I'm downloading a patch right now, although the download is behaving really strangely. It keeps stopping and starting and is maxing out at 25% of normal speed.
Fextralife has their boss guides up. A robust 4 bosses, more than making up for the anemic amount in the Ashes DLC, and further proof that this should have simply been released as one large package, as it would have then rivaled and even surpassed The Old Hunters, Crown Trilogy, or Artorias. It's simply a matter of perception. And this IS a continuation of the first DLC's story, very directly.
The way you access this area though is profoundly lazy. A bonfire spawns a few feet from the post-boss bonfires at either the Kiln or the site of the Sister Freide battle, to grant access. Putting in some sort of object, or touching a statue or tree or ANYTHING would be better. I still think the bonfire placement in Dark Souls 3 (outside of the fantastic Cathedral of the Deep) is FAR worse than the much maligned Dark Souls 2 placement. This cements that theory permanently.
Ok, so....after watching some Let's Plays by some top streamers tonight, I've discerned what I think is the main thrust of the end of the story here:
The Ringed City is the home of the Pygmies, the progenitors of humanity. We've known this for awhile, but it also seems a woman resides here, she's the woman with the cracked shell, Filianore. The covenant here, indeed EVERYTHING in the Ringed City is protecting her. The shell is somewhat cracked already (more on this in a bit), but when you finally reach her, it crumbles completely and she wakes, a flash of light emits from her, and when it fades, she is a rotted corpse and the entire city, and, indeed, the entire world is simply covered in Ash. Outside is a wasteland, with Lordran, Drangleic, and Lothric all ruins on the horizon of a vast sea of grey. Pygmy lords are crawling their hands and knees begging for the now dead Filianore to help them, as someone has arrived and is consuming their souls, Slave Knight Gael, the man who sent you into the painting.
My thought is very much that Gael is a Gollum-like creature. He got this far by deviousness and wit, and it is likely his entrance to the wasteland was what caused the first crack in the shell, with yours destroying what appears to be an illusion entirely. Filianore seems to be serving the same sort of purpose Rom did in Bloodborne. She is essentially a Dreamcatcher, and while you can't say the Ringed City is entirely an illusion, it also ceases to exist when she wakes.
You come upon Gael who is literally eating the remains of the remaining pygmies, consuming their portion of the Dark Soul found by the Furtive Pygmy so long ago. He, after all, still wants it for his lady's painting. Gael essentially becomes an abomination, a hybrid of Artorias (obvious references here) and Orphan of Kos. And you battle him in an Ash swept wasteland until you claim the blood of the Dark Soul, which is all that is left.
You return to the painting, and the girl thanks you. She will now paint the new world, and it will be named after you. And....that's the end. The cycle may be ended, but life will carry on in the new Painted World regardless of what happens in the real world. But what the hell is the real world?? If this is the case, has this ALL been a painting the whole time?? Is EVERYTHING a painting?? As Filianore's slumber proves, is anything real at all but an Ash covered wasteland?? Likely not, and that the painting is simply an escape from a dying world. But a famous 80s prime-time soap opera called "Dallas" asked the question for an entire season of "who shot JR??" And in the end, no one had shot JR, it had all been a dream. It was considered one of the biggest cop outs in TV history. This ending actually worked really well in Monkey Island 2. But here, I just don't know. The locations and boss fights as sights and sounds in this DLC are simply breathtaking. But does any of this make a lick of sense, or are we just forever left with 100s of unanswered (and unanswerable) questions??
Edit: This is perhaps the most telling item description in any of the games:
For the pygmies, who took the dark soul, the Great Lord gifted the Ringed City, an isolated place at world's end, and his beloved youngest daughter, promising her that he would come for her when the day came.
Filianore is Gywn's youngest daughter (wasn't aware he had another daughter, but ok). The Pygmies held the burden of the Dark Soul, and Gywn gifted them a home and his daughter to watch over them. Clearly Gwyn never predicted his own downfall, and Filianore rested in eternal slumber until.....well, until today. And in the end, the only person who gets out of this without so much as a scratch remains.....Gwynevere. Forever lost to time.
So the Dark Sign is essentially a seal of fire against the corruption of the abyss. Gwyn recognized the threat of the Dark Soul and tried to contain those who had it in them by granting them a kingdom at the end of the world, along with his daughter and a whole honor guard dedicated to protecting her.
Ahh dark souls, i spent many hours on this series.
Miyazaki is more gifted in creating new worlds then extending it, It was kind of obvious that Dark Souls 1 was intended to be a singular complete game, the subsequent games have only really awkwardly extended the lore.
