Extensive Bloodborne versus Dark Souls 3

[Kurf]

So after more than a month of release, Dark Souls 3 has already developed its thriving PVP community and preset Dueling areas. The game is living and there's constant PVP action, albeit the Cooperative play is significantly weak in areas that have low PVP traffic. The game's Online seems to be almost entirely centered around Invasions.
But how does this latest Souls release compare to the highly regarded Bloodborne of 2015?

ONLINE

As mentioned before, Dark Souls 3's PVP community is definitely strong compared to the Cooperative community more focused on farming bosses than helping players through areas. The variation is lackluster however, with players following their favorite metas and shaking their heads at anything not considered "OP", usually revolving around spamming the same attack over and over (see Washing Pole sprint R1).
Bloodborne however swapped the large weapon pool for multipurpose weapons. Instead of seeing weapons in PVP completely limited to their fast moves like Dark Souls 3, Bloodborne's PVP revolved around utilizing the many different attack moves to catch opponents off-guard thanks to the Visceral system and the ability to transform your weapon. The PVP however never caught on as strongly as it seems in Dark Souls 3 due to the massive annoyance of 20 quick-healing items, but healing in Bloodborne is arguably superior to Dark Souls 3, allowing players to punish players for healing in their face with sidearm parries.
WINNER: Dark Souls 3

GAMEPLAY

Bloodborne revolutionized the way Souls players approached encounters by introducing the Transformation and Regain system, which rewarded aggressive players and provided fluidity to combat. The quicker dodge system allowed easier timing of enemy attacks and a more aggressive playstyle, providing very little consequence to pressuring enemies. The way you could seemlessly switch from a weapon's normal state to its transformed mid combat without disrupting the action thanks to a special attack was well received and made fighting more intense and fun. Dark Souls 3 completely ditched a fast combat system for the slower style of Western combat. While there are weapons that benefit aggressiveness, a lack of regain system provides consequences for pressuring enemies and the tedious roll system interrupts fluid fighting as it switches from Bloodbornes long-reaching dodge R1's for short, stunning R1's to stop pursuing foes. The lack of poise in Dark Souls 3 is outrageously laughable when an enemy won't stop swinging and completely stunlocks the player should they get close, not to mention making Ultra weapons and Heavy armor very disadvantageous compared to faster counterparts. The poorly designed Equipment Load system completely locks players out of their favorite sets to combine with a viable build should they wish to comply with the community's preset level Meta. The diversity of armor and weaponry is definitely welcomed, but not when most of it is locked off unless you pump your Vit stat into levels that completely neglect actual stats you use for combat. The defense is also horribly confusing, feeling more like Calculus than a straight-forward system you can jump into and get.
WINNER: Bloodborne

ENVIRONMENT AND LEVEL DESIGN

Face it, when you first warped onto the High Wall and saw the intimidating towers of Lothric Castle, you felt a gulp of saliva audibly travel down your throat. Sadly, that's about the only time in the game that'll actually occur. You'll go to that Castle, but you'll never truly go to that Castle. You'll more just experience 20 minutes of its unfinished interior and be done. When you finish slashing and cutting your way through the High Wall, you'll look back and remember that Lothric and Winged Knight and that'll be it. For the most part, you're just beating up extremely squishy copied and pasted enemies on a linear path to a Bonfire that all and all takes around 30 minutes to do.
Ever since Dark Souls 2, From has steered away from the iconic verticality of Dark Souls and Demon Souls, ditching the appraised spiral design and shortcut routes for tons of Bonfires and a linear pathing that doesn't encourage exploration. It seems all the hardest enemies are placed in the areas you'd figure to explore, allowing for an easier playthrough to be played directly without checking every pathway. The only area that truly felt like a Dark Souls area was the Cathedral, its moving bridges and layered floors truly encouraging exploration.
Bloodborne's levels come right off the bat allowing multiple routes to take on the same encounter. The beautiful aesthetic horror of Central Yharnam is captivating and roaming mobs truly feel surreal. From the burning ruins of Old Yharnam to the run down Fishing Village, Bloodborne's levels are unique at every turn, and rewarding of exploration. Checking the right little turn or figuring out the right puzzle can result in handsome rewards. The constant re-occurance of alternate paths to a large encounter truly make the game enveloped in a sense of finding creative ways to take out groups of enemies. From the very beginning you're met with wide enemy variety from the basic Yharnamites to Brick wielding giants and Werewolves.
WINNER: Bloodborne

