-
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.
Bloodborne is a great game, but a bad Souls game.
- Thread starter Beerman462
- Start date
Baroquemantic
Member
I love that this is now a verb.
Suuuure it isn't.
I love how people completely overlook the huge design and philosophy overlap just because marketing tells them it's totally different
This one's an exclusive!
Calamari41
41 > 38
I for one appreciate the differences, even though I do like Dark Souls and Dark Souls 2 more than Bloodborne.
There is a reason it is not named Dark Souls 3 or even Demon's Souls 2, OP.
The game is designed within the same philosophy of the Souls games, but it has its own take on the formula. That doesn't make it any less than the others though. Every Souls has its own uniqueness after all.
I completely disagree with you though. It is not only a great Souls game, but actually an evolution of the series gameplay design, especially the combat. It is the most polished game Miyazaki has ever made.
The game is designed within the same philosophy of the Souls games, but it has its own take on the formula. That doesn't make it any less than the others though. Every Souls has its own uniqueness after all.
I completely disagree with you though. It is not only a great Souls game, but actually an evolution of the series gameplay design, especially the combat. It is the most polished game Miyazaki has ever made.
Nothing in Bloodborne connects to anything in Souls. It's a new IP by definition. That's a fact, not an opinion.
Beerman462
Member
It had more to do with weapons progression. I maxed out the repeater, but it ate up to much ammo per use. My second play through I concentrated on the pistol. Maybe it wasn't necessary, but it was much easier the second time.
X-Men Children of the Atom also features Akuma......
StrongBlackVine
Banned
So was Demon's Souls. Doesn't mean they are part of the same IP. Is the TLOU an Uncharted game?
You couldn't defeat a boss because you messed up your build?
You may be a great player, but a bad Souls player.
If only this had been first.
I missed this the first time around lmao. Best new verb.
SolidSnakex
Member
It's obviously influenced by the Souls games, but they're influenced by King's Field. That doesn't mean that Demon's Souls was King's Field 5.
NoMoreTrolls
Banned
...yeeeeaaaaah...
Just OOT, do you consider Soul Calibur and Tekken same game too? Or Darkstalkers and Street fighter? Or Starcraft and Warcraft? I can give you alot more games.
All games above are made by the same company and belongs to the same genre. So by your definition. They must be same games in the same series, right?
Beerman462
Member
No one is talking about IP here. That's the other thread. This game is made by the same people, with many of the same philosophy. Maybe it isn't a "Souls" game, but comparisons will be made.
Army of Darkness is a direct sequel in a franchise. Your comparison makes no sense.
Yeah well, the facts are wrong. In my opinion, it's not a new IP.
lol
Great analogy, people are being really obtuse here. They are the same damn games repainted, this one tried to distance itself a bit more since it was an exclusive.
Cheat Code
Member
This is almost as bad as the insane troll logic that people used to connect Uncharted and The Last of Us.
It's an reference, a tribute, a homage, whatever. Patches in Dark Souls was not a pious spider creature that worshipped an Eldritch god.
Are you seriously telling me Demons' Souls and Dark Souls are not both Souls?
Seriously?
Are you talking about the newspaper easter egg in Uncharted 3 that implies Uncharted takes place in the same universe as TLOU?
Dark_castle
Junior Member
I like how people are convinced that Bloodborne isn't a Souls game simply because it lacks 'Souls' at the game title.
Cheat Code
Member
Yes and it's not an implication, it's an easter egg that they've already confirmed was a little teaser for The Last of Us.
Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew
Banned
How serious is it to have a good build in Bloodborne/Souls? I am actually not paying that much attention to the build in Bloodborne and I'm using logic as to what will do the most damage. I'm barely upgrading Bloodtinge and Arcane that much as I have yet to see a use for it.
I hope I don't end up in that situation where I didn't upgrade a certain aspect and get stuck forever with the boss...
A Link to the Past
Banned
Wait, so now we're separating Demon's Souls from Dark Souls too? Granted they are separate things, but to me it feels more like the "Souls Universe" than anything. Really, it's more along the lines of "DKC, Mario, Yoshi's Island, and Wario Land are Mario Universe games".
CambriaRising
Member
Doesn't matter at all. You could have beat him handedly if you conquered the previous bosses.
It's not called blood souls for a reason.
it's a new ip with souls mechanics.
it doesn't have the build variety of the souls games, but it's way more focused on the melee combat and fast paced gameplay.
every melee weapon has more more move set and depth than it's equivalent in the other souls games.
that's just what Bloodborne and if Bloodborn 2 were to happen it's probably gonna be the same with the build variety and the stylish transforming weapons.
it's a new ip with souls mechanics.
it doesn't have the build variety of the souls games, but it's way more focused on the melee combat and fast paced gameplay.
every melee weapon has more more move set and depth than it's equivalent in the other souls games.
that's just what Bloodborne and if Bloodborn 2 were to happen it's probably gonna be the same with the build variety and the stylish transforming weapons.
