Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
As for bosses ... eh. They're okay. In some ways they feel a little half-baked and RnGish, but not in a really fatal way or anything so it makes them feel anticlimactic once you're over the art (which is, hands down, the best thing about this game) even once you beat them. Good example of this is the Covenant boss, when her second hand comes up it gets a little RnG with them both just acting like the one hand phase, only random attacks between them both, rather than having both hands work together in a way that feels like a legit second phase. Sort of lazy, in other words.
I feel like the best comparison is to any of the earlier Adult Swim games, that's what it feels like to me. Where the art direction and everything is exceptional but the game mechanics themselves are secondary to that, and maybe needed slightly more time to cook.
If you're looking for a Souls-like in terms of challenge, rather than mechanics, you probably won't find it here.
I bought it because of the animation, but all the cutscenes you see in the trailers are basically what's in the game minus the ending content. Most of the enemy sprites are well-animated, but very little variety and you start seeing reskins later on. The ending content is not much better, I'm afraid. The art style reminds me a bit of classic Psygnosis games, which is twisted and surreal.
The plot / storyline is pretty dumb and boring. Unlike souls, you never fight any NPCs you've talked to, and there doesn't appear to be any shockingly fun stuff like mimics, giant boulders, life sucking vases, etc., It is all just spikes, bottomless pits, and lava.
If you're looking for a truly "souls-like" platformer, this won't cut it. If you're looking for a slightly more difficult metroidvania, then maybe this is for you.
There's not even really a direct means to move faster in this game that I'm aware of, only indirectly through chain dashing with a couple "toes" equipped to make the cooldown between dashes shorter, as well as a longer dash. Outside of that...exploration is more optional, simplified, and tends to be a little "meh" for lack of a better word because it's slow-paced but full of instant death with a splash of somewhat simple combat (combat is pretty good, but definitely secondary outside of bosses). And the instant death is primarily platform related (with enemies placed to help with that by knocking you into pits) - things like environmental damage don't really do enough damage to matter.
This game sits in this weird void between Metroidvania and Souls, and serves to exemplify the differences between both similar genres by not quite reaching either one itself. It's odd. It's not bad just...not quite there either, but the art is incredible. Enough to make me look forward to their next game, but this one is very mixed for me. There's enough to like though that it'll find its niche. I like it a little better than my own first impressions of it as well.
Also this - I mean the simplest solution would be to be required to press jump again on an edge in order to grab it. Or just to have your attack do it like it does to certain walls. But instead they made it automatic, and then introduce areas you have to descend made of floating platforms that are so close together you accidentally grab nearly every one in the way down.
Edit : Worth noting I'm about 80% of the way through it - haven't beaten it yet but at this point it's a bit late for my first playthrough feelings to change I think. I'm still curious what a second run through will feel like when I'm done with this one.
That applies to both Souls and Metroidvanias. SotN had many one-way doors that you could only unlock from one side without requiring a special ability to do so. Tomb Raider (not a Souls game) had similar "shortcut" gates as well. Games were already doing this before the first Souls came out.
Hypocrite much?
The game is closer to a Metroidvania than a Souls game, imho. With the exception of Dark Souls 3, most of the Souls games were unique in how advancement and death worked. In Dark Souls 1 & 2, when you died, you lost all your souls and some humanity requiring you to return to the point where you died in order to recover them. This game has some similarities in that respect in that you do lose something (max FP & tears gain) but not nearly as severe. You have a gauntlet to go through to get to the next save point (bonfire/altar), but you acquire boosts to HP, FP, etc., by finding items / objects just as you would in a metroidvania. There are special items only accessible through the acquisition of other special abilities / items whereas most Souls games don't have anything like that at all. (Just weapons, armor, and key items.) -- Do note that there are no varieties of weapon and armor and thus the game lacks the "fashion" aspect most people crave with Dark Souls.
About the only other thing that is Souls-like about this game is how enemies only respawn whenever you pray at an altar (bonfire). Unlike Souls, however, activating an altar (bonfire) will cause all the enemies to respawn. (In DS, you can activate a bonfire without sitting at it and enemies will not respawn)
So yeah, not hard, but very fair, honestly the closest thing to this is Castlevania 4 on the Snes, even the sounds of it reminds me of it, and the palette too.
I'm sorry, but the reality is that your reading comprehension is clearly stunted somehow. I'll underline to help you understand better, since you are clearly inept in this capacity.
You cannot argue similarities between games simply based on the sum of all individual parts if those said individual parts are not similar at all. These are the only individual parts that are similar to Dark Souls:
- Enemies respawn when you activate a save point.
- You gain a resource that can be spent. (not Lv/XP)
That's it. While your initial post claimed:Which is not even remotely close to the truth. Anyone who has played the game will already conclude how full of ♥♥♥♥ you really are and that you have only really succeeded making a complete fool of yourself. I can already list way more similarities:
Gated shortcuts are predominant in both genres.
But what is the point, right? You'll just write another massive paragraph about how I have "tunnel vision" and making what you call "semantical justifications". You're like a last-gen troll that snuck out from under the ♥♥♥♥-hole bridge that likes to excuse anyone else's arguments as "semantics" because you just learned the word and figured it will gray up enough of your faulty points that you can disguise what is nothing more than pathetic trolling anyway.
Do you even know what "semantics" means exactly? Or did someone use that word once and you figured you could use it to justify all the condescending trash that you post?
I'll give you a hint: It doesn't excuse every comparison made between these two games that I have made. And those comparisons are significant, whether you choose to acknowledge them or not simply because you think you have a "broader" (r*tarded) or more "contextual" (deranged) view. But because you're so dismissive of those semantics, you've completely lost what the big picture is, and that's that this game is only a distant comparison to Souls games.
But many aspects of a Metroidvania is exploration and shortcut gates scattered throughout a massive interconnected map. Souls maps have no "zoning" between areas other than some situations where a bird flies you to a remote area or something. For the most part, it was one seemless world.
Honestly to me what made DS stand out, the first one mostly, was how well connected everything was in like, perspective, it really dosent usually feels like you just teleported from one enviroment to another, it feels like a lived in place, and it's something that its sequels never really got super right, but also, i think its cause the first one isnt actually that giant of a game, 2 and 3 went a bit bigger, not sure about Bloodborne, never owned a ps4, and Sekiro was more like the third one too (I know people hate when people say Sekiro is a Souls, but, it's a souls)
IM NOT saying i dont like the other ones, i'm just saying that DS1 had that thing that the others never really managed to reach mapwise, they all have cool things on their own;