The aggressive enemies in DS3 weren't the problem IMO. There were a few things DS2 did better, but DS3 was still a better game all around.For me it's very simple. DS2 had better levels, more even design overall (no super low points that only exist to annoy the player like the swamp or blight town), less aggressive enemies that better fit the game's combat mechanics (DS3 tried to go full BB and the game suffered for it), better covenants, much better build variety and poise that worked better than in DS3 lol. DS3 wins on graphics but that's about it imo.
It amuses me that we often spend a lot of time shitting on the major outlets and their reviews, but the first thing done on a game's release is to compile all the mainstream review scores.
DS2 was made by a B team. Miyazaki wasn't the only one missing.
It also had the best PVP out of all of them and the best NG+. Fite me.
Dark Souls 2 had no Miyazaki and it's easily the worst of the lot.no. From Software has done it again.
i don't get this shit about one person making a game. Miyazaki didn't make this game all on his own. Kojima doesn't make games all on his own. yet somehow they LOVE to take all the credit and shit on the people that work for them.
I am not wrong. That's the very definition of an opinion.Pretty sure your opinion is the minority. The way I see it, you have a right to be wrong. And that's okay bro.
Yeah, no one is wrong here, if you enjoyed DSII more then that’s your taste. I know most won’t agree with me but I personally enjoyed Bloodborne more than Demon’s Souls and Dark Souls 1-3.I am not wrong. That's the very definition of an opinion.
I am not wrong. That's the very definition of an opinion.
Pretty sure that Dark Souls II has a better Metacritic score than III by the way.
If you are enjoying the game what does it matter what score reviewers give?I'd be sad when/if it drops below 90, this game has all the potential to be immortalised and deserves a great score.
I'd be sad when/if it drops below 90, this game has all the potential to be immortalised and deserves a great score.
It's a matter of the attention it gets from other people with a high score, of course it won't affect my enjoyment of the game yet I want it to succeed and unfortunately in this day and age a nice score helps.If you are enjoying the game what does it matter what score reviewers give?
No, I've been watching some videos and comments about the game and I'm liking everything I'm seeing, enough to understand its potential and form an opinion.You've already finished it?
I think Superman 64 is the best video game of all time.
FYI, opinions can be wrong.
That's fun !
The things DS2 did wrong massively outweigh the things it did right.The aggressive enemies in DS3 weren't the problem IMO. There were a few things DS2 did better, but DS3 was still a better game all around.
-power stancing is fkn awesome in DS2 and nearly absent in 3 (only specific weapons can)
-The overall lack of poise in DS3 killed everyone's more tanky turtle builds. They patched that eventually to make it better but it was still a shadow of previous systems.
-DS2 had the best PvP of all Soulsborne games
-Weapon durability was a better handled mechanic in DS2 (it was never even a problem in 3).
Otherwise, IMO DS3 is definitely better than 2 (in PvE). Better bosses (with the exception of Fume Knight which is one of my favorite bosses in the entire series), better level design (the DLC in 2 improved this but 3 was still generally better), better DLC, MUCH better hitboxes, AI for mob enemies and bosses (that lended well to the faster pace), and of course better graphics.
The things DS2 did wrong massively outweigh the things it did right.
On it's own is an OK game, when compared to the others is a crap game.
Those points, while very valid, aren't nearly enough to save it.
From Soul Memory to crap level design and enemy placement (every encounter is either an ambush or a gank squad or both!) to enemies with infinite poise, enemies with infinite stamina, and even something as basic as npc vendors stock (forgetting to add lacerating arrows to any vendor making impossible to get more than 18 per playthrough), to me DS2 is just a bad game.
I am a big souls fan but I've never bought one full price. It's kinda hard to resist sekiro and wait for the goty ultimate edition this time.. But I have to (
No.I think Superman 64 is the best video game of all time.
FYI, opinions can be wrong.
Welcome to 2019, how can there not be? Every souls game had dlc.Is there DLC planned?
I played Demon's Souls, Dark Souls 1, Dark Souls 2 and Bloodborne. I ejoyed 2 the most followed by Demon's Souls while I enjoyed Bloodborne by far the least.On it's own is an OK game, when compared to the others is a crap game.
Welcome to 2019, how can there not be? Every souls game had dlc.
Welcome to 2019, how can there not be? Every souls game had dlc.
