• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Dark Souls III [unmarked Spoilers Thread]

N

Noray

Unconfirmed Member
Anyone have an idea of where to acquire the Chaos Firestorm?

Wanna say it's somewhere in the demon ruins area (would only make sense) but fuck if I know where. I hate that goddamn place. Check the lava.
 

Levito

Banned
So the Soul Of Cinder--that was the person that defeated(player character) Gwyn in the first game, right?


EDIT: Read the thread more, guess it was The Chosen Undead and everyone else that linked the fire.


Also there's a picture of Nashandra in the game so it's not like they're ignoring the second game...
 

HGH

Banned
Its Japanese name is "Incarnation of Kings", so it's not a real person so much as every single previous Lord of Cinder represented in one entity.
 

GorillaJu

Member
Well I fucked the NK in about 4 attempts. And here it took me 15 or so to beat P.Sul. Weird that some people here say it's the hardest fight in the game I found it to be really straight forward.
Even Dragonslayer armor and prince bros were harder

Oops wandered into the wrong thread. See ya hahahaha
 

pa22word

Member
Well I fucked the NK in about 4 attempts. And here it took me 15 or so to beat P.Sul. Weird that some people here say it's the hardest fight in the game I found it to be really straight forward.
Even Dragonslayer armor and prince bros were harder

Oops wandered into the wrong thread. See ya hahahaha

Princes harder o_O?

You must have a really weird build, because most people I've talked to all agree that the knight gank squad before princes is probably harder than the fight itself lol >.>
 

GorillaJu

Member
Princes harder o_O?

You must have a really weird build, because most people I've talked to all agree that the knight gank squad before princes is probably harder than the fight itself lol >.>

Pyro dex build. My build is garbage overall, absolutely no specialization. Princes were way harder than Nameless King for me
 
Heads up guys I lost my second character to a game breaking glitch. I dunno the exact specfics of how I triggered it but I warped to the Deacon's Bonfire but for some reason it "unlit" & I touched it lighting it again. However by doing this it somehow activated every other bonfire in the game.

So what that means is I can't light anymore bonfires which means I can't warp to them or respawn at them. The game just kicks me back to the last bonfire I touched that I lit. So avoid warping or gong to the Deacon's bonfire
 

B-Genius

Unconfirmed Member
I mean at least with Aldia I can excuse it cause the dark serpents got the same treatment of just basically disappearing. But more substantial events would have been cool to see realized into this game.

Maybe not a lot of lore has carried over in terms of overall setting and world building, but I'm quite fond of the bits and pieces they kept. Have you met Karla? She has an interesting association with another popular character from Dark 2.

Anyway, is clear that Miyazaki DS3 expands upon DS1 lore more than DS2 lore, DS2 lore looks kinda sidetracked.

Is understandable, DS1 is his game, and I'm sure he's more comfortable following one of his games than other people games.

Totally understandable. As director of both games (and company president no less), he should have the right to finish the series on his own terms.
 

Zocano

Member
Maybe not a lot of lore has carried over in terms of overall setting and world building, but I'm quite fond of the bits and pieces they kept. Have you met Karla? She has an interesting association with another popular character from Dark 2.

I didn't catch much of her dialogue or make any meaningful connections (and if I have I've forgotten). I'll talk to her again.
 
NK is the most frustrating fight in any of these games.

Phase 1: The camera angle and lock on is atrocious. Multiple times I've been gearing up to dodge/block, and suddenly the camera shifts and I lose my lock on. That or the fire breath attack I cannot seem to survive. Sometimes my execution is literally flawless, other times camera angle reversal game over.

Phase 2: I just need to git gud, but it's still super frustrating. I can usually dodge his 1-2-pause-3 combo and most of the others, but if you make any mistake it's half your life, and he attacks faster than you can estus.

I'm seriously thinking about farming up a bow to +9 and just cheesing the whole thing with range.
 

B-Genius

Unconfirmed Member
I didn't catch much of her dialogue or make any meaningful connections (and if I have I've forgotten). I'll talk to her again.

I think it's something hidden past her dialogue... You may have to do a bit of investigation and (in-game) reading!
 

