I beat the maneaters.
I died... a crazy number of times. I don't actually know how many. If the game happens to tell you at the end how many times you died and where, 3-2 will probably make me weep.
By the time I finally won, I was good at dodging their individual attacks (simultaneous attacks were still inconsistent and just depended on how they approached), baiting them, and predicting their moves. It was never enough until the last fight where it all managed to turn out, and it still dragged out to something like 15-20 minutes. I got a round where they didn't combo me to death, ignore dodges to home in on me with punches(you know, pivot in place and do a 180 out of nowhere), or suddenly do three of those tackles in row that are perfectly timed to hit while you're getting up and can take damage but before you can actually move, or any other such thing. Waited them out and used the fire in the middle of the bridge to block a lot of attacks so I could zip out, get a couple of hits in and run away.
Experience and planning didn't help here. As far I'm concerned I got lucky. It's a victory, finally, but I don't feel particularly proud of it.
Anyway, moved on to 3-3. I'm apparently being invaded for this boss, so other folks are still online, which is cool. But I haven't been able to experience it because I can't get past the mindflayers on the stairs.
☠ Souls Series Symposium ☠
Re: ☠ Souls Series Symposium ☠
GameSack wrote:That's right, only Sega had the skill to make a proper Nintendo game.
Re: ☠ Souls Series Symposium ☠
Oh nice, if players are still filling in for that boss you could have some interesting experiences. Could be easy if they suck though.CFFJR wrote:I beat the maneaters.
I died... a crazy number of times. I don't actually know how many. If the game happens to tell you at the end how many times you died and where, 3-2 will probably make me weep.
By the time I finally won, I was good at dodging their individual attacks (simultaneous attacks were still inconsistent and just depended on how they approached), baiting them, and predicting their moves. It was never enough until the last fight where it all managed to turn out, and it still dragged out to something like 15-20 minutes. I got a round where they didn't combo me to death, ignore dodges to home in on me with punches(you know, pivot in place and do a 180 out of nowhere), or suddenly do three of those tackles in row that are perfectly timed to hit while you're getting up and can take damage but before you can actually move, or any other such thing. Waited them out and used the fire in the middle of the bridge to block a lot of attacks so I could zip out, get a couple of hits in and run away.
Experience and planning didn't help here. As far I'm concerned I got lucky. It's a victory, finally, but I don't feel particularly proud of it.
Anyway, moved on to 3-3. I'm apparently being invaded for this boss, so other folks are still online, which is cool. But I haven't been able to experience it because I can't get past the mindflayers on the stairs.
Yeah I usually lure the enemies from those stairs slowly one by one.
- Sload Soap
- Next-Gen
- Posts: 2105
- Joined: Mon Aug 12, 2013 4:43 pm
- Location: United Kingdom
Re: ☠ Souls Series Symposium ☠
Reasonably far into Dark Souls 2 but it was clear very quickly why it's considered the weakest in the series. Dodgy ass hit boxes, too many human enemies, bland looking areas, etc..
That's before you get into more serious issues like bosses that seem to oscillate between total pushovers and frustrating ganks and the unnecessary changes to healing. I'm playing the Scholar of the First Sin version as well which is supposed to fix some of these issues.
It's still a step up from most games but quite a step down from DS3.
That's before you get into more serious issues like bosses that seem to oscillate between total pushovers and frustrating ganks and the unnecessary changes to healing. I'm playing the Scholar of the First Sin version as well which is supposed to fix some of these issues.
It's still a step up from most games but quite a step down from DS3.
Re: ☠ Souls Series Symposium ☠

Have you reached the DLC areas yet? While I think there are some other sections of the game that stand out as well, those are overall pretty solid.
Except the Frigid Outskirts, which can go to hell. Twice.
Have you pushed Agility high enough for iframes/etc?
I finished off my sorcery run of DS3, but haven't done much else since I was headed out of town for the weekend. Certainly different than my previous runs, some things easier, some probably less so.
- Exhuminator
- Next-Gen
- Posts: 11573
- Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:24 am
- Contact:
Re: ☠ Souls Series Symposium ☠
Congratulations!CFFJR wrote:I beat the maneaters.