LORE AND STORY

Bloodborne strayed from the overused "Life is bad, go kill yourself to make it a little less bad, but it'll get bad again" motto of Dark Souls. In Dark Souls you first awakened in a cell, a knight from Astora soon dropping a key and telling you to make your way out. He was then found later and told you some ancient prophecy that a bunch of stick wiggling nerds told everyone, so clearly you should go fulfill it right? In reality, no Dark Souls game has truly given you a motive to fight for. If you give up, and just sit back, what do you truly lose? That's real life, and the real life sucks. There's no way to make it better, everything you do only makes it worse, from ruining the lives of others to either setting yourself on fire or not paying the electricity bills and leaving the world shrouded in darkness. There's nothing to gain, no reward for winning. Dark Souls also has a horrible tendency of less story equals better lore. While the grand collective theorist community is great and the imagination driving lore makes for personal head canons, the severe lack of anything in Dark Souls 3 is just plain lazy. From the very beginning of Dark Souls, you learned there's a curse and the first flame is dying, so you must go re-ignite it that way you can go visit your favorite merchant without being stabbed to death by Undead goons. Then in Dark Souls 2, some lady in a dress told you to go kill some poor war veterans, and you did, and then you sat in a stone chair and presumably died. So how did Dark Souls 3 decide to take the route? Well you woke up from a grave because the flame was going out again. Then you killed some guy who commited seppuku and walked into a Demon's Souls copy of the Hub. Surely this Firekeeper will finally give you a motive, something to fight for, something to keep hope. Nope, just says go reignite the flame. It feels less like you're a person and more like you're just some electrician who gets called to the same retirement home over and over.
Bloodborne is the polar opposite of Dark Souls, offering story and lore at every corner. In the very beginning you can clearly figure out from dialogue and descriptions that the Cathedral experiments with blood and so on and so forth and they goofed up and it all went wrong. Not to mention the crazy mind boggling theories of what is real and what is not with the whole Insight business gives the community more extensive arguments over story. The motive is also very clear, escape this Nightmare. Unlike Dark Souls, what you do actually makes the world a better place, or at least the world you're in. You're fighting through all these monstrous foes and far from innocent bosses so that you can escape this horrible nightmare and reawaken in peace. You have reason to keep going, knowing that soon enough it'll all get better.
WINNER: Bloodborne

TL;DR: Dark Souls 3 is alive PVP wise, but Bloodborne has more aggressive combat and an accessible story along with better enemies and areas.

[Kaizen]

And, most importantly, and no idea how I forgot to add it before... 30 fps.
That's completely unacceptable and just can't deal with it under any circumstance.

I also happen to like DS2 a lot, same as Souls 1 and Demon's. ( We need Demon's on PC )
BB just isn't Souls and I can't accept it as part of the franchise, which thankfully, it really isn't.

[Jaxar]

Publicado originalmente por Gameo:

Bloodborne has: something like 3 sets of armor, a small handful of weapons, stupid victorian setting, strays from the Souls fomula, feels like a fast paced action game, virtually no PvP,.. and guns

No thanks.

From your description, it honestly sounds like you've never actually played BB, more likely just seen a few gameplay videos.

[Kaizen]

Publicado originalmente por Jaxar:

Publicado originalmente por Gameo:

Bloodborne has: something like 3 sets of armor, a small handful of weapons, stupid victorian setting, strays from the Souls fomula, feels like a fast paced action game, virtually no PvP,.. and guns

No thanks.

From your description, it honestly sounds like you've never actually played BB, more likely just seen a few gameplay videos.

Don't really know what to tell you then, played it.

[Kurf]

Publicado originalmente por Gameo:

Publicado originalmente por Jaxar:

From your description, it honestly sounds like you've never actually played BB, more likely just seen a few gameplay videos.

Don't really know what to tell you then, played it.