B-Genius

Unconfirmed Member
Well I'm still stuck in japanese, so.

Oh. Well, if you're gonna double-dip then at least that's something else to look forward to ^^;

If you're not gonna get the English version then I'm available for translation help and general story talk (either in here or via PM).
 

Zocano

Member
Oh. Well, if you're gonna double-dip then at least that's something else to look forward to ^^;

If you're not gonna get the English version then I'm available for translation help and general story talk (either in here or via PM).

I actually played through the game in english first (xbone version so I can switch regions whenever I want).

I'm just stuck on japanese until they patch up the xbone version a bit more.
 

TheFlow

Banned
DS1 has a bunch of things that make it hard for me, or for new players.
- There's much more of a "wrong way" syndrome than is present in DS2, DS3, or BB.
- The Curse mechanic comes out of nowhere and fucks you up when it does.
- Enemies do a lot of damage.
- The camera, especially in zones like BT or Great Hollow, or during a bunch of the boss fights, is a mess. DS2 and DS3 switched to a bunch of wide open arenas for boss fights, and they play much better as a result.
- Some of the boss fights can be super rough, like Capra. DS3 actually has a realistic difficulty curve in terms of boss difficulty, which I would never ever say is true for DS1.

DS1 has a few things that really help out the player, though.
- Shields are really, really good.
- Some things like Chlorianthy Ring are just fantastic, more fantastic than DS2 or DS3's design teams were willing to put in.

I just started up a new game in Dark Souls 1, and a few things really stood out to me. Noray, you are right that DS3 has a better distribution of "hard" regular enemies, but that isn't enough to overcome how frustratingly difficult I find DS1's camera and close quarters boss fights. And DS1 has Blighttown, Great Hollow, Tomb of Giants, and Crystal Caves, zones I just find frustrating.

haha yea I don't like the small area boss fights. I am in blighttown now. The bosses aren't too big of a deal but going through the areas is a pain.
 
This game has no lore. It's just Dark Souls 1 but for no reason you are an unkindled instead of an undead and you huntdown previous chosen undead to link the fire just because instead of going after the Lord Souls just because. The plot makes zero sense. Why are the Lords of Cinder even missing? If anything this game has zero impact on the lore because time line wise it takes place before 2 . We can assume this because places like Catarina, Astora, and such still exist while in DS2 they are long gone.
 

Zocano

Member
This game has no lore. It's just Dark Souls 1 but for no reason you are an unkindled instead of an undead and you huntdown previous chosen undead to link the fire just because instead of going after the Lord Souls just because. The plot makes zero sense. Why are the Lords of Cinder even missing? If anything this game has zero impact on the lore because time line wise it takes place before 2 . We can assume this because places like Catarina, Astora, and such still exist while in DS2 they are long gone.

This is kinda how I feel (except it's after Dark Souls 2-- it just doesn't consider any of the important plot points that happen in Dark Souls 2).

The actual "new" things that Dark Souls 3 introduces is kinda... unresolved or feels like undeveloped. There's *nothing* on the pilgrims. They exist, they probably come from londor (most likely New Londo or what became of it), they "die", and then become butterflies???

The Soul of Cinder makes sense. The Lords of Cinder, why do they not want to light the fire? Almost unanimously. I mean they were physically resurrected to reignite the fire which wuh? I was under the assumption they already did that (or took their throne of want route-- make "dark lords").
 
This game has no lore. It's just Dark Souls 1 but for no reason you are an unkindled instead of an undead and you huntdown previous chosen undead to link the fire just because instead of going after the Lord Souls just because. The plot makes zero sense. Why are the Lords of Cinder even missing? If anything this game has zero impact on the lore because time line wise it takes place before 2 . We can assume this because places like Catarina, Astora, and such still exist while in DS2 they are long gone.

I'm starting to feel like Dark Souls is suffering the problem of becoming too referential now. I started to notice this at the Old Hunter DLC and watching some of the Dark Souls 3 videos over the week.
 

Zocano

Member
I'm starting to feel like Dark Souls is suffering the problem of becoming too referential now. I started to notice this at the Old Hunter DLC and watching some of the Dark Souls 3 videos over the week.

