cRPG

Other Games => ... and all the other things floating around out there => Topic started by: Leshma on February 03, 2015, 05:54:32 pm

Title: Bloodborne
Post by: Leshma on February 03, 2015, 05:54:32 pm
First 18 minutes of gameplay, involves spoilers but since I won't be getting Peasant Station 4 decided to watch it all. And it is so epic... :cry:

Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: WITCHCRAFT on February 03, 2015, 06:06:51 pm
My brother is in the same boat. He is super excited for the game to come out, but doesn't want to buy a PS4 just to play one game. Maybe it'll come out on PC in a few years  :|
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: darmaster on February 03, 2015, 06:10:24 pm
EMULATORRRRS (in few decades tho)

also spoiler for what? since when from software games had any sort of plot?
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Gravoth_iii on February 03, 2015, 07:18:52 pm
Why not in other thing floating around part? Anyways, might get ps4 at some point for this, too bad i will miss the launch. Souls games are amazing at launch.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Leshma on February 03, 2015, 07:30:07 pm
Why not in other thing floating around part?

No idea :| Thought I was in there when I made this thread, dunno how managed to fuck it up.

Would trade Witcher 3 for this any time of the day imho.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Falka on February 03, 2015, 08:34:12 pm
since I won't be getting Peasant Station 4

I can not decide if I should buy PS 4 or update my crappy PC. Stayin with my current PC would mean I won't be able to play Bonerlord, but maybe it's not a bad thing after all... So what should I do?

visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Gravoth_iii on February 03, 2015, 08:44:24 pm
Ah god, it looks amazing. So much blood (killing floor 2 hype) and the setting, ooh i was wondering what setting could they possible put a new game in and they just got the best one possible.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Polobow on February 03, 2015, 09:16:49 pm
Good thing my peasant brother bought a PS4, will be happily enjoying Bloodborne
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Vibe on February 03, 2015, 09:47:06 pm
Fuck From for releasing the game to peasants only. Don't they know the noblemen drive this world?
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Gatsby on February 03, 2015, 11:23:23 pm
900p 15fps ftw!!
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Golem on February 05, 2015, 10:04:32 pm
To be honest, after seeing this video, it looks bad.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Xant on February 06, 2015, 08:34:59 am
So this is basically Dark Souls 2 with slightly updated graphics.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Vibe on February 06, 2015, 09:39:57 am
And a slightly different theme, yes.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Polobow on February 06, 2015, 01:43:33 pm
Team A made it though
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Vibe on February 06, 2015, 02:28:24 pm
who cares its for console only, could as well be made by poop shovelers
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Polobow on February 06, 2015, 03:27:44 pm
jelly
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Leshma on February 06, 2015, 03:42:52 pm
So this is basically Dark Souls 2 with slightly updated graphics.

Dark Souls 2 is the worst game in the serious. Has all the elements of the previous games and is bigger but lacks character. It is generic in a way, like difference between first Bioshock and Bioshock 2. From what I've seen on that short video, Bloodborne will have a lot of character and many elements of the world seem to be carefully put together like in first two games, unlike Dark Souls 2.

World design means a lot. Demon Souls have great world design, Dark Souls has different vertical design which is perfectly executed imho. You can see that in other game series as well, first Jedi Knight is way superior to Jedi Outcast and especially Jedi Academy because it has vast exteriors that look like they've come from a original SW movie. Next two games don't have that sense of scale and you don't feel like someone put great effort and skill to make it special.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Gravoth_iii on February 06, 2015, 04:45:51 pm
So this is basically Dark Souls 2 with slightly updated graphics.

Different theme, combat is changed up quite a bit but yeah pretty much.

Dark Souls 2 is the worst game in the serious. Has all the elements of the previous games and is bigger but lacks character. It is generic in a way, like difference between first Bioshock and Bioshock 2. From what I've seen on that short video, Bloodborne will have a lot of character and many elements of the world seem to be carefully put together like in first two games, unlike Dark Souls 2.

World design means a lot. Demon Souls have great world design, Dark Souls has different vertical design which is perfectly executed imho. You can see that in other game series as well, first Jedi Knight is way superior to Jedi Outcast and especially Jedi Academy because it has vast exteriors that look like they've come from a original SW movie. Next two games don't have that sense of scale and you don't feel like someone put great effort and skill to make it special.