Something tells me you didn't get far because you complain about the fast paced action and since there's hours on hours of it, I don't know how you would have made it through. But I don't want this discussion to get into salty nonsensical name-calling.
Your opinion on the action speed is your opinion and no amount of "You're not good enough!" is going to change anyone's mind on the speed, or lack thereof in Dark Souls 3.

[Lugez]

Publicado originalmente por Jaxar:

Publicado originalmente por Gameo:

Bloodborne has: something like 3 sets of armor, a small handful of weapons, stupid victorian setting, strays from the Souls fomula, feels like a fast paced action game, virtually no PvP,.. and guns

No thanks.

From your description, it honestly sounds like you've never actually played BB, more likely just seen a few gameplay videos.

either that, or he expected BB to be a complete Souls copycat.

i personally found the PvP fine. it's just everyone coming from Souls expected honor/no healing duels. they ignore the fact that healing was central to the combat system. the bell maidens were kinda bad though.

[Kaizen]

Who said anything about being good?
I had a small amount of trouble with one boss, he was in a graveyard. Aside form that it was shoot something, crit them, move on to the next..
I did not beat Bloodborne, my cousin owns it, play it at his place from time to time, but I can't tolerate the 30fps it makes me sick to my stomach.
So, I just don't really care for it.

[Agent Orange]

Publicado originalmente por I N T E N S E C H U G G I N G:

Publicado originalmente por stompie5:

B...but you declared bloodborne the winner 3 out of 4 categories :O

I still have faith that From will get it together and balance the gameplay. In my opinion it's significantly worse than Bloodborne in its current state, but with improvement it could become a more stylized game. In Bloodborne, playstyles weren't as varied because everyone dodged at the same speed and everyone pistol spammed or became cauliflower man. Dark Souls 3 has potential because you have Dex builds, Str builds, Magic builds, Tanks, and Glass Cannon dragon boyos. It's just that 99% of playstyles currently aren't viable because of the "Meta". The only metas I recall in Bloodborne was the Cannon and Rifle spear which were both swiftly balanced, unlike From's current take on Dark Souls 3.

So... just a long way of saying you think Bloodborne was much better than dark souls 3, but you hope that Fromsoft will get its ♥♥♥♥ together and make america great again?

(I'm going to be entirely honest, I feel bloodbornes gameplay, as well as level design was much more repetitive than the new installation of the souls series. Also, Bloodborne had lore? It didn't show it at all. In the end, I can honestly gaurantee your accusations here had been purely based off of opinion alone.)

[Roland of Gilead]

I wouldn't go so far as to say bloodborne is better, but it was certainly more fresh and new then dark souls 3 is. Theres things i love about both games, in the end i think dark souls 3 is better, but only by a little bit.

[Roland of Gilead]

Publicado originalmente por Not the Illuminati (Trust me):

Publicado originalmente por I N T E N S E C H U G G I N G:

I still have faith that From will get it together and balance the gameplay. In my opinion it's significantly worse than Bloodborne in its current state, but with improvement it could become a more stylized game. In Bloodborne, playstyles weren't as varied because everyone dodged at the same speed and everyone pistol spammed or became cauliflower man. Dark Souls 3 has potential because you have Dex builds, Str builds, Magic builds, Tanks, and Glass Cannon dragon boyos. It's just that 99% of playstyles currently aren't viable because of the "Meta". The only metas I recall in Bloodborne was the Cannon and Rifle spear which were both swiftly balanced, unlike From's current take on Dark Souls 3.

So... just a long way of saying you think Bloodborne was much better than dark souls 3, but you hope that Fromsoft will get its ♥♥♥♥ together and make america great again?

(I'm going to be entirely honest, I feel bloodbornes gameplay, as well as level design was much more repetitive than the new installation of the souls series. Also, Bloodborne had lore? It didn't show it at all. In the end, I can honestly gaurantee your accusations here had been purely based off of opinion alone.)

Sounds like someone was too lazy to look for lore. It has a deeper and probably more interesting story then ds3 imo.