Bloodborne was awesome not only because of the gameplay but because it was a completely fresh world and lore to unpeel.
 
Totally understandable. As director of both games (and company president no less), he should have the right to finish the series on his own terms.

Yeah I'd have to disagree. DS2 exists and players have played it, and it came from his studio. It's not like DS2 added much to the lore, but to just completely ignore it is disappointing, and I'm not willing to give him a free pass on it. DS2 also reworked the gameplay mechanics in pretty interesting ways, and this game just seems to ignore many of the improvements. If i had to read between the lines I might say that Miyazaki got a big head, and only worked on the material he developed, rather than give a nod to the DS2 team and acknowledge their successes. But there's no way to know for sure if that's how it went down.
 
This is kinda how I feel (except it's after Dark Souls 2-- it just doesn't consider any of the important plot points that happen in Dark Souls 2).

The actual "new" things that Dark Souls 3 introduces is kinda... unresolved or feels like undeveloped. There's *nothing* on the pilgrims. They exist, they probably come from londor (most likely New Londo or what became of it), they "die", and then become butterflies???

The Soul of Cinder makes sense. The Lords of Cinder, why do they not want to light the fire? Almost unanimously. I mean they were physically resurrected to reignite the fire which wuh? I was under the assumption they already did that (or took their throne of want route-- make "dark lords").
Exactly we have no backstory at all to anything about the Lords of Cinder. Where are the Lord Souls? Where is the chosen undead? Why do we all of a sudden have this random different method of linking the fire? WTF is an unkindled? What makes it different than an undead and why? Why are parts of the world randomly showing up in Lothric? Also it's impossible for Londor to be New Londo because Lothric is built ontop of the old Lordran where New Londo is and Londor is super far away.
 
This game has no lore. It's just Dark Souls 1 but for no reason you are an unkindled instead of an undead and you huntdown previous chosen undead to link the fire just because instead of going after the Lord Souls just because. The plot makes zero sense. Why are the Lords of Cinder even missing? If anything this game has zero impact on the lore because time line wise it takes place before 2 . We can assume this because places like Catarina, Astora, and such still exist while in DS2 they are long gone.

Yeah, I'm starting to get this vibe.

While DkSII's lore was handled in a somewhat fumbled manner, it at least tried to incorporate new kingdoms and places into its setting, and implied that the setting is ages apart from the first game, even if the antagonist is related to a late game DLC boss from the first game. As some people have noted, a lot of people were pissed when DkSII referenced DkS, but are far more accepting of DkSIII when it blatantly makes throwbacks to the first game for what seems to be "just because". The biggest example I can think of is the Sunbros. People were complaining when they made a return in the second game, yet seem to have no problem with them returning in this one.
 

ScribbleD

Member
Yeah I'd have to disagree. DS2 exists and players have played it, and it came from his studio. It's not like DS2 added much to the lore, but to just completely ignore it is disappointing, and I'm not willing to give him a free pass on it. DS2 also reworked the gameplay mechanics in pretty interesting ways, and this game just seems to ignore many of the improvements. If i had to read between the lines I might say that Miyazaki got a big head, and only worked on the material he developed, rather than give a nod to the DS2 team and acknowledge their successes. But there's no way to know for sure if that's how it went down.

If you want to jump to farfetched conclusions based on no evidence, you could just as easily say that he ignored aspects of Dark Souls 2 due to fan backlash.
 
If you want to jump to farfetched conclusions based on no evidence, you could just as easily say that he ignored aspects of Dark Souls 2 due to fan backlash.

Actually a possibility. After Demon's was such a disaster Miyazaki had all of the criticism of the game plastered all over his office and computer when he was making Dark Souls so he didn't make the same stupid mistakes.
 

SargerusBR

I love Pokken!
As some people have noted, a lot of people were pissed when DkSII referenced DkS, but are far more accepting of DkSIII when it blatantly makes throwbacks to the first game for what seems to be "just because". The biggest example I can think of is the Sunbros. People were complaining when they made a return in the second game, yet seem to have no problem with them returning in this one.

It's called hipocrisy.
 