Dark souls 2 had the best pvp though.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Kafein on February 07, 2015, 12:27:43 am
Dark souls 2 had the best pvp though.

Well, that's pretty much irrelevant if you're there for the world design. The best pvp (and it's true, despite soul memory and shit) does not compensate the complete lack of coherence in the whole game. Furthermore, all three games suck at pvp compared to games designed for pvp exclusively anyway.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: SeQuel on February 07, 2015, 02:47:26 am
Dark Souls 2 is the worst game in the serious. Has all the elements of the previous games and is bigger but lacks character. It is generic in a way, like difference between first Bioshock and Bioshock 2. From what I've seen on that short video, Bloodborne will have a lot of character and many elements of the world seem to be carefully put together like in first two games, unlike Dark Souls 2.

World design means a lot. Demon Souls have great world design, Dark Souls has different vertical design which is perfectly executed imho. You can see that in other game series as well, first Jedi Knight is way superior to Jedi Outcast and especially Jedi Academy because it has vast exteriors that look like they've come from a original SW movie. Next two games don't have that sense of scale and you don't feel like someone put great effort and skill to make it special.

I disagree, there is no way Dark Souls 2 is worse than Demon Souls. Demon Souls was so rough of a game and clunky as hell, I honestly didn't even like it that much. As for Dark Souls 1 I do agree that it had better Bosses and a World in general however; Dark Souls 2 had WAY more viable weapons to use, 60 fps, a cleaner/functioning UI, and much smoother animations and excellent DLC's. With that alone I, personally, rank Dark Souls 2 above Dark Souls 1. I was really happy with the game and thought it was a great edition to the series, sure the bosses coulda been better which I thought was the weakest point in the game but the World was not terrible. I enjoyed many areas in the game like No-Mans Wharf, Iron Keep, and Huntsman Corpse just to name a few off the top of my head.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Gravoth_iii on February 07, 2015, 10:45:18 am
Well, that's pretty much irrelevant if you're there for the world design. The best pvp (and it's true, despite soul memory and shit) does not compensate the complete lack of coherence in the whole game. Furthermore, all three games suck at pvp compared to games designed for pvp exclusively anyway.

Im not there purely for the world design, im in for the whole thing. If one part is lacking, then another might make up for it and still make me enjoy the game. I think the pvp is better than most other games out there designed for it. It reminds me of crpg with the variety available.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Vibe on February 07, 2015, 11:32:04 am
DS2 was okay, DS1 was okay. Each has their pros and cons compared to each other. DS1 had the world down, DS2 was actually for the fucking PC, albeit not the best port.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Kafein on February 07, 2015, 12:24:46 pm
I enjoyed many areas in the game like No-Mans Wharf, Iron Keep, and Huntsman Corpse just to name a few off the top of my head.

I think each individual area was quite decent, however the lack of connections and the randomness of the sequence was impossible to ignore. Dark Souls was one world which made sense from start to finish. Dark Souls 2 feels like someone went through a checklist of zones, designed them then tried to hastily glue them together. In Demon's Souls the lack of connections was acknowledged, and there were only 5 independent zones, which weren't even really independent if you read into the lore a little bit. Dark Souls 2 appears to be trying to fool the player into thinking that the world is connected. This may sound like a petty complaint, but to me exploring the world for the first time is probably the most enjoyable thing in all three games, and Dark Souls did that much better than Dark Souls 2.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: SeQuel on February 07, 2015, 08:26:33 pm
I think each individual area was quite decent, however the lack of connections and the randomness of the sequence was impossible to ignore. Dark Souls was one world which made sense from start to finish. Dark Souls 2 feels like someone went through a checklist of zones, designed them then tried to hastily glue them together. In Demon's Souls the lack of connections was acknowledged, and there were only 5 independent zones, which weren't even really independent if you read into the lore a little bit. Dark Souls 2 appears to be trying to fool the player into thinking that the world is connected. This may sound like a petty complaint, but to me exploring the world for the first time is probably the most enjoyable thing in all three games, and Dark Souls did that much better than Dark Souls 2.

