Jump to content
~*Please Support the GoFundMe Campaign for HardAct*~ Read more... ×
Sign in to follow this  
Pikachu

General Gaming Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice OT - Releasing 22 March 2019 (Update: Gameinformer February Cover)

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Bloodporne said:

Of course. I just think Dark Souls was a brilliant evolution from Demon's hub design and somehow they had reverted ever since. 

Dark Souls 1 was an accident I think. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, skillzdadirecta said:

A lot of you guys didn't play Demon's Souls huh? The FIRST Souls game?

 

I played it. I liked the light / dark tendencies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dark Souls' world design would have been incredible if being back at Firelink actually meant anything, but it doesn't; the hub is important in the other games because of all the merchants and the leveling waifu, but what's important about Firelink in the original? There's one shop, Frampt, and that's basically it. Outside of going back to place the Lordvessel, you could easily go the entire game without going back for any meaningful reason. Personally, I prefer the hub model, if only because roaming around to merchants is fucking annoying (especially the ones that are out of the way, like the guy in Sen's).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I only played DeS once on a borrowed PS3 with a broken build. It was Good. Better than Dark Souls 2 that's for sure.

 

53 minutes ago, Chris- said:

Dark Souls' world design would have been incredible if being back at Firelink actually meant anything, but it doesn't; the hub is important in the other games because of all the merchants and the leveling waifu, but what's important about Firelink in the original? There's one shop, Frampt, and that's basically it. Outside of going back to place the Lordvessel, you could easily go the entire game without going back for any meaningful reason. Personally, I prefer the hub model, if only because roaming around to merchants is fucking annoying (especially the ones that are out of the way, like the guy in Sen's).

 

I don't really care about firelink, just the connected world. Put DS3 firelink in DS1 and shit would be perfect. DS2 was kinda close with majula but shit only connected to Majula in one direction. 

ba223c2dea75c53656207bf2964ed175.png

 

Like DS1 you could get to the Hydra and the Forest in like 3 or 4 different ways, and there were 2 ways to enter Blight Town if you had the master key.  DS2 didn't have that. I like the Hub, but I rather have no hub if it meant having a world as interconnected as DS1. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Enlityn said:

Sooo Nioh 2? 

 

No. Nioh 2 is a thing. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God, I hate hub world design. At least insofar as having to teleport to levels. It makes it feel like an overwrought level select screen rather than a world. It immediately put me off of Demon's Souls and thus I never finished it. Having to go to that shitty Hunter's Dream in Bloodborne on top of the 3,000 year loading screens over and over was somehow even worse. What a goddamn mess.

 

You want an important hub location? That's fine, just don't make it a teleport hub! Or at least, not ONLY teleports. Let me walk everywhere, too! I guess my main complaints just boils down to that: I need to be able to walk to (nearly) every point in the game!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah exactly. The level of disappointment I felt when I got to the end of one of the “spokes” in DS2 was massive. I was just like “oh I can’t go further? I have to fucking teleport back? Lame”

 

I loved that in DS1 when I got cursed by the frogs in the sewers, I had to physically run all the way back up to the bell tower to break the curse. I mean it sucked at the time but it added so much to that world. You always felt like you were pushing forward in that game. And that feeling when you open a shortcut and realize you’re back to some part of firelink or how you could see other areas you’d been was such a amazing feeling. That fact that they made 3 more games and never duplicated that world design is mind blowing to me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Chris- said:

Dark Souls' world design would have been incredible if being back at Firelink actually meant anything, but it doesn't; the hub is important in the other games because of all the merchants and the leveling waifu, but what's important about Firelink in the original? There's one shop, Frampt, and that's basically it. Outside of going back to place the Lordvessel, you could easily go the entire game without going back for any meaningful reason. Personally, I prefer the hub model, if only because roaming around to merchants is fucking annoying (especially the ones that are out of the way, like the guy in Sen's).

My take on it was this:

 

As much as I think the word is overused and a bit corny, I've never felt more immersed in a lived-in world than when I played Dark Souls 1. I can see your criticisms but to me the whole Firelink Shrine area with its soundtrack felt really rewarding to return to every time even if simply only because the game imbued it with so much thematic meaning. The main attraction here for me was the bonfires being used for leveling and so on, it just never took me out of the world like having to warp to a disconnected area which I think even kind of blows in Bloodborne despite me being a total fanboy for it. 

