-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Bloodborne vs DS3 (civil discussion)
- Thread starter Aceofspades
- Start date
Dark Souls is, like, my favourite game of all time. Bloodborne is up there too, and I prefer it over Dark Souls III.
Bloodborne's setting and enemy design, how it puts across the lovecraftain themes is incredible. It has the best presentation of any game I've played.
Dark Souls III feel like it has too much sequel baggage. I like the game, but I much prefer the original ideas of other Souls games. I'm not big on the Dark Souls sequels. Kind of why I wouldn't want a Bloodborne sequel, From Software are at their best when they're doing something fresh.
Bloodborne's setting and enemy design, how it puts across the lovecraftain themes is incredible. It has the best presentation of any game I've played.
Dark Souls III feel like it has too much sequel baggage. I like the game, but I much prefer the original ideas of other Souls games. I'm not big on the Dark Souls sequels. Kind of why I wouldn't want a Bloodborne sequel, From Software are at their best when they're doing something fresh.
Yeah, I have to agree.
Doesn't help that it hasn't been that long at all since Bloodborne, let alone The Old Hunters. Not even in the "it's still fresh in our memories" way, but in the "man, I still want to play more Bloodborne" way.
I can't really say Bloodborne is "a much better game", simply because I don't think it can, Dark Souls III is pretty damn good, but it still feels like a much better game simply because I'm playing Dark Souls III and thinking about how much I'd like to be playing Bloodborne.
I don't feel the franchise fatigue a lot of people talk about, but I'd still like a bigger windows between releases. Especially with DLC bringing new content months down the line.
Yeah, I remember this, but that was a leak, to be fair.
And while A LOT of people did comment about the lovecraftian nature of that design, most people didn't think too much about it at all, it was just "Oh shit, a Cthulhu-like monster. Cool."
Wow that sucks. I'm really glad I wasn't yet into Souls by the time Bloodborne leaked. The story and lore in Bloodborne impressed me a lot and the lovecraftian twist was handled so well, it really elevates the game for me.
Finding emissaries in the swamp area is one of the creepiest moments I've had playing video games.
tintin1029
Member
While I like both games a lot, where as Dark 3 was a sequel to Dark 1, and is probably an overall better game than Bloodborne, Bloodborne was pretty much it's own thing and was very unique in comparison.
Which is why I prefer BB.
Which is why I prefer BB.
GIANKRATOS
Member
All i remember regarding that were discussions about demon's souls (latria)
Edit:
Exactly.
I know and i agree, that's what i've meant.
JudgmentJay
Member
Yeah, it's not like we hadn't seen tentacles on monsters in Souls games prior to Bloodborne. I was following Project Beast from the first leak and I never saw anyone speculate that it would be a lovecraftian horror-themed game.
On-topic, DS1 > BB > DS3 for best 3 in the series for me. Bloodborne wins out over DS3 based on setting and tone as well as the DLC, which is the best chunk of video game content I've ever played. If DS3's DLC is as good as The Old Hunters I might have to re-evaluate.
tintin1029
Member
Wow. I didn't know Ebreitas was leaked that hard.
I remember seeing this gif back in 2014
But I didn't know it extended even more into a close up of her. She's far away enough in the gif to where I was just confused and had no idea what I was looking at.
Glad I jumped off that leak train by then.
Bloodborne has the fantastic transition from Werewolf hunting to the more sinister Lovecraftian threads. Can't really compare that to anything in any other game; it's marvelous.
Beyond that however it has some problems. The gem system is absolutely broken. The gems you get are eh, and if you go to the chalice dungeons it's way too much pain for minimal upgrades. By the time you're ready to start going through the chalice dungeons you've essentially beaten the game.
NPC quests in Bloodborne are lacking too. Many I finished up and wondered if I missed something, only to discover that nope, that was it. Not a whole lot going on there.I love the NPC events in Dark Souls III. They were done right- you have to look for them but the clues are there for you to find.
Atmosphere is hard to settle- both games did such a wonderful job. I absolutely loved looking out from Lothric High Wall, seeing where I was going to go, and then looking back once I reached the Undead Settlement. The sense of geographical cohesion in DSIII is better than that of BB. However Bloodborne has this thick, dark, dense foreboding miasma every step of the way. Everything feels dirty and diseased.
