Dark Souls Vs. Other RPGs

I loved the witcher 2. Currently playing DD (still with phases of going back to DkS, so addictive), and that's a good game too. DD has ingredients of many RPG's in it; DkS, Skyrim, Dragon Age etc.

The witcher 2 was heavy on the politics, but that I really like.

Well you've all successfully convinced me to tear myself away from my uber-mage and new cleric build long enough to play The Witcher 2.



I liked some of what Skyrim had to offer but it just wasn't challenging at all. I agree that Borderlands is a truly exceptional piece of work and look forward to BL2 in September. Kingdoms of Amalur was another one that I forgot to mention was collecting dust on my shelf but, as has been said, it's there for the exact same reason Skyrim is: it's just not challenging enough to engage my interest.



In any event, thank you all for your replies. I'll try to knock out The Witcher 2 before I spend much more time on Dark Souls. Challenging combat and political intrigue are big draws for me so we'll see how it goes.

Owl wrote:Well you've all successfully convinced me to tear myself away from my uber-mage and new cleric build long enough to play The Witcher 2.



I liked some of what Skyrim had to offer but it just wasn't challenging at all. I agree that Borderlands is a truly exceptional piece of work and look forward to BL2 in September. Kingdoms of Amalur was another one that I forgot to mention was collecting dust on my shelf but, as has been said, it's there for the exact same reason Skyrim is: it's just not challenging enough to engage my interest.



In any event, thank you all for your replies. I'll try to knock out The Witcher 2 before I spend much more time on Dark Souls. Challenging combat and political intrigue are big draws for me so we'll see how it goes.

Lol, I hate borderlands

But sounds good glad we saved you from becoming hollow this day, I guess we'll just have to see how long you last

Interesting discussion this. I've played Dark Souls to death (literally) and I thought I'd never get tired of it but inevitably there came a time when I needed a break, so I got Dragon's Dogma, didn't like it and traded it in for The Witcher 2 and I'm not sure whether I like it or not. To me it seems more like a guided tour than a game. You are led by your tiny paw from one set piece to the next which isn't my kind of game at all. However, I will finish it sometime. In the meantime I've dusted off my copy of Skyrim and I'm really enjoying it this time around because I can go where I like and do what I like when I like and I love discovering new places to explore.

I've no doubt though that I'll return to Dark Souls probably when the new content is released.

Azran wrote:The objective of a company is to make money. Managing to do that through methods that actually respect and acknowledge the loyalty of the customer is up to each of them.
I do like when an studio actually demostrates that they care about their customers' opinions and requests (like FromSoftware does). Then you got the other end of the issue, like EA and Capcom with their DLC gimmicks and unfinished games.

Blizzard is actually kind of an interesting example, to say the truth. I think their last really innovative game (in relation to the rest of the franchise) was Warcraft 3. Since then, they've been recycling concepts and making them prettier (even if those concepts are actually good). Nowadays, Starcraft represents the old-school RTS games even more than the C&C franchise.

Anyway, sorry for the derail.

Companys exist to make money? Wow what a ground breaking statement

There is a difference between people who are making money doing something they love, the typical artist, and a company making games because its the way they decided to make money. It's a fine line but it exists and its an important distinction. FROM isn't a well managed corporation, they are a group of passionate game designers who would probably be doing this as a hobby in their basement anyways. Electronic Arts is a corporate conglomerate beholden to share holders.

Oh, yes. Of course. But what I meant is, there is a certain point between catering to fans and making a living.

It's unfair to compare Dark Souls to other RPGs. The RPG gamer in me refuses to acknowledge Dark Souls as a RPG anyways. It's more of a strategic action game.

I haven't been playing Dark Souls for a while now because I can't enjoy it's challenge when I'm too frustrated to deal with the usual PvP crap. These days, I play some PS3 games from GUST and NIS for their humor and character interaction.

To be honest, RPG shouldn't even be the name of the genre. You are playing roles in any game which asks you to take control of a character. I guess Character Progression (CP) doesn't sound as nice.

Majikero07 wrote:It's unfair to compare Dark Souls to other RPGs. The RPG gamer in me refuses to acknowledge Dark Souls as a RPG anyways. It's more of a strategic action game.

I haven't been playing Dark Souls for a while now because I can't enjoy it's challenge when I'm too frustrated to deal with the usual PvP crap. These days, I play some PS3 games from GUST and NIS for their humor and character interaction.

Dark Souls is more Rpg then any of the other "Rpgs" out there. We've all been lead to believe that Rpgs need an elaborate story full of cinematics and dialogue, but this isn't the case. Rpgs started with table top games that had neither of those two things. You took on a role in a world mostly imagined, wrote your own back story and played your character how you wanted. Dark Souls is very close to this, just there is less need for imagining your surroundings since you can see them.