I agree, but Leshma saying it was the worst in the series seems like a exaggeration. Dark Souls 1 and 2 have their pros and cons, hopefully 3 will master them both  :D
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Leshma on February 07, 2015, 10:03:16 pm
I didn't say game sucks, but it slightly worse than Demon Souls and Dark Souls. First game introduced concept which was very fresh at that time (although it was upgrade of their previous games) and did a lot of things right. Second game in series was wonderful game and had perfectly designed world and back story.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Leshma on February 12, 2015, 08:31:55 pm
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Asheram on March 26, 2015, 01:14:31 am
They need to rename this to LoadingScreenBorne  :P
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: SeQuel on March 26, 2015, 03:40:10 am
Bought it, loving it! Only downed 2 bosses so far.

As for the stupidly long load screens From has said

"The development team is currently exploring another patch for Bloodborne, seeking ways to improve load time duration, in addition to other performance optimizations and miscellaneous bug fixes."

http://www.gamepur.com/news/18355-dev-acknowledges-bloodbornes-poor-loading-time-ps4-second-patch-development.html

I started with the Pimp Cane and it's pretty fun but I'm trying to get enough souls for the
(click to show/hide)
since I like fast weapons.

P.S - I love coopin with randoms and helping them.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Siiem on March 26, 2015, 11:33:02 pm
Saw "japan studios", closed. Fuck. Dat.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Banok on March 27, 2015, 12:32:00 am
Well I personally like DS more for singleplayer but the combo of both was fun for me in ds2. And ds offers a flavour of pvp that pure pvp games can't, its slightly open world mmo flavoured.

I think it would be logical to take souls in a more mmo/pvp direction, always online is a bad word - but it would mean better multiplayer gameplay, server side gamesaves, ALOT less cheating, more competitive pvp, maybe better netcode.

Plus they could have just made offline and online characters two completely seperate gamemodes, so to participate in multiplayer you HAVE to always play that character online. you can't just solo pve, save scum to make characters like I and everyone probably did in dark souls 2.

but anyway I predict the next amazing souls game will be a far future imitator outside of from software, ds2 was overall a step back and sony can only push from software further and further back.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: LordBerenger on March 27, 2015, 09:12:36 am
My brother is in the same boat. He is super excited for the game to come out, but doesn't want to buy a PS4 just to play one game. Maybe it'll come out on PC in a few years  :|

I bought Xbox 360 for the 8th time just for the sake of GTA V. But this game doesn't look like a 'Buy console for just 1 game' game.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Nightmare798 on March 27, 2015, 04:23:18 pm
I dont like the stupid time setting anyways. Plate armor and fancy knight helmets for me any day.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Gravoth_iii on March 27, 2015, 04:45:00 pm
Game looks so fuckign cool, cant believe im missing out.. gotta make some dosh selling my 2'' to some desperate granny so i can afford a ps4.

Even if the gameplay would be worse, the setting is so fucking awesome, all the armors look amazing. Allthough the gameplay does look improved, dashing looks awesome (lol i was suggesting similar things for melee battleground, they took my advice), parries by shooting guns, regenerating health by instantly attacking. Hints at a port have been made but i think its only but a dream.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: SeQuel on March 28, 2015, 01:35:46 am
Game looks so fuckign cool, cant believe im missing out.. gotta make some dosh selling my 2'' to some desperate granny so i can afford a ps4.

Even if the gameplay would be worse, the setting is so fucking awesome, all the armors look amazing. Allthough the gameplay does look improved, dashing looks awesome (lol i was suggesting similar things for melee battleground, they took my advice), parries by shooting guns, regenerating health by instantly attacking. Hints at a port have been made but i think its only but a dream.