Overall I'd give the award to Dark Souls III, but I would recommend Bloodborne to anyone.
Beyond that however it has some problems. The gem system is absolutely broken. The gems you get are eh, and if you go to the chalice dungeons it's way too much pain for minimal upgrades. By the time you're ready to start going through the chalice dungeons you've essentially beaten the game.
NPC quests in Bloodborne are lacking too. Many I finished up and wondered if I missed something, only to discover that nope, that was it. Not a whole lot going on there.I love the NPC events in Dark Souls III. They were done right- you have to look for them but the clues are there for you to find.
Atmosphere is hard to settle- both games did such a wonderful job. I absolutely loved looking out from Lothric High Wall, seeing where I was going to go, and then looking back once I reached the Undead Settlement. The sense of geographical cohesion in DSIII is better than that of BB. However Bloodborne has this thick, dark, dense foreboding miasma every step of the way. Everything feels dirty and diseased.
Overall I'd give the award to Dark Souls III, but I would recommend Bloodborne to anyone.
Exactly. You have the Mind Flayers in Demon's Souls, and Dark Souls even had Yellow King Jeremiah, and no one really thought too much of it, because it was just a nod, a little reference.
tintin1029
Member
My first thought on Ebrietas from the leak was that she looked better than anything in Dark 2 and that's about it.
JudgmentJay
Member
Don't forget Ceaseless Discharge.
EDIT: Actually, now that I think about it, Amygdala being in the beta was a pretty big hint to the cosmic horror stuff. I do remember people calling it at that point. They should have left that out!
Wow. I didn't know Ebreitas was leaked that hard.
I remember seeing this gif back in 2014
But I didn't know it extended even more into a close up of her. She's far away enough in the gif to where I was just confused and had no idea what I was looking at.
Glad I jumped off that leak train by then.
Ha ha, I remember seeing that gif way before the game came out, I didn't assume it was some kind of cosmic being, It's kind of hard to even tell what it is, if you haven't already faced Ebritas in game.
Anyway, I totally didn't see the Lovecraftian twist coming and I followed the game until I went on blackout closer too release. The twist was brilliant, though, a masterfully executed example of subtle story telling through gameplay and level design.
Sure but what I'm saying is that all official marketing leading up to release avoided the Lovecraftian references.
If the trailer hadn't leaked we wouldn't have known about it.
Not to mention all the newcomers that didn't follow it as ardently as mega fans like us, of which there was a lot for Bloodborne.
abstract alien
Member
Does Dark Souls 3 have the same Metroid-ish style interconnected map as Dark Souls 1 and Bloodborne?
OrbitalBeard
Member
Yes, but like Bloodborne and DS1, there are a handful of areas separate form the rest of the game.
jacksepticeye
Member
DS3 mechanically is pretty solid and I wouldn't say BB is better either, just different. I like the speed and aggressiveness of BB a lot and it provides enough of a different playstyle.
With DS3 all I could do was compare it to DS1 which is one of my favourite games ever made. I guess I like the medieval feel of DS1 more. I do agree that BB is a bit light on armors etc.
Lightningboalt
Neo Member
See yeah, I get what you're all saying here. I'm not saying that from day 1 people saw Ebrietas and thought "oh shit Cthulhu, this game's going to twist into a Lovecraft game" because Miyazaki's fascination with Lovecraft was well documented by that point. All I'm saying is that over time throughout the pre-release period there was some speculation that the game would veer off into a cosmic horror focus. For some people (myself included), learning that insight was a mechanic in the game was the big puzzle piece that effectively confirmed it.
Surely I can't be the only one here who remembers speculation about the game going down a cosmic horror route? I'm not saying it was a majority theory or that people should have seen it coming, just that some people expected it around the internet (and could've very well been wrong, because yeah Ebrietas was from very early footage and for all we knew at the time could've been cut). Hell, I'd seen theories about this even here on gaf, that was basically the thing that started me lurking around here in the first place. Am I really the only one in the topic who remembers it? Or perhaps "encountered it" would fit better?