So if any games need a new genre its all those other games that say they are Rpgs.

Federally wrote:

Majikero07 wrote:It's unfair to compare Dark Souls to other RPGs. The RPG gamer in me refuses to acknowledge Dark Souls as a RPG anyways. It's more of a strategic action game.

I haven't been playing Dark Souls for a while now because I can't enjoy it's challenge when I'm too frustrated to deal with the usual PvP crap. These days, I play some PS3 games from GUST and NIS for their humor and character interaction.

Dark Souls is more Rpg then any of the other "Rpgs" out there. We've all been lead to believe that Rpgs need an elaborate story full of cinematics and dialogue, but this isn't the case. Rpgs started with table top games that had neither of those two things. You took on a role in a world mostly imagined, wrote your own back story and played your character how you wanted. Dark Souls is very close to this, just there is less need for imagining your surroundings since you can see them.

So if any games need a new genre its all those other games that say they are Rpgs.

I completely disagree. Not with your description of an RPG, but with the fact that I would not at all describe Dark Souls with "Take on a role in a world mostly imagined, wrote your own back story and played your character how you wanted." However I think that's a good, basic idea of an RPG sadly these days they have a bit too far from the roots sometimes.

LordRevan wrote:

Federally wrote:

Majikero07 wrote:It's unfair to compare Dark Souls to other RPGs. The RPG gamer in me refuses to acknowledge Dark Souls as a RPG anyways. It's more of a strategic action game.

I haven't been playing Dark Souls for a while now because I can't enjoy it's challenge when I'm too frustrated to deal with the usual PvP crap. These days, I play some PS3 games from GUST and NIS for their humor and character interaction.

Dark Souls is more Rpg then any of the other "Rpgs" out there. We've all been lead to believe that Rpgs need an elaborate story full of cinematics and dialogue, but this isn't the case. Rpgs started with table top games that had neither of those two things. You took on a role in a world mostly imagined, wrote your own back story and played your character how you wanted. Dark Souls is very close to this, just there is less need for imagining your surroundings since you can see them.

So if any games need a new genre its all those other games that say they are Rpgs.

I completely disagree. Not with your description of an RPG, but with the fact that I would not at all describe Dark Souls with "Take on a role in a world mostly imagined, wrote your own back story and played your character how you wanted." However I think that's a good, basic idea of an RPG sadly these days they have a bit too far from the roots sometimes.

What modern game comes closer then?

Dwarf Fortress?

Heh, all RPGs have stipulated boundaries. Some of them are easier to break than others. So technically, inside Dark Souls, you actually CAN play your character however you wish.

Majikero07 wrote:It's unfair to compare Dark Souls to other RPGs. The RPG gamer in me refuses to acknowledge Dark Souls as a RPG anyways. It's more of a strategic action game.

I haven't been playing Dark Souls for a while now because I can't enjoy it's challenge when I'm too frustrated to deal with the usual PvP crap. These days, I play some PS3 games from GUST and NIS for their humor and character interaction.

It's called Action-RPG. Like Borderlands. It's an action game, with elements of RPGs, such as character progression, skills customization and equipment customization (those are the basics elements that form an RPG).

In the case of Dark Souls and Demon's Souls, the RPG elements are SO heavy in the gameplay, that most consider them RPGs directly (I do too). After all, what makes a game an RPG? The things I said above, if present in any game, they make it an RPG, even if the game it's not completely in it (unlike DkS and DS, which are VERY focused in those elements).

Now, you may ask how to difference between a RPG from an Action-RPG (after all, they both have action [hit/kill things]), in my opinion, the main difference, it's the depth of interaction with the world/other characters you have. For example in Skyrim, you have a medium level of interaction with the world, there are decision you can/have to make that can change some parts of the world, or unlock new quests, items etc.

In Dark Souls, the interaction with the world it's limited to dialogs. Of course you can kill them all, but in the end, it doesn't change much, only true interaction I can think of is killing Gwyndolin. NOW that's when Dark Souls has it's OWN form of interaction, an online interaction with other players of the world. You can summon, get invaded, change things in other people's worlds, etc. Not much, but it's something.

Another example of it, it's borderlands, you have the basics elements of an RPG, but it's focused in combat, action, and the interaction it's close to non-existent.

Basically, Action-RPGs are games that are focused on Combat, but give you enough tools to choose/create your own way to combat, like character progression, equipment customization, etc (the basics elements of an RPG).

EDIT: Another example of an Action-RPG, is Dungeon Siege (old memories).