F0rneus

Tears in the rain
This game has no lore. It's just Dark Souls 1 but for no reason you are an unkindled instead of an undead and you huntdown previous chosen undead to link the fire just because instead of going after the Lord Souls just because. The plot makes zero sense. Why are the Lords of Cinder even missing? If anything this game has zero impact on the lore because time line wise it takes place before 2 . We can assume this because places like Catarina, Astora, and such still exist while in DS2 they are long gone.

You are going to be a very extreme minority with that opinion. DSIII is not only a lore rich sequel, but it closes and ends the plot threads from Dark Souls 1 beautifully. And no it doesn`t take place before 2. Game makes it clear enough. WTF? it's one thing to dislike the game. That's fine. But it's like your hate of it, makes your entire view of it stilted and wrong.
 
You are going to be a very extreme minority with that opinion. DSIII is not only a lore rich sequel, but it closes and ends the plot threads from Dark Souls 1 beautifully. And no it doesn`t take place before 2. Game makes it clear enough. WTF? it's one thing to dislike the game. That's fine. But it's like your hate of it, makes your entire view of it stilted and wrong.

Except two other people in this thread already agree with me and you've presented no counter argument which only serves to make my points stronger. Also please leave your bullshit slippery slope mentality else where. I do not HATE this game. It's all I'm playing right now. I am just not blind to the game's obvious short comings.
 

Zocano

Member
Exactly we have no backstory at all to anything about the Lords of Cinder. Where are the Lord Souls? Where is the chosen undead? Why do we all of a sudden have this random different method of linking the fire? WTF is an unkindled? What makes it different than an undead and why? Why are parts of the world randomly showing up in Lothric? Also it's impossible for Londor to be New Londo because Lothric is built ontop of the old Lordran where New Londo is and Londor is super far away.

It could always be a vertical pilgrimage and not a horizontal one.

Also yah you don't hollow? Are you just an ash person? If so why? Why can't everyone be ash people. No hollowing is good. You need to be *forced* to hollow by Yoel. The pilgrims can make you hollow but other people should be able to hollow normally? Why are some people ash people and not others?

Why is Kaathe mentioned at all? Fuckin dark serpents what are they.

Do all the lords of cinder have a secret pact to turn out the fire?

Why is Lothric cursed? Why do the pilgrim butterflies protect him? Why is he the only Lord of Cinder they protect?

Why are the fire keepers different now? Why is there just one forever resurrecting fire keeper? Why does she have to be blind? Why does her crown have a dark sigil on it?

Why is "your" firelink shrine fake and yet everyone shows up there?

What is the real firelink shrine then if your fake one is fake?

Is the real firelink shrine the fake? It's encased in forever darkness so is it from an unkindled that chose dark lord mode?

Why is Oceiros literally never acknowledged outside of his boss fight. He seems to be completely irrelevant outside of his items in his little room. He worships dragons and made himself a dragon? Or was he always half a dragon? Did he fuck Oedon and make a formless baby? Why is Ocelotte only a voice? Why is Ocelotte even a thing if they don't lead her/him into anything? Why does Ocelotte sound like Shanalotte and why are they probably related?

If the default ending is linking the fire more why does the Soul of Cinder still try to stop you? Doesn't it want you to fuel it more?

What is up with the darksign sun and why is it leaking in the kiln? Is it just more berserk reference for the sake of berserk reference?

Why do embers exist now and why are they related to humanity? What happened to humanity? Is it still just there and never mentioned?

Why does Yuria want you to stick a sword through a dead person's face? Why does that give you their dark sigil? Why do dark sigils exist? Doesn't the darksign resemble the curse and therefore hollowing? You start the game with a darksign so why don't you hollow? Why do you have to be given something to begin hollowing if you already have the dark sign?

What is with the crazy dark virus goop? Why does it only happen to 8 enemies and only those 8? Why is there two Gundyr's and why is one whole and the other infected? Why does Oceiros have a bunch of black goo men in his garden?

Why does Pontiff Sulyvhan love Bloodborne? Why does he make all his soldiers werewolves? Why does he protect a man made out of black goop? Why is Pope Sulyvhan following a saint made out of black goop? Why does the man made out of black goop look like Gwyndolin? Did a dead Gwyndolin body get eaten by black goop? Wouldn't it have rotten? He wants to eat gods but Gwyndolin would have been long dead.