My trick was to use the flaming brazier to control their proximity to me. That, and keeping their tails cut off.
I foresee only two future bosses being possible problems for you. Depending on how you take on Penetrator, he can be a pushover or a nightmare. Then there's the False King. If you fight the False King fair and square (as in actually melee him) you're in for a helluva fight. I thought he was harder than Flamelurker or the Maneaters (I sword fought him to death).
Keep us up to date!
PLAY KING'S FIELD.
Re: ☠ Souls Series Symposium ☠
Oh man, I don't know what's more annoying. The confusing agility stat in Dark Souls 2, or the changes to poise in Dark Souls 3.isiolia wrote:Have you pushed Agility high enough for iframes/etc?
I feel old when talking to anyone my age yet too inexperienced to effectively talk to anyone older. Life is grand that way.
My twitter handle is @EckoExplores
My twitter handle is @EckoExplores
-
marlowe221
- Next-Gen
- Posts: 1137
- Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2012 7:34 pm
- Location: Mississippi
Re: ☠ Souls Series Symposium ☠
I want to like these games. In theory, I should like these games.
But I kind of don't. All my experience is with the original Dark Souls.
For one thing, I can't get past Orenstein and... Dickhead? in Dark Souls, no matter what I do. My Longsword +10 just isn't doing it for me and the thought of grinding up a different weapon makes me feel sad/tired.
Also, Dark Souls likes to waste the player's time. I don't mind fighting the same boss over and over again. I don't mind the game being hard. What drives me crazy is the 15 minute run from the shrine back to Orenstein & Dickhead. There are no significant enemies that cannot be run past on that trip - there is no purpose to that at all that I can tell. It's just a waste of 15 minutes of my life that offers no real gameplay of any kind.
This game can be janky as all hell for a game where prescision play is rewarded and button mashing punished. The Capra Demon is a great example of this. Half the reason that fight is hard is because it takes place in a room that is too small for the game's camera system to function properly. Fighting the camera controls is not what makes a game fun; it's just bullshit.
Dark Souls is shockingly obtuse about its mechanics - reading outside the game is a necessity for most people. In the good old days, outside reading was also required. That's why they wrote a damned manual!
I loved the game up until the point where I beat a giant knight and some of the Wicked Witch of the West's flying monkeys came and dropped me off in a shiny beige city built on top of a lot of bottomless pits. If the game had ended right there I would have called it one of the best games I've ever played.
Are any of the sequels better games?
But I kind of don't. All my experience is with the original Dark Souls.
For one thing, I can't get past Orenstein and... Dickhead? in Dark Souls, no matter what I do. My Longsword +10 just isn't doing it for me and the thought of grinding up a different weapon makes me feel sad/tired.
Also, Dark Souls likes to waste the player's time. I don't mind fighting the same boss over and over again. I don't mind the game being hard. What drives me crazy is the 15 minute run from the shrine back to Orenstein & Dickhead. There are no significant enemies that cannot be run past on that trip - there is no purpose to that at all that I can tell. It's just a waste of 15 minutes of my life that offers no real gameplay of any kind.
This game can be janky as all hell for a game where prescision play is rewarded and button mashing punished. The Capra Demon is a great example of this. Half the reason that fight is hard is because it takes place in a room that is too small for the game's camera system to function properly. Fighting the camera controls is not what makes a game fun; it's just bullshit.
Dark Souls is shockingly obtuse about its mechanics - reading outside the game is a necessity for most people. In the good old days, outside reading was also required. That's why they wrote a damned manual!
I loved the game up until the point where I beat a giant knight and some of the Wicked Witch of the West's flying monkeys came and dropped me off in a shiny beige city built on top of a lot of bottomless pits. If the game had ended right there I would have called it one of the best games I've ever played.
Are any of the sequels better games?
Have: Sega Genesis, SNES, Atari 2600, Atari 7800, Atari 800XL, PC, N3DS XL, Wii U, GBA, Xbox One, Switch
Want: Games!!!
Want: Games!!!