Gameplay is better, 100% faster paced and a lot more skillful. You can no longer circle strafe and back stab for days, and the setting is awesome.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Gravoth_iii on March 29, 2015, 12:36:27 pm
PVP looks like a healfest, which to me isnt necessarily a bad thing since both sides can do it, but a lot of people are complaining about it. Allthough i do believe its going to change as the game gets older because it seems like you can cancel out heals by shooting etc. Scrublords just QQing when they cant instagib and someone heals up since they dont pressure enough.
Someone said he fought a 1v3 for 40 minutes, if that was true then holy crap that would be pretty epic TBH.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: SeQuel on March 29, 2015, 09:40:44 pm
From the various vids i've seen, since people can shoot to cancel healz, and healing items arent refilled like estus and are actually a consumable item i think that's a balancing factor. They could use all their blood vials vs you, but then they have to continue without blood vials for a bit or try and farm more.

Looks good.

Yup, you can cancel heals with bullets. There is also a item calling Numbing Mist that prevents people from healing for a duration.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Gravoth_iii on March 30, 2015, 05:31:53 pm

Sends shills down my spine x1000, so evil and amazing. Trying not to spoil the game too much with soundtracks, but i might not be able to restrain myself with stuff like this.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: karasu on March 31, 2015, 04:48:30 pm
http://www.reddit.com/r/bloodborne/comments/30d9u0/i_have_platinumed_bloodborne_2nd_in_usa_and_here/


Couple of interesting negative points here, like the NG+ having absolutely no new item in it, and how absurd it is to even upgrade a single later item, forcing people to mostly stick to initial weaponry.

But on the other, those Chalice Dungeons seem pretty cool.

So it seems the end-game currently is to ignore NG+, and do PvP and Chalice Dungeons, which means you can't even kill the last boss cause it ports you directly to NG+.


As much as I love Souls series, I'd never waste 400€+ (console+game) to play this "Souls" piece in a crappy peasant system, my console fever ended when PS2 stopped getting decent J-releases.

Also, the last Namco douchebaggery with DS2:SotFS isn't helping much.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Gravoth_iii on March 31, 2015, 05:18:16 pm
Seems like variety has been halved if not more, which is also sad to me, i guess this isnt going to be the bestest of souls games. People believe miyazaki is a genious and without him souls series are lost, but to me it seems like bloodborne is about as good as DaS2 so far, for different reasons.

Pvp will still have a great say on the game, and its just beginning.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: karasu on March 31, 2015, 05:27:15 pm
Yeah, still DeSouls and DaS were the best for me for the different reasons.

The pvp in bloodborne looks cool, but the healing system is kinda lame, so easy and fast to heal, making whoever has the most healing items the winner in long battles.

Btw is there any anti-hack system on Bloodborne? Since the lack of it ruined completely PvP in the last titles (I was literally forced to use at some point bonfire effigy to block invasions and still be able to co-op somehow, since 3 out of 5 invaders where freakin' hackers with god mode or full invis gear and max stamina, etc).
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: BlindGuy on March 31, 2015, 07:57:36 pm
Played this for a while. Its crap. The last 3 were pretty crap, and this felt like the easiest and simplest yet. If you want a hard game play Shadow Warrior on Heroic, looks better plays less like a game from 2000 and isn't so fucking boring. JUST my opinion of course, but this entire series trades on the name of ONE dev who was never godmode to start with.

Also, having literally nothing in the way of exploiting and cheating then trying to make your game MP at all or WORSE, pvp, is a fucking joke.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: karasu on March 31, 2015, 09:35:57 pm
I guess there's no PvP anti-cheat measure still. What a joke.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Kafein on April 03, 2015, 11:17:59 pm
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: darmaster on April 04, 2015, 02:14:01 am
this game is still shit compared to a masterpiece such as fable tbh
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Taser on April 04, 2015, 03:40:48 am
this game is still shit compared to a masterpiece such as fable tbh

I don't know how they went from the awesomeness that was fable 1 to the crap that fable 2 & 3 were.