Good explanation +1

Dark souls: An epic RPG, you can do things your way, go where ever you want, choose your class and builds, the possibilities are endless for builds. perfectly designed plots and pvp. epic bosses. perfect difficulty, this game can suit the needs of any gamer if he or she decides to leave their comfort zone and try this game out. all in all this is my favorite game, it's not the biggest game ever, but the deep lore, pvp intensity, the adrenaline of being invaded, it's all a great feeling, mostly because you have so much to risk!

Skyrim: One of my personal favourite games, you start out arrested (typical elder scrolls game) and then a dragon attacks! while your adrenaline is pumping and it looks awesome, you find out that it isin't very easy to learn the controls while a city is burning on your face, but the weapon and armor choices are customizable and endless, you can be a vampire, a werewolf, a serial killer, you can help the towns people, fulfill your destiny as the dragonborn and much much more! (jesus i sound like one of those cheap comercails) For only the price of... never mind but anyway, great game, it is about as long as this run on sentence.

Dragon's Dogma: i don't know much about it, but ive heard it's hard and very fun. worth the 60$ by far, so i may buy it if i feel like it, it seems fun. but here is a quick few things ive learned... a dragon has eaten your heart and you are now known of something called an arisen, a being with power, who can create pawns to share and use in battle! your main goal is to kill the dragon.

The Witcher 2: BOOBIES!!!! sorry... ummm its a great game.

Skyrim, the game where you have to intentionally Gimp your character just to make it mildly challenging.

put it on master and fight with your fists on lvl 1, against elder dragons... then you will get a small fraction of what you face on dark souls.

Wilkinson3424 wrote:put it on master and fight with your fists on lvl 1, against elder dragons... then you will get a small fraction of what you face on dark souls.

The only time Skyrim was ever difficult is when I fought a fire breathing Ancient Dragon on my stage 4 Vampire with intentionally gimped gear and stats. Just a slight touch of his fire OHKO me, needless to say I never beat that dragon lol

Oh, come on, a game shouldn't be judged just by it's difficulty. Sure, Skyrim isn't as difficult as Dark Souls but, whereas Dark Souls is a niche game which appeals to gaming veterans, Skyrim is a game that anyone can play at any level and there should be room for both.

To be honest, I'm getting a little tired of reading posts from people bragging about how they have to play Skyrim on 'rock hard' difficulty to gain any satisfaction from it. It's either that or they go on about how they play Dark Souls with one hand tied behind their back at soul level zero just to prove how superior their gaming skills are. In the great scheme of things it 'ain't worth a hill of beans'.

Read the first line of my Sig, I don't brag about my DkS skills. However Skyrim is stupid easy due to it being poorly balanced. It's incredibly easy to raise smithing and create god like armor and weapons, then enchant them and make even the scarriest Ancient Dragon trivial. Skyrim's lack of balance is bad game design, not a feature.

Federally wrote:Read the first line of my Sig, I don't brag about my DkS skills. However Skyrim is stupid easy due to it being poorly balanced. It's incredibly easy to raise smithing and create god like armor and weapons, then enchant them and make even the scarriest Ancient Dragon trivial. Skyrim's lack of balance is bad game design, not a feature.

I rest my case.

SlakeMoth wrote:

Federally wrote:Read the first line of my Sig, I don't brag about my DkS skills. However Skyrim is stupid easy due to it being poorly balanced. It's incredibly easy to raise smithing and create god like armor and weapons, then enchant them and make even the scarriest Ancient Dragon trivial. Skyrim's lack of balance is bad game design, not a feature.

I rest my case.

Um...Okay?

SlakeMoth wrote:Oh, come on, a game shouldn't be judged just by it's difficulty. Sure, Skyrim isn't as difficult as Dark Souls but, whereas Dark Souls is a niche game which appeals to gaming veterans, Skyrim is a game that anyone can play at any level and there should be room for both.

To be honest, I'm getting a little tired of reading posts from people bragging about how they have to play Skyrim on 'rock hard' difficulty to gain any satisfaction from it. It's either that or they go on about how they play Dark Souls with one hand tied behind their back at soul level zero just to prove how superior their gaming skills are. In the great scheme of things it 'ain't worth a hill of beans'.

+1

SlakeMoth wrote:Oh, come on, a game shouldn't be judged just by it's difficulty. Sure, Skyrim isn't as difficult as Dark Souls but, whereas Dark Souls is a niche game which appeals to gaming veterans, Skyrim is a game that anyone can play at any level and there should be room for both.

To be honest, I'm getting a little tired of reading posts from people bragging about how they have to play Skyrim on 'rock hard' difficulty to gain any satisfaction from it. It's either that or they go on about how they play Dark Souls with one hand tied behind their back at soul level zero just to prove how superior their gaming skills are. In the great scheme of things it 'ain't worth a hill of beans'.

Well said sir. We are talking about RPG's. Everyone can decide for her or himself how to play the game and at which level they get the most satisfaction out of it.