Some of the battles are really easy - just spam the attack button and the enemy's stance breaks. Some of them require some pretty strict timing in terms of parrying but also that system(I don't remember what it's called, a red character appears above your head) where the enemy can do three different style of attacks and you have to respond in certain ways really fast (for example if they do a sweep you can jump twice to counter it but if you read that incorrectly and it was a grab, you're fucked). It could be that I'm not using them correctly but the arm mods that I have right now don't really add that much outside of one bossfight where well-timed shurikens interrupt the boss' attack.May have to just try it out myself. Watched a few battles on Youtube and it bored me to tears.
May have to just try it out myself. Watched a few battles on Youtube and it bored me to tears.
Well yeah, you're watching someone else play a video game.
Oh god...
I mean congrats on this game, I am sure it is great but... This will mean years of "why is X game not like Sekiro", or the beautiful "Sekiro has ruined games for me."
I mean really, congratulations for Miyazaki and his talented team. It's just that every thread is going to be bombarded by rabid fanboys, isn't it?
Yeah, how could he create a new game with this in mind? Take your game back, i don't want that threads overflooding GAF.
you're totally missing my point. i'm not saying the games are bad. i just hate how people love to give one person all the credit for a game. yeah they are the director but it's not a 1 person job to make a game. you see people praise Kojima for example like some kind of genius and rarely does the studio get any credit.Well, if you look at From's output from their last few years only the games he directed personally where exceptional - namely Demons Souls, Dark Souls 1, Bloodborne and Dark Souls 3. Hell, if Dark Souls 2 didn't show what difference he makes then I don't know what does.
I'm 90 percent sure that was meant to be an example of his second statement and you missed the point of the post.No.
For context:
If the point was so easy to miss, then it wasn't a very good one and if you rely on hyperbole you open yourself up to scrutiny.I'm 90 percent sure that was meant to be an example of his second statement and you missed the point of the post.
Scrutiny from those who missed the point, in which case they're not really tackling the actual argument and their scrutiny may as well be directed at a brick wall.If the point was so easy to miss, then it wasn't a very good one and if you rely on hyperbole you open yourself up to scrutiny.
whatever.Scrutiny from those who missed the point, in which case they're not really tackling the actual argument and their scrutiny may as well be directed at a brick wall.
His point was also clearly stated at the end of his post. It wasn't easy to miss though I do get you tackling the Superman 64 stuff separately. When you don't really know people on an online anonymous board, it's difficult picking up on sarcasm or hyperbole.
PS4 version? On the metacritic most of the reviews are in PS4 version. I follow the metacritic and Sekiro already have a 89 metascore before this review unlike PC/XBOX ahead 90.Slant Magazine gave this a 40/100 knocking the Metacritic score down to an 89.
Slant Magazine gave this a 40/100 knocking the Metacritic score down to an 89.
After the release of 2011’s Dark Souls, Hidetaka Miyazaki became one of the most respected names in the gaming industry, and with good reason. After all, Dark Souls is much more than a difficult action title with a fascinating semi-open environment, as its tense purgatorial trials and the ambiguity of its dread-inducing journey leaves one with a sense of ennui. Now years later, Miyazaki’s latest game, Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice, offers the best opportunity yet to question the media’s worship of this undoubtably talented artist. While Dark Souls represents a distinctive landmark in game history, Sekiro is more like an uninspired contemporary clone of 1998’s Tenchu: Stealth Assassins in which the stealth gameplay largely comes down to you watching little awareness meters above the heads of enemies and running away with ease when you’ve been spotted.
In the end, the game’s combat system lacks a truly innovative hook such as the Ki Pulse dynamic from 2017’s Nioh, the boomerang axe from 2018’s God of War, or the total dependence on defensive technique in last year’s Way of the Passive Fist. Even though Sekiro does sport a prosthetic arm that can be equipped with non-sword weapons, the items are hardly inventive: axe, spear, flamethrower, shuriken, and so on. There’s simply little in Sekiroto make it stand out in a vast ocean of releases, rendering it more of a footnote in the gaming market than the product of a distinguished auteur’s imagination.
I couldn't tell you. Just got this update from another sitePS4 version? On the metacritic most of the reviews are in PS4 version. I follow the metacritic and Sekiro already have a 89 metascore before this review unlike PC/XBOX ahead 90.
https://www.slantmagazine.com/games...o-shadows-die-twice-coasts-on-borrowed-moves/
Bullllllllllllllllllllshit. This guy probably hasn't beaten the first boss, let alone the entire game.