On a more on-topic note, this whole discussion is one of the other things that leads me to me put Bloodborne above Dark Souls 3. It just feels like there's a lot more to actually say about it. That's not vital for a game, in fact it's somewhat tangential, but Bloodborne being its own fascinating entity with a well-developed world makes it seem all the more engaging to me. Some people here have mentioned Dark Souls 3 having sequel baggage, and I think that's definitely one of its primary issues... like it was interesting seeing
Anor Londo
Not as cohesive as Dark Souls 1 but if you are good with Bloodborne then probably you are good with Dark Souls 3.
lowhighkang_LHK
Member
I love how Bloodborne is all like:
I've played the shit out of Bloodborne 3 times. If there is a Neo Update to it, I think I'll do a complete fresh new game for one more go.
I've played the shit out of Bloodborne 3 times. If there is a Neo Update to it, I think I'll do a complete fresh new game for one more go.
abstract alien
Member
Sweet, thanks! That's one of my favorite aspects about them. Dark Souls 3 came out way too soon for me though, so I've been waiting for the urge to build back up before I jump into it and buy. Hopefully they sit on the franchise for a few years once DS3 is complete.
The thing I remember most about DS1 was coming up the elevator back to Fire Link Shrine. I went into that game completely blind(and spent 3 hours fighting skeletons I wasn't ready for), so that was a big moment for me. I really felt something right there.
LordOfChaos
Member
I only had to maybe up to the second or third boss, but after that I felt like I was perpetually nearly full with vials and bullets both.
Nice tattoo, btw.
That actually makes a lot of sense, and I have to agree. Not that Dark Souls III doesn't have enough to its story and world, on the contrary, but it's just kinda more obvious, I guess, since everyone has baggage from the series at this point? I don't feel the urge to discuss nearly as much as I did in Bloodborne, a lot of it because I don't need to, there were a lot of concepts in Bloodborne that I wanted other people's inputs to form a better understanding, while Dark Souls III was easier to connect the dots if you were already following the story.
OrbitalBeard
Member
That seems to be the moment when everyone realizes that DS1 has some really great Metroid-like level design.
I think Bloodborne has a better moment though:
climbing out of the grave from the depths of the poison swamp inside the cave in the Forbidden Woods, only to find yourself in the locked area of Iosefka's clinic from the very beginning of the game
From a level design standpoint, the above is probably the single biggest "holy shit" moment I've ever had in a game.
LordOfChaos
Member
Agreed, forget a 60fps game, even a 30fps game with normal frame pacing feels and looks better than it in motion. I really wish they'd fix it, and I'd suggest politely putting in requests for frame pacing fixes into wherever they may see it online.
I suppose part of the reason why it isn't as remembered and mentioned is just because
there's a much bigger mindfuck a couple of minutes away from that, when you see what's actually going on inside Iosefka's Clinic.
That little moment in Dark Souls was all about the level and world design, Bloodborne punched you in the face with major lore right after that moment happened, to people tend to not think about it as much.
Yeah, that part really impressed me, but I'm still not sure if it all matches up to scale, if you were to look at a map viewer or something.
For me, the part in Dark Souls that made me realize the level design was really impressive was actually when you kick the ladder down to the first Bonfire in Undead Burg.
OrbitalBeard
Member
Two great moments in a row. What a game.
It impressed me more because not only is it great level design, but it felt more naturally integrated into the world, at least in my opinion.
Part of that though is because, like you said, the scale is smaller. Bloodborne's scale in general is smaller, which I love.
I really enjoyed Bloodborne but the constant, attack!!, premise of the game felt oppressive in a sense that, my skill level wasn't good enough to parry completely reliably. So to be honest, Bloodborne isn't at fault in any way. This is just my experience. I know some of Gaf could parry the shit out of enemies, thus there's your lighter equivalent to sword and board, with devastating results to enemies.
I never got to quick rest, like I can in DS3. Sword and board works well for me in DS3. Many enemies do allow for a small quick release of blocking between blows, except of course the huge maddening combos some enemies do. It can make a huge difference between no stamina and death. Coupled with learning to evade more effectively, I find DS 3 combat more enjoyable.
In DS3, I generally know if I can beat a boss after 2-3 tries. In Bloodborne even today, there's doubt about beating a boss and I've finished Bloodborne. DS 3 combat flows more for my playstyle and lackluster abilities. Again, I'm aware both games are quite solid in terms of combat, just DS3 fits me better.