I would say that the influence of Bloodborne onto Dark souls 3 is a bit of a mixed bag, Dark Souls combat was designed to be slower-paced and doesn't feel the same with Bloodborne style combat.
@vanatos For me DS3 combat feels great except some stamina costs like ultracheap rolls and too expensive heavy weapons (I haven't tested the newest patch).
Ahh dark souls, i spent many hours on this series.
Miyazaki is more gifted in creating new worlds then extending it, It was kind of obvious that Dark Souls 1 was intended to be a singular complete game, the subsequent games have only really awkwardly extended the lore.
I would say that the influence of Bloodborne onto Dark souls 3 is a bit of a mixed bag, Dark Souls combat was designed to be slower-paced and doesn't feel the same with Bloodborne style combat.
We disagree on nearly everything on politics but I'm right in line with you on Dark Souls. There is no way to say Dark Souls 3 is BAD (it's very good), but it is too fast. I feel like Dark Souls 2 still works though (playing alot of it right now actually) because it only relies on the lore from the first game so much as to give you a reference point. It's clear aeons have passed since the events of the almost mythological first game, and no one really knows anything about Gwyn, or the First Flame, at least outside of Aldia. The bosses that have the 4 great souls likely don't have much of a clue as to where they came from, or even how they got them. I kind of respect Dark Souls 2 for having the balls to make it's own story and framework rather than plopping down fan service from the sky every 5 feet in Dark Souls 3.
For the record, I like the general content I've seen of The Ringed City, especially the finale, which I think is fitting and as good an ending as anything. I just feel like Miyazaki never intended to make this game, and they just threw stuff at the wall to see what would stick. That's why, as much as in many ways it would be awesome, Bloodborne SHOULD NOT get a sequel. It's a singular experience that can't really benefit from anymore elaboration.
Also (and this isn't really a spoiler) but after seeing this DLC, I no longer believe that the Furtive Pygmy is actually a singular being like Nito, Gwyn or the Witch. When they are saying "the furtive pygmy" I believe it is more in the vein of describing a entire species, sort of like saying "Alaskan salmon".
@FinneousPJ@jjstraka34 Yeh in DS1 the main things that needed tweaking was backstabs being so ridiculously easy and powerful and of course the magic system.
Ninja-flipping heavy armor knights just seems a bit immersion breaking and theres no more weight in combat because of that.
And i agree that now i don't want a bloodborne sequel, I LOVE bloodborne and i'm eagerly waiting for the Design Works of Bloodborne to be released in English. I have the Dark Souls one.
I do hope though that if Miyazaki makes another great game with great lore, he plans on a far more expansive lore that can be explored across multiple sequels.
@FinneousPJ@jjstraka34 Yeh in DS1 the main things that needed tweaking was backstabs being so ridiculously easy and powerful and of course the magic system.
Ninja-flipping heavy armor knights just seems a bit immersion breaking and theres no more weight in combat because of that.
And i agree that now i don't want a bloodborne sequel, I LOVE bloodborne and i'm eagerly waiting for the Design Works of Bloodborne to be released in English. I have the Dark Souls one.
I do hope though that if Miyazaki makes another great game with great lore, he plans on a far more expansive lore that can be explored across multiple sequels.
That is generally best for any type of fiction that goes on for a multi-part arc. For instance, Breaking Bad was clearly planned out from the beginning, it had a story it wanted to tell and stopped when it was over. On the flip-side, you have The Walking Dead, which is flailing because it's just continuing because it gets good ratings, and any sense of actual narrative has been completely lost. Bloodborne is the single best example of Lovecraftian fiction I've seen outside the printed word, except for maybe "Alien" or "The Thing".
So yesterday I played for about 6.5 hours. I beat two bosses and found a couple of secrets. I reached the final boss but didn't find the optional boss yet. I didn't beat the final boss yet either. I'm quite certain I missed some stuff, so today I will be revisiting areas and trying to find the optional boss. There is certainly a lot to see and do here, and the ride's been amazing so far.
That is generally best for any type of fiction that goes on for a multi-part arc. For instance, Breaking Bad was clearly planned out from the beginning, it had a story it wanted to tell and stopped when it was over. On the flip-side, you have The Walking Dead, which is flailing because it's just continuing because it gets good ratings, and any sense of actual narrative has been completely lost. Bloodborne is the single best example of Lovecraftian fiction I've seen outside the printed word, except for maybe "Alien" or "The Thing".
The Walking Dead is still giving us the stories previously printed in the comic. Soooo the flaws aren't so much that it's run so long that they don't know what to do. The problem is that the stories from the comic aren't that great anymore.
