoyed the nameless king fight so much though.
    Huh. Neat.
    Rom
  • JukilianJukilian Member Posts: 1,579 @ - Epic Achaean
    I've also found every boss in Demon's Souls to be super easy as well.

    Maybe it's just my increasing experience from the previous games making these seem easy. I've gone a completely different build in Demon's Souls as I did in DS1 & 2 though, to try to have more of a challenge.

    I typically go super light melee fighters with no magic or miracles. In Demon's Souls I've gone a heavy Paladin with a halberd.
  • GrandueGrandue Member Posts: 382 ✭✭✭✭ - Eminent
    I'm going to forbid all Ashtani from playing these games. This happened when FO4 came out, half our CWHO disappears for a RL month when a new hot game comes out. 
    Shirszae
  • LoalaineLoalaine EnglandMember Posts: 52 ✭✭✭ - Distinguished
    Just started it with a warrior... any recommendations on any other classes to play? I wanna try sorceries next before I get to invested in one particular style 
  • TaelTael Member Posts: 1,197 @ - Epic Achaean
    edited April 2016
    One thing about the games that new players may not necessarily realize that they aren't "balanced" in the conventional sense.

    In a lot of games, magic vs. two-handed melee vs. archery vs. sword and board and all that is just a choice of playstyle and the game is designed so they're approximately equal in difficulty across the whole game.

    But in Dark Souls, playing with a lot of magic will make the game way easier in most areas and playing with a shield is like an order of magnitude easier than playing fully two-handed or dual-wield.

    The same applies to some equipment - the Ring of Binding in DS2 makes the game substantially easier since it halves the potential health penalty from dying.

    So if you're starting out or you're struggling, some magic is a good idea. I would definitely take a shield. When I first played DS1, I tried to play without a shield and it turned me off from the game for about a year. Later I tried again with a shield and got about a third of the way through the game, really enjoyed it, and then restarted and played shieldless, which was more manageable (though still pretty tough - I don't think I would recommend trying it without doing a full playthrough with a shield first) with that experience and the knowledge of where to get a couple of pieces of equipment relatively early.

    Basically think of your build as not just your playstyle, but also the game's difficulty slider. If the game seems too hard or too easy, your build is the thing to adjust.
  • JukilianJukilian Member Posts: 1,579 @ - Epic Achaean
    I played through most of DS1 without a shield in my play through. I got really good at dodging, and that really paid out on some bosses.

    I had very little trouble with Manus, for example, because I was fast and good at dodging. My housemate isn't so good at dodging and kept getting smashed.
  • AhmetAhmet Wherever I wanna beMember Posts: 3,370 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Jukilian said:
    I played through most of DS1 without a shield in my play through. I got really good at dodging, and that really paid out on some bosses.

    I had very little trouble with Manus, for example, because I was fast and good at dodging. My housemate isn't so good at dodging and kept getting smashed.
    I got really good at dodging on my first playthrough, then used heavy shields on my second, and I was astounded at how many boss attacks you can block with a shield. (hydra bossfight ftw)
    Huh. Neat.
    RomAntidasShirszae
  • TaelTael Member Posts: 1,197 @ - Epic Achaean
    Jukilian said:
    I played through most of DS1 without a shield in my play through. I got really good at dodging, and that really paid out on some bosses.

    I had very little trouble with Manus, for example, because I was fast and good at dodging. My housemate isn't so good at dodging and kept getting smashed.
    Yeah, I had a similar experience. I restarted and began my shieldless run just after a friend had picked up the game and we were going through it at about the same pace (him with a head start). It was rough at first, but it was pretty great when I beat Smough and Ornstein in two tries after hearing him complain about them for so long.

    I still had some trouble with Manus, but I seriously can't even imagine how hard it would have been if I had been used to using a shield since, unlike most of the other bosses, you really can't block much of his stuff with a shield.
    Antidas
  • JukilianJukilian Member Posts: 1,579 @ - Epic Achaean
    edited April 2016
    Once I figured out Manus, I killed him in like two tries.