 

I liked how much you had to "realistically" commit to exploration and areas prior to the Lordvessel warping. It made the whole game feel like an actual journey to me rather than just warping from level to level. It just felt really special and brought a weird sense of 'realism' to the game I've never felt since. I've started Bloodborne from scratch once and went as long as possible without warping back to the hub and it felt even better.

 

I don't mind an obvious hub at all but I really want it it to be physically connected to the world in some capacity. That, no insta-warping which sucks quite a bit of excitement out of exploration but most of all I really wish they would return to leveling at bonfires/whatever equivalent as to not take you out of the world constantly. That's the main thing for me really writing this now. Having to warp to some repetitive-as-fuck NPC, taking you out of the experience every time, just to level up and fix weapons etc. worked fine in Demon's Souls due to its essentially level structure but it just doesn't work for me after being shown what it could be in an Adventure in DS1. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bloodporne said:

My take on it was this:

 

As much as I think the word is overused and a bit corny, I've never felt more immersed in a lived-in world than when I played Dark Souls 1. I can see your criticisms but to me the whole Firelink Shrine area with its soundtrack felt really rewarding to return to every time even if simply only because the game imbued it with so much thematic meaning. The main attraction here for me was the bonfires being used for leveling and so on, it just never took me out of the world like having to warp to a disconnected area which I think even kind of blows in Bloodborne despite me being a total fanboy for it. 

 

I liked how much you had to "realistically" commit to exploration and areas prior to the Lordvessel warping. It made the whole game feel like an actual journey to me rather than just warping from level to level. It just felt really special and brought a weird sense of 'realism' to the game I've never felt since. I've started Bloodborne from scratch once and went as long as possible without warping back to the hub and it felt even better.

 

 I don't mind an obvious hub at all but I really want it it to be physically connected to the world in some capacity. That, no insta-warping which sucks quite a bit of excitement out of exploration but most of all I really wish they would return to leveling at bonfires/whatever equivalent as to not take you out of the world constantly. That's the main thing for me really writing this now. Having to warp to some repetitive-as-fuck NPC, taking you out of the experience every time, just to level up and fix weapons etc. worked fine in Demon's Souls due to its essentially level structure but it just doesn't work for me after being shown what it could be in an Adventure in DS1. 

 

See, I feel like the 'exploration' in Souls games is overblown. When I think of exploration, I think of games like Breath of the Wild or The Witcher 3...You can go anywhere you want and do anything you want virtually anytime you want (with some mild restrictions). But even Dark Souls, which is held up as the one with the best exploration, is incredibly restrictive. Within each area, you are still more or less penned in by the layout and geometry of the environment, and absent the Lordvessel there are choke points where you can only go two directions (Anor Londo, Undead Asylum) or even just one (Painted World). 

 

I realize this sentiment isn't shared by everyone, but to me exploration is meaningless outside of an open-world setting; I'm not interested in exploring linear settings, even if they connect in interesting ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Chris- said:

 

See, I feel like the 'exploration' in Souls games is overblown. When I think of exploration, I think of games like Breath of the Wild or The Witcher 3...You can go anywhere you want and do anything you want virtually anytime you want (with some mild restrictions). But even Dark Souls, which is held up as the one with the best exploration, is incredibly restrictive. Within each area, you are still more or less penned in by the layout and geometry of the environment, and absent the Lordvessel there are choke points where you can only go two directions (Anor Londo, Undead Asylum) or even just one (Painted World). 

 

I realize this sentiment isn't shared by everyone, but to me exploration is meaningless outside of an open-world setting; I'm not interested in exploring linear settings, even if they connect in interesting ways.

I'm a full 180 from the bolded so we're going to have to agree to disagree and/or fight this out at a designated time and place like real men!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice's New Combat Options Means Bosses Are A Little Different

In From Software games, bosses are the main event. From Ornstein and Smough in Dark Souls to The Nameless King in Dark Souls III, the developer has crafted incredibly rewarding  enemy encounters over the last few years. With Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice, From is changing their approach to combat, which means how they design bosses has to follow suit. Although the boss we faced in our time with the game definitely captured the feel of a From Software boss fight, we did notice – and were able to talk to From about – how Sekiro’s new combat and traversal options could alter the way we approach their bosses.

 

Exclusive Gameplay From Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice's Hirata Estates

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

In this exclusive Game Informer video, Ben Hanson interviews Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice's lead game designer Masaru Yamamura about designing combat and how it differs from his work on Dark Souls and Bloodborne. The video contains a lot of new gameplay showing off several fights in the Hirata Estates area as well. You can learn even more about how progression works in the game by visiting our hub for a month full of exclusive content at https://www.gameinformer.com/sekiro

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×