[Kurf]

Publicado originalmente por Not the Illuminati (Trust me):

Publicado originalmente por I N T E N S E C H U G G I N G:

I still have faith that From will get it together and balance the gameplay. In my opinion it's significantly worse than Bloodborne in its current state, but with improvement it could become a more stylized game. In Bloodborne, playstyles weren't as varied because everyone dodged at the same speed and everyone pistol spammed or became cauliflower man. Dark Souls 3 has potential because you have Dex builds, Str builds, Magic builds, Tanks, and Glass Cannon dragon boyos. It's just that 99% of playstyles currently aren't viable because of the "Meta". The only metas I recall in Bloodborne was the Cannon and Rifle spear which were both swiftly balanced, unlike From's current take on Dark Souls 3.

So... just a long way of saying you think Bloodborne was much better than dark souls 3, but you hope that Fromsoft will get its ♥♥♥♥ together and make america great again?

(I'm going to be entirely honest, I feel bloodbornes gameplay, as well as level design was much more repetitive than the new installation of the souls series. Also, Bloodborne had lore? It didn't show it at all. In the end, I can honestly gaurantee your accusations here had been purely based off of opinion alone.)

Well the fact that I spent 42 hours on Bloodborne and over 100 on Dark Souls 3 probably shows that no, I don't have bias. The only thing I'm saying is Dark Souls 3 has more PVP potential, or at least playstyle potential, but at the moment it's not being exploited because From is too lazy to patch anything. With Bloodborne though, I felt it was too NON-repetitive, I would get used to Central Yharnam and then be thrusted in to the puzzling maze of Old Yharnam against fast Poison enemies before being thrusted into an open ended neighborhood.
If you didn't know Bloodborne had lore, then I don't know what the hell you were doing. Every NPC you talked to had more lore in their dialogue than an entire Dark Souls game. If you're accusing me of being biased in any way towards Bloodborne, I've stated already I like Dark Souls 3 more because it fits me but I like Bloodborne's story and area design more.
I mean dude you have no idea how disappointed I was with the size of Anor Londo.

[Roland of Gilead]

Also OP if you talk about bloodborne on the steam forums then people will just ♥♥♥♥ on it. Reddit is the much better option because the people are more mature.

[Kaizen]

I will say that Souls 3 feels like a thrown together recycle of previous game, but in general Bloodborne has nothing on Souls.
Demon's is still top notch, too bad I can't deal with playing it anymore (thanks for nothing, Sony)
Dark souls 1 still has the best world layout and atmosphere of the franchise and some of the best bosses, DS2 has some of the nicer mechanics and best PvP, and 3 is just kind of a mix of everything in one game.

[Kurf]

Publicado originalmente por Knight Artorias:

Also OP if you talk about bloodborne on the steam forums then people will just ♥♥♥♥ on it. Reddit is the much better option because the people are more mature.

Yeah people ♥♥♥♥ on it because most everyone in Steam forums are elitists fatsos still passing their Algebra I exam, but hey, you never know when you get the couple of gems in the mud.

Publicado originalmente por Gameo:

I will say that Souls 3 feels like a thrown together recycle of previous game, but in general Bloodborne has nothing on Souls.
Demon's is still top notch, too bad I can't deal with playing it anymore (thanks for nothing, Sony)
Dark souls 1 still has the best world layout and atmosphere of the franchise and some of the best bosses, DS2 has some of the nicer mechanics and best PvP, and 3 is just kind of a mix of everything in one game.

Of course Bloodborne will never recreate my feelings for Dark Souls and Demon Souls, but you seriously can't stress that first part enough.
Dark Souls 3 is more fan service than game.

[odinigh]

Publicado originalmente por Gameo:

I will say that Souls 3 feels like a thrown together recycle of previous game, but in general Bloodborne has nothing on Souls.

Except it was created by the same people with the same director and it is very similar.
Like, wtf?
It's the same series.
It's why people are says SoulsBorne all the time.
It's why Miyazaki supposedly didn't work on Dark Souls 2.
(Though saying he had nothing to do with it would be a lie.)

[Jaxar]

Publicado originalmente por Gameo:

I did not beat Bloodborne, my cousin owns it, play it at his place from time to time

OK this makes sense. Your comment of "stupid victorian setting" made it sound like you had either not played it, or played very little of it as anyone who has played it to completion knows that the theme of the game changes heavily after a few hours in.