    Mind you, my process of "figuring out" bosses typically included many deaths. In DS1, anyway. DS2 and Demon's Souls? Pfft.

    I have a four day weekend starting in about half an hour. I should try to smash out the rest of Demon's Souls.
    TaelShirszae
  • JukilianJukilian Member Posts: 1,579 @ - Epic Achaean
    Two more bosses down in Demon's Souls...

    Progress!
  • JukilianJukilian Member Posts: 1,579 @ - Epic Achaean
    Demon's Souls is now finished.

    That was a breeze.
    Antidas
  • TaelTael Member Posts: 1,197 @ - Epic Achaean
    edited April 2016
    I'm playing through Dark Souls 2 again, since I never finished it, and man...I am really not a fan.

    It really feels like something that was designed by someone who had absolutely no idea what they were doing - so many mechanics changed just for the sake of changing them. It's like someone saw the weight breakpoint rolling mechanics and just thought making them continuous and based on stats instead must inherently be better (it isn't), and they saw the stats and figured it would be better if they were combined into derived stats in esoteric ways, and they saw the soul level matchmaking and...I don't even understand what possible rationale there is for that change. And then you have to fast-travel through two loading screens every time you want to level up and go back. And instead of the availability of recoveries between bonfires being paced by Estus Flasks, there are both too few Estus Flask sips early on and gamebreaking infinite lifegems later on. And instead of actually balancing the areas or making it possible to learn to run through them to get to the bosses efficiently, if you want to repeat bosses you have to fight your way through it unless you end up having to try more than ten times, at which point the game determines you've ground your way through enemies long enough that you can stop. And that also means you can't just farm souls anywhere, so that's fun too. And if you die? Well, you failed, so of course any sensible designer would tell you that when something is too difficult for the player and they retry it, you should make it even harder by reducing their health. The more they're struggling, the more frustrating it should get. Makes perfect sense.

    And the enemy placement, probably the best part of DS1, is so much less careful with tons of annoying ranged enemies and tons of group fights against fast enemies with perfect tracking. I'm playing Scholar of the First Sin this time around and the changes seem pretty unilaterally worse than even the base game too: random enemies inexplicably copy-pasted from later areas into earlier areas that look out of place and lead to even worse encounters. What the hell is that drake doing in Heide's Tower of Flame? Sitting right outside a boss called the Old Dragonslayer no less! Not a very successful Dragonslayer I guess.

    If it weren't for DS1, it might still seem like a good game, and I'll probably still finish it, but it's just totally inexplicable how many strictly negative changes were made. I just don't understand how no one said "guys, wait, isn't this just worse than what we were doing before?".
  • AntidasAntidas Member Posts: 1,496 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Tael said:
    I'm playing through Dark Souls 2 again, since I never finished it, and man...I am really not a fan.

    It really feels like something that was designed by someone who had absolutely no idea what they were doing - so many mechanics changed just for the sake of changing them. It's like someone saw the weight breakpoint rolling mechanics and just thought making them continuous and based on stats instead must inherently be better (it isn't), and they saw the stats and figured it would be better if they were combined into derived stats in esoteric ways, and they saw the soul level matchmaking and...I don't even understand what possible rationale there is for that change. And then you have to fast-travel through two loading screens every time you want to level up and go back. And instead of the availability of recoveries between bonfires being paced by Estus Flasks, there are both too few Estus Flask sips early on and gamebreaking infinite lifegems later on. And instead of actually balancing the areas or making it possible to learn to run through them to get to the bosses efficiently, if you want to repeat bosses you have to fight your way through it unless you end up having to try more than ten times, at which point the game determines you've ground your way through enemies long enough that you can stop. And that also means you can't just farm souls anywhere, so that's fun too. And if you die? Well, you failed, so of course any sensible designer would tell you that when something is too difficult for the player and they retry it, you should make it even harder by reducing their health. The more they're struggling, the more frustrating it should get. Makes perfect sense.