That is generally best for any type of fiction that goes on for a multi-part arc. For instance, Breaking Bad was clearly planned out from the beginning, it had a story it wanted to tell and stopped when it was over. On the flip-side, you have The Walking Dead, which is flailing because it's just continuing because it gets good ratings, and any sense of actual narrative has been completely lost. Bloodborne is the single best example of Lovecraftian fiction I've seen outside the printed word, except for maybe "Alien" or "The Thing".
The Walking Dead is still giving us the stories previously printed in the comic. Soooo the flaws aren't so much that it's run so long that they don't know what to do. The problem is that the stories from the comic aren't that great anymore.
I can't even begin to tell you how horrible this season has been in my book (so much so that I'm just itching for it to be over so I can start watching the surprisingly phenomenal "Better Call Saul" instead. The main problem is that they've lost all sense of narrative direction. If you have a couple of favorite characters, odds are that in 8 weeks of episodes, you might see them for 35 minutes. Branching every character into individual stories has destroyed the entire pacing of the show. Jeffrey Dean Morgan is a fine actor, but he has been given NOTHING to do with Negan except chew the same scenery ever time he is on screen. If I hadn't already invested 5 seasons into this show, I'd just flat-out stop watching.
So yesterday I played for about 6.5 hours. I beat two bosses and found a couple of secrets. I reached the final boss but didn't find the optional boss yet. I didn't beat the final boss yet either. I'm quite certain I missed some stuff, so today I will be revisiting areas and trying to find the optional boss. There is certainly a lot to see and do here, and the ride's been amazing so far.
Well, it IS hidden, at least as well as, say, the Stray Demon from the first game. There is both a trigger and you also have to then find the way to get there. It's not inconceivable you'd have to use a Wiki. Completing Lapp's quest is even more obtuse. Vaati's got a video of 10 things you might have missed, and both are in there, though I'm guessing you want to discover them on your own if possible.
Thinking of Dark Souls I. Thinking of playing a sorcerer. Thinking I might go down to get the great scythe before Blighttown and make it enchanted +5 (farm the oozes for green titanite, the golems for blue titanite) before going there. Wondering if I should switch out for the moonlight butterfly spear or the moonlight greatsword once I get that far. Or stick with the enchanted great scythe.
Thinking of Dark Souls I. Thinking of playing a sorcerer. Thinking I might go down to get the great scythe before Blighttown and make it enchanted +5 (farm the oozes for green titanite, the golems for blue titanite) before going there. Wondering if I should switch out for the moonlight butterfly spear or the moonlight greatsword once I get that far. Or stick with the enchanted great scythe.
I've yet to do a Sorcerer in classic (simply because I've made it a point that one day I will beat every boss in these games melee-only while solo, I'm slowly getting past the 50% mark). Unlike in 2, I believe it starts out pretty strong.
Some more ruminations I why I think, as a sequel, Dark Souls 2 handles the callbacks to the original much better. Drangleic exists what is clearly aeons in the future from the events of the first game. Outside of Aldia, no one has any clue about Gwyn, or the fight against the Dragons, or even, it seems, the first flame. If you've read the Wheel of Time book series, you'll remember the tag line "The Wheel of Time turns, and Ages come and pass, leaving memories that become legend. Legend fades to myth, and even myth is long forgotten when the Age that gave it birth comes again." That is what has happened in Dark Souls 2. No one is cosplaying as Artorias in Farron Keep or dressing up like Big Hat Logan wielding crystal magic. because no one actually knows anything about them.
The 4 great souls are held by beings that almost came upon them incidentally. The Rotten isn't the Lord of the Grave, it's just what happened when so many things got thrown away into The Gutter. The Duke's Dear Freja is simply in the grand tradition of Shelob. Who knows how long she has been there, or what beings have let her be for how long for their own purposes. The Lost Sinner is, again, just someone who couldn't handle coming into contact with soul of The Witch of Izalith. And the Old Iron King was simply a bad king who was easily corruptible. The point being, all these beings are relatively pathetic when it comes down to comparisons to the the respective Souls they carry. And that is by design. Because even the name Lordran was been lost to time. YOU as the player recognize some things, but that has nothing to do with what is going on in the game world.
Dark Souls 3 doesn't really have a story at all. It's "converging lands" theme is simply a mechanism to drop parts of Dark Souls 1 wherever it feels like it. No effort is really made to explain why a Black Knight would be hanging out in the Road of Sacrifices, why Anor Londo is melded onto the back of Irithyll, or why Andre would just be sitting in this Shrine along with a Handmaiden from 2.