I never got to quick rest, like I can in DS3. Sword and board works well for me in DS3. Many enemies do allow for a small quick release of blocking between blows, except of course the huge maddening combos some enemies do. It can make a huge difference between no stamina and death. Coupled with learning to evade more effectively, I find DS 3 combat more enjoyable.
In DS3, I generally know if I can beat a boss after 2-3 tries. In Bloodborne even today, there's doubt about beating a boss and I've finished Bloodborne. DS 3 combat flows more for my playstyle and lackluster abilities. Again, I'm aware both games are quite solid in terms of combat, just DS3 fits me better.
TheKastorian
Member
Bloodborne still remains my number one just because I find the lore more interesting and the combat more satisfying. Enjoyed Dark Souls 3 immensely and I think it's better than the original Dark Souls (but I'm probably in the minority here)
GeordieMark
Member
Bloodborne is better for being different. The tweaks that From made had a significant effect on how BB played making it feel fresh. The lore and world is easily the best and most coherent since DS1 too.
Dark Souls 3 is fun, but kind of bland. It goes through the motions and checks every box you'd want and expect a Souls game to check, but it feels somewhat less fulfilling than BB because everything is pretty familiar if you've played the rest of the series. The fantastic lore of the original Dark Souls has been butchered at this point, so the story and world are far less interesting to me than in the first and second games, and certainly in BB.
Dark Souls 3 is fun, but kind of bland. It goes through the motions and checks every box you'd want and expect a Souls game to check, but it feels somewhat less fulfilling than BB because everything is pretty familiar if you've played the rest of the series. The fantastic lore of the original Dark Souls has been butchered at this point, so the story and world are far less interesting to me than in the first and second games, and certainly in BB.
I guess it depends on how you play, but personally, Dark Souls III took me a lot longer.
Don't remember the exact amount of hours, unfortunately, but around 130? Bloodborne took me 69.
I didn't do all of the chalice dungeons on my first playthrough of Bloodborne, and also missed one optional boss, so there's that. Still, I don't think it would take me long enough to make it even.
But yeah, as I said, depends on the way you play it. Many of those hours were farming for enemy sets and weapons, which is something that isn't present in Bloodborne.
I prefer Dark Souls 3 a lot more. It's a lot more fun for me to replay with all the variety there is. I really like the feeling of finding items on the ground and it being a set of cool armor or weapons. That was super limited in Bloodborne, where you'd mostly just find vials and bullets. Boring!
They're pretty equal in terms of length. Bloodborne might be shorter if you completely skip the chalice dungeons.
honestrade
Member
I prefer DS3 to Bloodborne. I like having a wider variety of builds and weapons and prefer slower combat and use of shield. For example I loved playing through DS3 as a pure sorcerer, and I enjoy replaying the game with completely different builds. Also estus shards are preferable to blood vials.
In Bloodborne I didn't care for the parry-health regen system, although in fairness I never mastered it. I do prefer the more non-linear design of Bloodborne (similar to DS1)...DS3 was too linear imo. I do need to go back and replay Bloodborne with DLC.
In Bloodborne I didn't care for the parry-health regen system, although in fairness I never mastered it. I do prefer the more non-linear design of Bloodborne (similar to DS1)...DS3 was too linear imo. I do need to go back and replay Bloodborne with DLC.
DS3 is the worst Souls game I've played. Actually preferred 2 over it. I have no desire to go back and play it. Nothing stands out as memorable.
Bloodborne on the other hand is a game of the generation. Never experienced something so beautifully horrifying. It has a look and feel to it that just kept drawing me back. I must have played through it 5 times. Pretty much everything OP mentions, nails why I love it so much.
Bloodborne is this generation's Ocarina of Time.
Agreed.
Bloodborne on the other hand is a game of the generation. Never experienced something so beautifully horrifying. It has a look and feel to it that just kept drawing me back. I must have played through it 5 times. Pretty much everything OP mentions, nails why I love it so much.
Bloodborne is this generation's Ocarina of Time.
Agreed.
Certainly doesn't feel that way. Maybe they both have the same number of iframes, but there is a definite difference in the speed and frequency of the dodge as well as its availability and distance covered in BB when compared to the Souls series.
Depends if you view the repetitive chalice dungeons in Bloodborne as content.