Honestly fable 2 & 3 were .. ok (considered apart from fable 1) but I  had a lot more fun with 1 than I did with 2 and 3. 3 could have been good. Cool premise but it was done so poorly. I mean.. what the hell was that ending? And the revolution? Fucking hell.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: darmaster on April 04, 2015, 01:56:23 pm
Agree, the third was definitely shit conpared to the others and especially to the first, but still a good game; the thing is tho that these from softwares games feel soulless to me, the """"""""story"""""""" is practically non existant, the gameplay is ok maybe chanllenging but nothing more, simple patterns to learn and repeat, as far as I've got ranged isn't an option and stealth isn't taken into consoderation at all; I probably might be the only one here who didn't really appreciate these games but seriously, when I say fable 1 is better than all these from softwares games I'm totally honest
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Taser on April 04, 2015, 08:16:27 pm
Agree, the third was definitely shit conpared to the others and especially to the first, but still a good game; the thing is tho that these from softwares games feel soulless to me, the """"""""story"""""""" is practically non existant, the gameplay is ok maybe chanllenging but nothing more, simple patterns to learn and repeat, as far as I've got ranged isn't an option and stealth isn't taken into consoderation at all; I probably might be the only one here who didn't really appreciate these games but seriously, when I say fable 1 is better than all these from softwares games I'm totally honest

Yeah the story was shit for the 3rd. Like when you find out why your brother was being such an asshole because of an impending invasion. But.... since most people bought all the buildings, it was pretty easy to put gold in to do all the "good" choices without penalty and avoid being an asshole and still get all the benefits. Which I'm not even sure matters if you even bothered to put gold in for the "benefits", like the army and etc. Since it was all for the ending which was piss poor.

Had they fleshed out the revolution a lot more and did more work on the invasion aspect .. it could have been a lot better. And if the choices were actually hard. "Hmm should I put the kids to work to get more gold or should I put them in school? Well I do have 50 million gold so.... maybe I give no shits about gold at this point."
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Nightmare798 on April 06, 2015, 12:12:57 am
Ohh I see how it is.

In short, what sony is trying to do is akin to having a brain-dead person on a life support system.

I mean, what other reason would they have to desperately keep a shitty outdated console (funnily enough, it was outdated upon its release, let alone now), alive by taking it from the kneeling positon just so they release the game only and only for their system.

Well fine, Not that I care anyways. I would be pissed off if it was medieval themed, but it is actually set in victorian era, so no dice. I am just honestly dissapointed how much they need to cling to their stupid system just to keep it alive.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Mr_Oujamaflip on April 06, 2015, 11:56:37 am
OK so I've played this for a few hours.

It looks OK, it's so dark I can't really make out any real detail but whatever.
Combat is uneventful basically hit, dodge, hit, dodge. I appreciate it's about timing but that's what you do.
AI is OK, they get pulled into choke points fairly easily but in open areas they do surround and attack well.
What I've found most frustrating is the lack of progression, I appreciate the gates are meant to be the "check points" which is all well and good but when you die and lose everything it gives you no desire to come back and get it. Same issue with DayZ after you've died and lost all your stuff it just grates having to go back and get it. I'd go back to the shop guy in the well and buy stuff but the 2 minute loading screens are awful and further reduce any real desire to press on.

It also has hilariously bad voice acting.

I imagine a lot of my issues with the game could be resolved by sorting the loading times, would allow me to drop back, have a small break and head back out stronger but in trying to avoid them it's making me push forward into things I'm not prepared for.

Oh and using all your Molotov's to progress, dying afterwards, not getting the Molotov's back but the enemies return is just silly, that's one of the biggest criticisms of Far Cry 2 where the enemy camps just refill every 5 minutes but here it's a good thing? Double standards.

The high difficulty thing it's so heavily praised for isn't what I'd call difficult it's more like a don't mess up situation rather than it being particularly hard. Not getting any sense of dread when I'm approaching things like I did in Metro 2033 Redux on Ranger Hardcore mode, nor do I feel any accomplishment when I do get past a large group or whatever.

Quite disappointed so far, I'll keep going to see if it improves though.
Title: Re: Bloodborne
Post by: Gravoth_iii on April 08, 2015, 08:01:36 pm
Replaying demons souls (my least played souls game) to get a feel of fresh souls, and so that i dont feel sad not having bloodborne :( God the combat is clunky in this, they really improve it in a lot every sequel so far. The more i watch streams of bloodborne, the less i lust for it tbh, not because its getting spoiled but because it actually doesnt look that much fun. Variety stinks, and some things just look outright unfair. Also grinding potions was a dumb idea, not sure what they were thinking. And upgrading weapons seems silly hard.