Hmm.. I think I just figured out what I want to do with my Dark Souls playthrough on PC that I'm doing right now... WHIPS 
You can use whips very easily in Dark Souls 2, dual-wielding them even! Just gotta watch that durability.
Going through Dark Souls 1 with a whip...well, you are better at that game than I
Going through Dark Souls with a whip is self-flagellation.
Going through Dark Souls with a whip is self-flagellation.
You're on a roll today, champ! 
Thankfully I have Havel's and FaP, so it's not a fat roll.
You can use whips very easily in Dark Souls 2, dual-wielding them even! Just gotta watch that durability.
IIRC, whip's durability is 90% gone after a couple of mobs in Heide's Tower of Flame. I really wanted to try dual-wielding whips but durability bug put an end to that dream.
Bloodbourne may not be for me. A little too visceral in a way that doesn't really get me excited.
I tend to agree. There's waaaaay too much blood spewing around, and while I know that this is BLOODborne, and that it's blood themed, I still find it off putting.
Make Dark Souls 3, that'd be too many sequels. Make Bloodborne, it's not enough like Dark Souls. Can't make everyone happy!
I'm still not watching videos! But for those of you that are, here is some character creation stuff:
Make Dark Souls 3, that'd be too many sequels. Make Bloodborne, it's not enough like Dark Souls. Can't make everyone happy!
hmm I can't image the title of the game is going to matter to me very much
Make Dark Souls 3, that'd be too many sequels. Make Bloodborne, it's not enough like Dark Souls. Can't make everyone happy!
I want both!
No reason to dislike sequels, as long as they continue to be great. We surely don't have a whole lot of games like Souls.
Give me 2-3 quality Souls clones a year. Maybe then I'll be happy.
Blind_Evil wrote:Make Dark Souls 3, that'd be too many sequels. Make Bloodborne, it's not enough like Dark Souls. Can't make everyone happy!
I want both!
No reason to dislike sequels, as long as they continue to be great. We surely don't have a whole lot of games like Souls.
Give me 2-3 quality Souls clones a year. Maybe then I'll be happy.
STOP DILUTING THE BRAND!! Just kidding, I feel the same way
Whelp - I'm officially ready for this. I have beaten Demon's, DS1 and DS2.
I've been hearing a lot of speculation that this will likely be the most accessible game of this genre made by Miyazaki. I have mixed feelings about that, if true. But I'm still going to play the shit out of it.
Accessibility!
To be fair, for it to be "the most accessible game of this genre by Miyazaki" it would not have a very high bar to clear. 
Accessibility is such a weird thing in regards to gaming, in theory it's great, in practice it isn't always so good. Something like Mass Effect 2 and Skyrim does this extremely well by cutting out extra RPG stats that never added anything to it the first place, while things like Nintendo's games try to do it by adding motion controls that are fine so long as it doesn't give you wrist pain in which case F you, you didn't really want to play Metroid Prime Trilogy anyways right? It's especially dumb in that case as while I don't have an issue with Metroid Prime 3 being design around motion controls (not every game needs to be for everyone) not letting people have the original controls for 1 & 2 is just dumb and actually far less accessible. Fortunately that's rare and more often then not (And I highly expect that this the case here), it's just a buzz word to try and draw in the people who couldn't figure out the last one. Which is it's own problem but not really one I see having a meaningful effect on Bloodborne in and of itself.
Honestly I've found the games that manage to be the most accessible are the ones with the best UI design which is something the souls series sorely lacks.
I've been hearing a lot of speculation that this will likely be the most accessible game of this genre made by Miyazaki. I have mixed feelings about that, if true. But I'm still going to play the shit out of it.
There was speculation that Dark Souls 1 would be more accessible than Demon's Souls, and there was speculation that Dark Souls 2 would be more accessible than Dark Souls 1. Both were true, and I think they turned out pretty alright. These games are deep and intricate enough that making them a little more accessible doesn't necessarily equate to dumbing them down.
Accessibility!
danopian wrote:To be fair, for it to be "the most accessible game of this genre by Miyazaki" it would not have a very high bar to clear. :D
If they added a pause button they would have done it.
It would've broken the whole f*cking thing.
To be fair, for it to be "the most accessible game of this genre by Miyazaki" it would not have a very high bar to clear. :D
If they added a pause button they would have done it.
Got no problems with increased accessibility, if it just means the game will be easier to understand and get into. Demons Souls surely was trying to hide how it worked.
But it should definitely keep its unforgiving gameplay. One of the things making these games so lovely, is that they expect you to become better while playing, and balance the game around that assumption. While most games would still let you keep progressing, if you do not improve.
The brilliant part is, what the game is demanding of the player, is not unreasonable at all. Since it is not really a twitch-based game. It only asks you to progress slow and steady and pay attention.
Shadout wrote:danopian wrote:To be fair, for it to be "the most accessible game of this genre by Miyazaki" it would not have a very high bar to clear. :D
If they added a pause button they would have done it.
It would've broken the whole f*cking thing.
Exactly. More like Babyborne.
At that point, you might as well just play Lords of the Fallen like a chump.
I had a session playing Dark Souls 2 (I knew I shouldn't have popped into the game to look at my characters) that has eased my concerns about not having shields in Bloodborne. I played through the gutter with a torch in order to light all the stands and I realised that that area is balanced for someone who is probably carrying a torch and therefore shieldless. Until now I've been thinking the game might be balanced for the type of player who loves agility builds and can run rings around npcs, players and bosses alike. If that were the case I'd be left in the dust. It's more likely though that the game will be a challenge scaled to the average player who is only armed with the weapons the game provides.
O sarcasm, I have missed thy dulcet tones!
Accessibility!
You underestimate how important this is. How can I be insufferably superior if the game is accessible?
At that point, you might as well just play Lords of the Fallen like a chump.
I almost lol'ed while scratching my poor, sick son's back as I'm trying to soothe him back to sleep (just a cold, no worries).
Oh, Shields live!
Sony's Japan Studio confirmed to IGN that shields will appear in the game after rampant speculation that they may not. Shields played a very large role in From's previous Souls games, of which Bloodborne is a spiritual successor, yet not a single piece of gameplay footage has shown a Bloodborne player wielding such defensive weaponry. When asked about it before, the publisher and developer always stayed mum on the issue. Perhaps it was still being sorted?At any rate, Japan Studio producer Masaaki Yamagiwa said that shields will come with a caveat: "If you're always standing back and guarding, you'll die very quickly," he warned potential hunters. "So you have to incorporate it into your strategy of how you play and fight."
Sounds okay if they are less effective. Some of the late-game upgraded shields in previous games really could make you immortal.
But nice to have more options when building characters. Previous games have always had the basic tank, warrior, rogue, mage archetypes in different forms.
Okay, I pre-ordered. And I promise that this post will be my only complaint about not being able to pause.
Pages