Dark Souls 3 took me 52 hours whereas Bloodborne was 35. You could bump it to about 40 if you do the required chalice dungeons for the optional bosses.
I knew of the visceral rune, but I guess I only tried blood bullets a dozen times or so and never noticed you could rally that health back. I stand corrected on that one, then.
Raonak
Banned
The only real complaint I have with BB is farming of health vials.
Stuff like build variety never mattered much for me, because the fast build BB is built around feels more fun.
You get less weapons, but you also get less duplicates and it feels like most weapons are viable, not to mention the trick factor to them makes them way more interesting.
I hope if it does get a sequel, they make a FF8 style gunblade weapon.
Atmosphere and setting is some of the best in the medium.
Stuff like build variety never mattered much for me, because the fast build BB is built around feels more fun.
You get less weapons, but you also get less duplicates and it feels like most weapons are viable, not to mention the trick factor to them makes them way more interesting.
I hope if it does get a sequel, they make a FF8 style gunblade weapon.
Atmosphere and setting is some of the best in the medium.
Ugh..Npc quests for DS3 were too obscure for me in my first run to be honest. I was like oh there is a new npc in shrine and after beating a boss and coming back its gone
By the time i completed 50% of the game no one left except blacksmith, shop lady and that old king on throne lol.Oh anyway its Bloodborne for me too. The setting was more interesting and fresh for me. The story was new and fresh too and it gave me enough space to build it up with my own imagination. DS3 was while good it was a sequel screaming sequel in every step. Aside from few levels i didn't enjoy the areas too much. And it was too bright! I love darkness in my Soul games.
GiantBreadbug
Member
Funny timing, I actually just started DS3 back up after failing to finish it coming hot off of BB.
One reason why I'm not really enjoying DS3 as much as I think I should is because there's so much that's lost on me because I didn't play DS1 or DS2. That's ultimately my fault, and I can't blame the game for having a lot of plot and lore elements from the previous games. That being said, there were a lot of moments that just weren't impactful or special to me because I'm not familiar with the lore of the series. But this is a feeling I was expecting going in, so it's not a huge problem.
One thing that I do get miffed about is people saying DS has better "build variety" than BB, which I don't think is true by any measure. Sure, by sheer numbers there are more weapons in DS. However, BB's totally unique weapons all have personality and style because they all have unique movesets, compared to DS's "weapon class" system. I much prefer BB's approach, as it has made replaying the game to try new weapons really fun. They all feel distinct. There's magic in DS3, but it's mostly unusable outside of a few (more on that later).
Probably the most distinct difference between the two is the combat, and that's actually the reason I prefer BB. Obviously in BB, the combat is quick paced, more "in-your-face," and hyper aggressive play is encouraged by the rally system. On the other hand, DS3 is slower, more methodical, and encourages an approach that is more gradual than BB. While I do prefer BB's approach to combat (thanks in no small part to the quicksteps over the rolling), I have to say I do enjoy DS3's combat elements. Two major things I would change about DS3, however, are:
1) Shorter casting times for magic. Most of it is basically unusable in PvP or even PvE because it takes so long to use. It's a shame too because magic adds great variety to builds in DS3, it's just that it happens to suck kinda bad. From what I hear, DS1 was the only game that did this very well (maybe I misheard though).
2) Change/improve the parry system. In my mind, this is something major BB has over DS3. Parrying with guns in BB is more or less average in difficulty (depending on the enemy), but this works well with how close-quarters a lot of the combat is. Shooting up close means if you fail you take damage, but if you succeed it pays off greatly. Also, if you incorrectly time a shot and take damage, you can try to get some health back by rallying (at a risk). I'll just say that I got the hang of parrying in BB not immediately, but with much practice. In DS3, however, it just will not click with me. I've practiced for hours on end and I absolutely cannot get the timing down. This could just certainly be my problem, but to me it feels like it's not even worth trying to shield parry in DS3. I can still take massive damage (with no way to fairly recover like rallying in BB), and the window for success seems so tiny that it just isn't worth it. So I'll keep trying, but until I have my "aha" moment, I think the BB system is much better.