    And the enemy placement, probably the best part of DS1, is so much less careful with tons of annoying ranged enemies and tons of group fights against fast enemies with perfect tracking. I'm playing Scholar of the First Sin this time around and the changes seem pretty unilaterally worse than even the base game too: random enemies inexplicably copy-pasted from later areas into earlier areas that look out of place and lead to even worse encounters. What the hell is that drake doing in Heide's Tower of Flame? Sitting right outside a boss called the Old Dragonslayer no less! Not a very successful Dragonslayer I guess.

    If it weren't for DS1, it might still seem like a good game, and I'll probably still finish it, but it's just totally inexplicable how many strictly negative changes were made. I just don't understand how no one said "guys, wait, isn't this just worse than what we were doing before?".
    Dark Souls 1 and 3 were produced by the same guy - Dark Souls 2 was produced by someone else. So yeah.

  • JukilianJukilian Member Posts: 1,579 @ - Epic Achaean
    Demon's Souls has the same kind of mechanic in reducing your max health as Dark Souls 2 did. I played through the entirety of Demon's Souls on that reduced health (half max, I think). You could at least wear the 'Cling Ring' to bring that up to like 2/3 max health or something. But yeah, DS2's health reduction I found wasn't that annoying of a mechanic. If it ever got too low, I just used another effigy.

    As for the Estus not being enough, I never had that as an issue. I relied on the lifegems when I was low on Estus, and eventually towards the end of the game your Estus has more charges, and each charge is more powerful.

    I honestly really enjoyed Dark Souls 2, but it wasn't as good as Dark Souls 1. I've yet to play a game that matches up to Dark Souls 1, in terms of gameplay and difficulty.

    Currently on my difficulty scale, I have DS1 at the top, then DS2, then Demon's Souls being the easiest of the three. I'm currently working on Bloodborne and I've beaten two bosses so far. I'd say it's close to DS1 in difficulty so far. Fantastic game. It's taken me a little while to get a handle on the combat (especially the trick weapon usage), but I'm getting better and better at it.

    Once I finish Bloodborne, I'll buy and play through DS3 and provide my opinion on it.
  • AhmetAhmet Wherever I wanna beMember Posts: 3,370 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    The one thing that really pissed me off in DS2 was the fact that when you used estus, the recovery was SO GODDAMN SLOW. Guh.
    Huh. Neat.
  • KenwayKenway San FranciscoMember Posts: 1,130 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Anyone on Xbox should pvp or coop with me. Sunbros ftw.

    - Limb Counter - Fracture Relapsing -
    "Honestly, I just love that it counts limbs." - Mizik Corten
  • TaelTael Member Posts: 1,197 @ - Epic Achaean
    edited April 2016
    Jukilian said:
    As for the Estus not being enough, I never had that as an issue. I relied on the lifegems when I was low on Estus, and eventually towards the end of the game your Estus has more charges, and each charge is more powerful.
    That's exactly what I mean though - without using lifegems, it's incredibly painful to rely on the estus flask until you rack up more shards, but with lifegems you have basically infinite healing since the game throws so many at you and you can buy an infinite amount of them so cheaply and so early.

    Plus the lifegems are way safer to use...again until you're further in and you have more adaptability (which might be why it was so slow for you @Ahmet?).

    And yeah, I know Miyazaki didn't do Dark Souls 2, but even so, it's hard to understand why anyone would think some of the design decisions were the right way to go. The whole soul memory thing? Soul memory is not just a mechanic where they were trying to do something and it didn't quite work out, it's just a bad idea that was totally unecessarily changed from the way it worked in DS1.

    I think it's pretty telling that when Miyazaki came back to do 3, he basically threw out almost every mechanic they had added in DS2 (including the whole lifegem thing and soul memory).
  • TaelTael Member Posts: 1,197 @ - Epic Achaean
    Well, DS2 certainly gets better at least. And the DLC is as great as always.
  • JukilianJukilian Member Posts: 1,579 @ - Epic Achaean
    So much Bloodborne this weekend... Game so good. Bosses can be a huge challenge sometimes too, which is a welcome change from Demon's Souls.

    Just decided to move to the rifle spear from my threaded cane to see what it's like. Pretty nice so far.
    Fendo
Sign In to Comment.