Bloodborne

[Polobow]

jelly

[Leshma]

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.

[Gravoth_iii]

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.

[Kafein]

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.

[SeQuel]

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.

[Gravoth_iii]

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.

[Vibe]

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.

[Kafein]

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.

[SeQuel]

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 

[Leshma]

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.

[Leshma]

[Asheram]

They need to rename this to LoadingScreenBorne 

[SeQuel]

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)

Mercy Blades which seem to be daggers

since I like fast weapons.

P.S - I love coopin with randoms and helping them.

[Siiem]

Saw "japan studios", closed. Fuck. Dat.

[Banok]

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.