I will say, about the atmosphere and setting, BB blows DS3 out of the water for me only by virtue of freshness. High fantasy has never been my scene, so a lot of DS is just kinda tired for me. I will say that From has done a great job of infusing their own horror-filled take on fantasy in DS, and even though the setting isn't my favorite, a lot of the locales in DS3 are impressive both from a visual and a storytelling standpoint. Unfortunately it has to compete with BB, which is unbelievably fresh and new. Every area in BB is a delight, and the Victorian horror elements to the plot and lore are so completely refreshing and fun. I also have to kinda disagree with the idea that DS3 has much better sidequests and characters, because I actually think BB stands a little above DS3 in that regard. I think a lot of this comes from the fact that some NPC quest lines in DS3 were nostalgia heavy, which is fine, but they didn't do a whole lot for me. BB could have certainly used more sidequests, but the quality of the ones that are there are superb to me.
There are, however, gameplay elements from DS3 I think BB is sorely lacking. The ability to land still from a jump (among other movement options), better weapon infusing system (DS gems are a good bit more fleshed out that BB), and the entire PvP system are all much better in DS3. I like the weapon skills too, but they need a lot more variety to stand out. Shields should absolutely play a bigger role in BB, because they add a degree of variety, and because the ones that exist in BB are functional and cool. Also, make magic in BB more like it is in DS3. Give it its own consumable that isn't bullets, and make it more than just a quick item.
I'm not going to try to make an argument for one being better than the other, but I will say that Bloodborne is far and away my favorite. I think a lot of it comes down to personal preference and that's fine. What I won't stand for is the idea that BB shouldn't be revisited, because it absolutely should. There's too much good in the game to not refine and expand it for a sequel. A BB trilogy would give the series plenty of room to grow.
One reason why I'm not really enjoying DS3 as much as I think I should is because there's so much that's lost on me because I didn't play DS1 or DS2. That's ultimately my fault, and I can't blame the game for having a lot of plot and lore elements from the previous games. That being said, there were a lot of moments that just weren't impactful or special to me because I'm not familiar with the lore of the series. But this is a feeling I was expecting going in, so it's not a huge problem.
One thing that I do get miffed about is people saying DS has better "build variety" than BB, which I don't think is true by any measure. Sure, by sheer numbers there are more weapons in DS. However, BB's totally unique weapons all have personality and style because they all have unique movesets, compared to DS's "weapon class" system. I much prefer BB's approach, as it has made replaying the game to try new weapons really fun. They all feel distinct. There's magic in DS3, but it's mostly unusable outside of a few (more on that later).
Probably the most distinct difference between the two is the combat, and that's actually the reason I prefer BB. Obviously in BB, the combat is quick paced, more "in-your-face," and hyper aggressive play is encouraged by the rally system. On the other hand, DS3 is slower, more methodical, and encourages an approach that is more gradual than BB. While I do prefer BB's approach to combat (thanks in no small part to the quicksteps over the rolling), I have to say I do enjoy DS3's combat elements. Two major things I would change about DS3, however, are:
1) Shorter casting times for magic. Most of it is basically unusable in PvP or even PvE because it takes so long to use. It's a shame too because magic adds great variety to builds in DS3, it's just that it happens to suck kinda bad. From what I hear, DS1 was the only game that did this very well (maybe I misheard though).
2) Change/improve the parry system. In my mind, this is something major BB has over DS3. Parrying with guns in BB is more or less average in difficulty (depending on the enemy), but this works well with how close-quarters a lot of the combat is. Shooting up close means if you fail you take damage, but if you succeed it pays off greatly. Also, if you incorrectly time a shot and take damage, you can try to get some health back by rallying (at a risk). I'll just say that I got the hang of parrying in BB not immediately, but with much practice. In DS3, however, it just will not click with me. I've practiced for hours on end and I absolutely cannot get the timing down. This could just certainly be my problem, but to me it feels like it's not even worth trying to shield parry in DS3. I can still take massive damage (with no way to fairly recover like rallying in BB), and the window for success seems so tiny that it just isn't worth it. So I'll keep trying, but until I have my "aha" moment, I think the BB system is much better.