Why is there another half dragon lady? Did Priscilla get out of the painting? How did she get out of the painting? If she could have left like you did, why didn't she earlier? Why do the priests keep the same doll around that let you enter the painting? Why is Irythill protected by the doll?

Why are dark wraiths still around? Why are these random dark wraiths just sitting around in a swamp? What are they after? Do they just want to kill the Abyss Watchers?

What was the black goo?

Whyyyyyyyyyyyy
 
N

Noray

Unconfirmed Member
Yeah I've been saying since I first beat the game and knew what the endings are that Dark Souls 3's story is confusing at best even by series standards. The 2 default endings are the same as they've ever been, with the Usurpation ending being only *mildly* interesting, but yeah the Unkindled/Hollow business makes zero sense to me.

At this point I think the best we can do is tell the character and area stories as best we can and wait for DLC to actually clarify what the fuck is going on in this game because I don't understand at all.

FWIW I think Yorshka is Ocelette. She has dragon-esque features, she's in hiding. Why? Fuck if I know. Everything Oceiros/Ocelette feels unfinished.

For a game that purported to close out Dark Souls, ending it with Linking the fire yet again or letting it die, with the heavy implication that it will one day rekindle, yet again, is just like... no.

And I hate how referential this game is to DkS1. For no reason. Why go back to Anor Londo? Why fight Gwyndolin 2.0? Yeah, because of Aldritch, but why was it written like that? Just for fanservice, really. The final boss, too, clearly meant to evoke the player character and Gwyn, but that makes him, as a lore figure, about as interesting as a blank piece of paper. Nothing is done with them. We don't learn anything new about Anor Londo, or Gwyndolin, not really. Nor about Gwyn. It's referential for its own sake.

After Bloodborne's amazing world-building and lore, I'm so disappointed in that aspect of Dark Souls 3. I love the game, but they really dropped the ball on those aspects.
 

JerkShep

Member
It's just that Dark Souls never needed a trilogy, the lore was great in the first one, but adding two games again based on linking the fire/letting the fire die out is just unnecessary. There are always good personal stories, even in DaS2 which was kind of a mess: the ivory king, raime and veldstadt, vendrick to some degree. But the core concept of the first flame can't really support three games if used like this. If they wanted to keep the Dark Souls brand, they should have gone the Final Fantasy way, with different worlds every time and small references.

I really want to see the truth behind the dark firelink shrine, it could be the saving grace of the main story.
 

Mendrox

Member
It's just that Dark Souls never needed a trilogy, the lore was great in the first one, but adding two games again based on linking the fire/letting the fire die out is just unnecessary. There are always good personal stories, even in DaS2 which was kind of a mess: the ivory king, raime and veldstadt, vendrick to some degree. But the core concept of the first flame can't really support three games if used like this. If they wanted to keep the Dark Souls brand, they should have gone the Final Fantasy way, with different worlds every time and small references.

I really want to see the truth behind the dark firelink shrine, it could be the saving grace of the main story.

Hyperbole much? To each his own, but I personally got goosebumps when I realized that I am at Anor Londo. Dark Souls 2 story just disappointed me a bit too much and everything here flows much better in my opinion. Dark Souls 2 felt tack on for me and because of that I never played through the game more than twice.

The whole Gwyndolin thing and the Dragonarmour are both things which I didn't like that much too, but the lore behind both of them was enough for me to connect them to the whole thing.

Also the third ending is the only ending in the whole franchise that changes the whole outcome for them.
 
Well, everyone here is wrong because the real lore is that the chosen unkindled or whatever (who is canonically female and named Toadette or something) plunged down on a huge ass dragon using only her bare fist and managed to kill it in one strike and then nothing else mattered even fuckin' Gwyn couldn't do that shit had to use his stupid ass wussy lightning bolts what a loser and so Nito resurrected himself to comment how he is nowhere near as nito as the chosen unkindled the end.

Fuck everything else in the story it doesn't matter. Except Gavlan should have his own Recettear-esque spin off game.
 
Top Bottom