Pretty sure it isn't.Can't anyone provide an answer?
Just got to Smouldering Lake and I hear my fave swordy, Fume Ultra is in there somewhere hidden. Which ways?
Thanks! Damn, I was just there except took one right turn when should've turned left.
Anyone have an idea of where to acquire the Chaos Firestorm?
Pretty sure it isn't.
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 ?
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 >.>
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.
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.
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.
I think it's something hidden past her dialogue... You may have to do a bit of investigation and (in-game) reading!
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).
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.
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 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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
Can you share a source for that?
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.
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.
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.
After numerous attempts at fighting the NPC with the fume knight sword, having this happen was pretty satisfying.
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.