I will say, about the atmosphere and setting, BB blows DS3 out of the water for me only by virtue of freshness. High fantasy has never been my scene, so a lot of DS is just kinda tired for me. I will say that From has done a great job of infusing their own horror-filled take on fantasy in DS, and even though the setting isn't my favorite, a lot of the locales in DS3 are impressive both from a visual and a storytelling standpoint. Unfortunately it has to compete with BB, which is unbelievably fresh and new. Every area in BB is a delight, and the Victorian horror elements to the plot and lore are so completely refreshing and fun. I also have to kinda disagree with the idea that DS3 has much better sidequests and characters, because I actually think BB stands a little above DS3 in that regard. I think a lot of this comes from the fact that some NPC quest lines in DS3 were nostalgia heavy, which is fine, but they didn't do a whole lot for me. BB could have certainly used more sidequests, but the quality of the ones that are there are superb to me.
There are, however, gameplay elements from DS3 I think BB is sorely lacking. The ability to land still from a jump (among other movement options), better weapon infusing system (DS gems are a good bit more fleshed out that BB), and the entire PvP system are all much better in DS3. I like the weapon skills too, but they need a lot more variety to stand out. Shields should absolutely play a bigger role in BB, because they add a degree of variety, and because the ones that exist in BB are functional and cool. Also, make magic in BB more like it is in DS3. Give it its own consumable that isn't bullets, and make it more than just a quick item.
I'm not going to try to make an argument for one being better than the other, but I will say that Bloodborne is far and away my favorite. I think a lot of it comes down to personal preference and that's fine. What I won't stand for is the idea that BB shouldn't be revisited, because it absolutely should. There's too much good in the game to not refine and expand it for a sequel. A BB trilogy would give the series plenty of room to grow.
Ryouji Gunblade
Member
I prefer Bloodborne's overall mechanics, but hate its chromatic aberration and frame pacing.
I like Dark Souls 3 for the Guts cosplays and clean graphics, but they overdo the gray colors and cathedral theme.
I like Dark Souls 3 for the Guts cosplays and clean graphics, but they overdo the gray colors and cathedral theme.
Hikami
Member
Too soon to judge for me, Dark Souls III's DLC isn't out yet.
The DLC is usually the best part of these games for me.
Dark Souls III is at the moment my least favorite games in the series though.
A lot of the areas in Bloodborne annoyed me (the one where enemies kept coming back to life, the frenzy build up areas, etc.) but I loved the weapons, bosses, and the setting. The 30fps lock was a huge downside having played DS1 and DS2 at 60fps before it. The CA didn't bother me, I actually liked it. ¯\_(ツ
_/¯
I loved pretty much all of The Old Hunters DLC I played through though. (I haven't actually finished it now that I think about it..)
DS3's areas weren't really annoying but most were boring to me since they were way too similar to areas from previous games. There were a few great areas like Irithyll of the Boreal Valley though. Then there's the whole poise thing.. It was just "meh" to me.
That could change though once the DLC is out. Unpopular opinion but Dark Souls 2 (Scholar of the First Sin) is my favorite game in the series mainly because of the DLC. Hoping DS3's is just as good if not better.
The DLC is usually the best part of these games for me.
Dark Souls III is at the moment my least favorite games in the series though.
A lot of the areas in Bloodborne annoyed me (the one where enemies kept coming back to life, the frenzy build up areas, etc.) but I loved the weapons, bosses, and the setting. The 30fps lock was a huge downside having played DS1 and DS2 at 60fps before it. The CA didn't bother me, I actually liked it. ¯\_(ツ
_/¯ I loved pretty much all of The Old Hunters DLC I played through though. (I haven't actually finished it now that I think about it..)
DS3's areas weren't really annoying but most were boring to me since they were way too similar to areas from previous games. There were a few great areas like Irithyll of the Boreal Valley though. Then there's the whole poise thing.. It was just "meh" to me.
That could change though once the DLC is out. Unpopular opinion but Dark Souls 2 (Scholar of the First Sin) is my favorite game in the series mainly because of the DLC. Hoping DS3's is just as good if not better.
DkS1=wood grain ring = GOAT
I like the dark souls formula more, since it feels more class based. Bloodborne combat never really got stale thanks to trick weapons and required visceral timing. I like combat options like ranged and AoEs in dark series tho, maybe a little more.
Edit: kiting with pebble was actually a little tiring
I like the dark souls formula more, since it feels more class based. Bloodborne combat never really got stale thanks to trick weapons and required visceral timing. I like combat options like ranged and AoEs in dark series tho, maybe a little more.
Edit: kiting with pebble was actually a little tiring