*blocks your path*

*blocks your path*

I can't even tell what's blocking what path

Dark souls 2 may be bad, but at least its not Bloodborne, one of the easiest games in the history of gaming franchises. Seriously each area following the "chosen hunter" and his excessively buffed weapons from assorted game locations as he fights brainless enemies has been indistinguishable from the last. Aside from the handholding, the game's only consistency is providing you with absolutely retarded, unchallenging enemies and allowing you to run through all of them without any motive to stay in place or fight them throughout the course of the entire game, all to make the difficult feel easy, to make action seem inert.

Perhaps the die was cast when From Software voted to make the game a PS4 exclusive; they made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody. just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for the souls series. Bloodborne might be anti-Christian (or not), but it’s certainly the normalfag game in its refusal of challenge, skill and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.

>a-at least the Dark Souls games were good though
"No!"
The enemies were easy; the bosses were unfairly hard. As I played, I noticed that every time a enemy went for an attack, he spent an unrealistic amount of time telegraphing an attack.

I began marking on the back of an envelope every second the enemy stretched his arm back. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope a several dozen times. I was incredulous. Miyazaki's mind is so governed by outdated game design philosophies that he has no other style of challenge. Later I read a lavish, loving review of Dark Souls by the same Kevin-V from Gamespot. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are playing Bloodborne at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to play Mount and Blade." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you play "Bloodborne" you are, in fact, trained to play Mount and Blade.

I preferred 10 days

Nigga at least get creative, you just copied the Harry Potter copypasta because you are so assblasted

>DS2 has too many humanoid enemies and bosses!
>Please ignore all of the numerous humanoid enemies and bosses in DS3!

Both of you honestly should just shut up right now. At least I've beaten the game you try to defend online, while I know it was too hard for you toddlers

Did you platinum bb in 10 days?

I've beaten it too.

what was your favorite ending? what about weapons?

Yes, why? Did we meet in another thread? I don't remember mentioning that in here

...

Default ending
Logarious wheel

Dark Souls III has a good balance of knight type bosses and monster/mage bosses.
Dark Souls II is 99% big guy with weapon bosses and 1% everything else.

You may have mentioned it before.

>savescum for achievements
Opinion discarded you meta-gaming plebian.

You outed yourself as a massive fucking faggot with your picture, again.

Keep posting this in every Dark Souls thread though, i find it fun triggering you.

I'll give you good taste for wheel.

Would have gotten great taste if you said ayy lmao ending. too bad

Wheel is such a flavor of the month weapon. Almost as bad as stake driver meme players.

The only real weapon is chikage.

I'll use my bloodtinge jutsu chikage okatsu bankai budoken and tear your shitty wheel in half.

Nothin' personnel, kid.

A very tiny pile of rubble.

who /beasthuntersaif/ here?

DaS1 and DaS3 humanoid bosses had interesting movesets and gimmicks that made them feel different from fighting a scale-up version of a normal enemy. DaS2 did not, fighting Lost Sinner, Velstadt, Pursuer, Watcher/Defender, Vendrick, Ruin Sentinels, felt almost exactly like fighting a normal mob with extra HP because their base movesets were so similar. It's all the same side cut - side cut - overhead/stab string plus a running overhead or jumping slash to punish distance. No variety whatsoever. Hell, in SOTFS they actually did just straight-up turn the Pursuer into a normal enemy.

>bosses where were unfairly hard
Hahahahahahahahahahhaha, they where all fair to me, just need to get good

Fuck you.

>savescum for achievements
The different endings for Bloodborne are so shit that I'd be quite disappointed if I did an entire playthrough for each of them, to be honest. Not the guy you quoted, by the way.

Also about Bloodborne, I couldn't find any weapon as OP and fun as the switch axe, which was disappointing. Spin to win all the way through. Kinda killed my desire to do NG+ runs.

>I began marking on the back of an envelope every second the enemy stretched his arm back. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope a several dozen times. I was incredulous. Miyazaki's mind is so governed by outdated game design philosophies that he has no other style of challenge. Later I read a lavish, loving review of Dark Souls by the same Kevin-V from Gamespot. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are playing Bloodborne at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to play Mount and Blade." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you play "Bloodborne" you are, in fact, trained to play Mount and Blade.

this actually made me :thinking:
why did Miyazaki make the same game five times? Does he truly feel like he finished the Souls games?
I also like the Mount and Blade comparison, training a brain to play games a certain way is fascinating to me.

By definition, boss fights should be somewhat unfair. Otherwise they wouldn't be boss fights.

He didn't direct DaS2 and was pretty much forced into directing DaS3.