- Exhuminator
- Next-Gen
- Posts: 11573
- Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:24 am
- Contact:
Re: ☠ Souls Series Symposium ☠
Try the original Demon's Souls. I loved it.marlowe221 wrote:Are any of the sequels better games?
---
Speaking of DeS, where's our man CFFJR? How's progress?
PLAY KING'S FIELD.
Re: ☠ Souls Series Symposium ☠
Dark Souls 2 lets you eventually clear out a zone; enemies that get killed before you die only respawn 15 times, so in a case like you're describing eventually you would have a clear path to the boss. Dark Souls 3 removes that. Both Dark Souls 2 and Dark Souls 3 are a bit better about having mid-level bonfires so the run to the boss isn't nearly as far.
Blizzard Entertainment Software Developer - All comments and views are my own and not representative of the company.
Re: ☠ Souls Series Symposium ☠
I can understand that. I was stuck for I think three days on O&S my first time through the game, and even playing it the other week on NG+ I ended up stuck on them for an hour. They're a wall for a lot of players. For me, a lot of it came down to actually needing to learn to shift between locked on and not, and a decent bit of the fight is a matter of using the environment to manage them and get space to attack.marlowe221 wrote: But I kind of don't. All my experience is with the original Dark Souls.
For one thing, I can't get past Orenstein and... Dickhead? in Dark Souls, no matter what I do. My Longsword +10 just isn't doing it for me and the thought of grinding up a different weapon makes me feel sad/tired.
You can also summon Solaire, which should make the fight a lot easier.
Which bonfire were you running back from? Takes maybe a minute or two to run to O&S, and unless you're summoning nothing really needs to get killed. Can see here from about 3:00 - you can just book it past everything, but the couple silver knights he kills are quick enough.Also, Dark Souls likes to waste the player's time. I don't mind fighting the same boss over and over again. I don't mind the game being hard. What drives me crazy is the 15 minute run from the shrine back to Orenstein & Dickhead.
If you do want to summon Solaire, clearing out the hall is somewhat necessary so that he doesn't rush off to fight stuff.
Don't disagree. There is a cheese for Capra Demon wherein you can just toss firebombs over the wall though. I think more of the challenge for that is getting rushed as you enter, and ganked by dogsThis game can be janky as all hell for a game where prescision play is rewarded and button mashing punished. The Capra Demon is a great example of this. Half the reason that fight is hard is because it takes place in a room that is too small for the game's camera system to function properly. Fighting the camera controls is not what makes a game fun; it's just bullshit.
DS1 is generally regarded pretty highly - at least, the first half. I would note that it seems like a lot of folks streaming speed or other challenge runs name Bloodborne as their favorite though.Are any of the sequels better games?
DS2 adds a lot, and certainly doesn't improve much on the jankiness. However, as noted, by default you can effectively clear an area, leaving you an empty run to a boss. You can warp between bonfires from the start, and every bonfire at that. DS1 doesn't give you the ability to do that until after O&S, and even then, only to select locations. So, if you found backtracking tedious in that, then the later games will probably be more appealing.
Upgrade systems are also simplified - DeS is by far the most esoteric, and DS1 retains some of that. The others get more and more straightforward. Plus, DS2 and 3 let you respec if you really feel like your setup just doesn't work for you (or want to try something else).
I'd also say that enlisting NPC help in DS2 and 3 is easier. More of them see to be a given that they'll be available, and right outside the boss door. Plus you can use an effigy/ember anywhere. DS1 I think you have more prerequisites for NPCs to be there, and DeS of course doesn't have consistent NPCs available and items to turn human are relatively scarce anyway.
DS3 is the only one I can't think of a particularly egregious run back to a boss in, but IMO the DS2 DLC has some of the worst.
Overall, I do think that the later ones are better balanced games, but that's part of what makes DS1 a bit fun - there are things that are broken levels of good for the player that would end up tweaked in a patch in DS2/3.
Bloodborne is a generally simpler game though, if faster, and retains a lot of the stronger design elements of the series. Oddly few of the bosses are actually required too. It's easily worth giving a shot even if you've written off the Souls games.