NervousXtian
Thought Emoji Movie was good. Take that as you will.
Yeah this, it's a fucking Souls game.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Not this again.
How so? I can't help but to roll my eyes when I read these kind of comments in regards to content. The game has the same average duration of the others Souls, which is impressive by itself, considering Bloodborne is a much more fast paced game than DS and DkS. In addition to that, you have the Chalice Dungeons and the DLC expansion that is in the works (people generally count Artoria of the Abyss as if it was in DkS original package, so I think it is relevant to say this).
You can beat the games with default stats and weapons, how much a good build needed is directly related to how bad you are at the game.
There's no "build" that you could have messed up to not be able to beat him. OP is ridiculous.
Jawmuncher
Member
Funny enough I thought BBs biggest issue was being too similar to DS still.
arglebargle
Member
I agree with this.
I definitely see where you're coming from, and I can't say I wouldn't be disappointed if Dark Souls III was as limited in regards to build variety as Bloodborne, I definitely would, so in a way I can see the "bad Souls game" point, but at the same time, I feel like it's too limiting to judge an entire "souls experience" based on that alone.
Let's please not turn this into yet another Dark Souls II flaming thread, but allow me to use it as an example to make this particular point: It's arguably (probably objectively) the game that allows for more build variety in the series, it's one of its better qualities, and yet many people will call it "a bad Souls game".
It certainly isn't what Dark Souls III should try to be, but I really don't think it's a bad Souls game at all, it just has its fair share of major flaws, like any other game in the series. And don't get me wrong, I don't wanna say people overlook the flaws and the series is overrated or whatever, it really isn't, on the contrary, the fact that those games have such major flaws and still manage to be as close to perfect as possible just shows how many more incredible games can come out from these guys. Every new game is perfect in its own way, and yet none of them can make the previous games "outdated", I'll play all of them because I just don't see Demon's, Dark or Bloodborne fully replaced the other at all, they're all fantastic for their own reasons, and I still want to play all of them for a long time.
Perhaps if a game comes out that makes the previous one irrelevant, that might mean that it's just an improvement on the same game, instead of a fresh new idea, so I hope it doesn't happen any time soon, I want to still find tons of stuff I'd like to see made differently in the next game.
Chalice Dungeons were a mistake, they're nothing but trash.
Bloodborne does indeed have less content than Dark Souls, a lot less, especially when it comes to the side characters, their quests are very poorly developed.
I do agree with the DLC though, I'll have no problems counting it as part of the main game once it's out.
Yeah... It's a fucking Souls game. It's the reasons everyone was excited about it in the first place, it's the reason I bought a PS4.
If it looked more like Armored Core, I don't think nearly as many people would bother, even being directed by Miyazaki.
Let's please not turn this into yet another Dark Souls II flaming thread, but allow me to use it as an example to make this particular point: It's arguably (probably objectively) the game that allows for more build variety in the series, it's one of its better qualities, and yet many people will call it "a bad Souls game".
It certainly isn't what Dark Souls III should try to be, but I really don't think it's a bad Souls game at all, it just has its fair share of major flaws, like any other game in the series. And don't get me wrong, I don't wanna say people overlook the flaws and the series is overrated or whatever, it really isn't, on the contrary, the fact that those games have such major flaws and still manage to be as close to perfect as possible just shows how many more incredible games can come out from these guys. Every new game is perfect in its own way, and yet none of them can make the previous games "outdated", I'll play all of them because I just don't see Demon's, Dark or Bloodborne fully replaced the other at all, they're all fantastic for their own reasons, and I still want to play all of them for a long time.
Perhaps if a game comes out that makes the previous one irrelevant, that might mean that it's just an improvement on the same game, instead of a fresh new idea, so I hope it doesn't happen any time soon, I want to still find tons of stuff I'd like to see made differently in the next game.
Chalice Dungeons were a mistake, they're nothing but trash.
Bloodborne does indeed have less content than Dark Souls, a lot less, especially when it comes to the side characters, their quests are very poorly developed.
I do agree with the DLC though, I'll have no problems counting it as part of the main game once it's out.
Yeah... It's a fucking Souls game. It's the reasons everyone was excited about it in the first place, it's the reason I bought a PS4.
If it looked more like Armored Core, I don't think nearly as many people would bother, even being directed by Miyazaki.
It's not serious at all. In Bloodborne it's even less serious than in the Souls games. I don't know why the OP thought his build was responsible, he just got better at the game after going through it one more time.
yes, and darkstalkers is a street fighter game
and starcraft is basically warcraft in space!
am i doing this right, guys?
/S
CambriaRising
Member
Quake is a Doom game. Halo is a Marathon game.