By the way, if no one noticed before, besides gameplay mechanics, there is a perfectly logical lore explanation for why you can warp between bonfires at the start of the game. In the basement of the Majula mansion, you can clearly see the broken shards of the Lord Vessel.
Thinking of Dark Souls I. Thinking of playing a sorcerer. Thinking I might go down to get the great scythe before Blighttown and make it enchanted +5 (farm the oozes for green titanite, the golems for blue titanite) before going there. Wondering if I should switch out for the moonlight butterfly spear or the moonlight greatsword once I get that far. Or stick with the enchanted great scythe.
I've yet to do a Sorcerer in classic (simply because I've made it a point that one day I will beat every boss in these games melee-only while solo, I'm slowly getting past the 50% mark). Unlike in 2, I believe it starts out pretty strong.
I just love playing spellcasters. I have noticed that magic is pretty powerful in Dark Souls, although that's not why I like doing it.
Dark Souls II seems harder to me because it's Scholar of the First Sin and there's greater enemy density, at least early on. I had better success with melee.
Thinking of Dark Souls I. Thinking of playing a sorcerer. Thinking I might go down to get the great scythe before Blighttown and make it enchanted +5 (farm the oozes for green titanite, the golems for blue titanite) before going there. Wondering if I should switch out for the moonlight butterfly spear or the moonlight greatsword once I get that far. Or stick with the enchanted great scythe.
I've yet to do a Sorcerer in classic (simply because I've made it a point that one day I will beat every boss in these games melee-only while solo, I'm slowly getting past the 50% mark). Unlike in 2, I believe it starts out pretty strong.
I just love playing spellcasters. I have noticed that magic is pretty powerful in Dark Souls, although that's not why I like doing it.
Dark Souls II seems harder to me because it's Scholar of the First Sin and there's greater enemy density, at least early on. I had better success with melee.
Scholar is harder in general (for the most part, there are select portions where it is easier), but yes, starting out as anything other than a melee fighter who can take some hits is rough going until you get some levels. Plus, it's very hard to sacrifice either Vitality, Endurance or Adaptabily for what you need, which is Intelligence and Attunement. Melee fighters can get by without much scaling in from Strength or Dex because of upgrades for most of NG, whereas you need investment as a spellcaster. Clerics are also MUCH better offensively than in 1.
That's another reason why Scholar is my favorite in the series. The sheer amount of builds rivals almost something like Diablo 2, the ways you are given to manipulate your own gameplay through Bonfire Aesetics, the amount of weapons and builds and infusions that can be put on all of them. I defend it so much because I think it's unfairly maligned to the point of being absurd. I'd compare the first two games to two Zeppelin albums: IV and III. IV is Dark Souls. It's obviously the more important album, it stands like a monolith on it's own, and exists as a singular experience that can't be bettered. III is Scholar of the First Sin. It's different, varied, quirky, goes out on a limb. And it's what I'd rather listen to 75% of the time.
@jjstraka34 I totally agree that Dark Souls II is unfairly maligned. I think sometimes it gets harsher criticism than it deserves because Miyazaki didn't work on it. I mean there are also a lot of valid criticisms (why so many bosses who are guys in armor?) too, so I'm not trying to say it's perfect. I just think it's better than consensus tends to indicate.
@jjstraka34 I totally agree that Dark Souls II is unfairly maligned. I think sometimes it gets harsher criticism than it deserves because Miyazaki didn't work on it. I mean there are also a lot of valid criticisms (why so many bosses who are guys in armor?) too, so I'm not trying to say it's perfect. I just think it's better than consensus tends to indicate.
I'd definitely say the boss fights suffer in stature compared to 3, and they don't have the nostalgia of the first game. I think the only genuinely horrible one is the Covetous Demon because it's so easy it's nearly pointless to even include it. But Dark Souls 1 has more than a handful of awful bosses on it's own. The Capra Demon, Ceaseless Discharge, and no less than 3 Asylum Demons come to mind.
It's one of my favorite things about the game. For my money, the best player in the world right now (PvE-wise) is a guy on Youtube named Faraaz Khan. He has already done flawless SL1 kills of all the DLC bosses, where one hit would be guaranteed death. Check out his channel:
@jjstraka34 I totally agree that Dark Souls II is unfairly maligned. I think sometimes it gets harsher criticism than it deserves because Miyazaki didn't work on it. I mean there are also a lot of valid criticisms (why so many bosses who are guys in armor?) too, so I'm not trying to say it's perfect. I just think it's better than consensus tends to indicate.
I'd definitely say the boss fights suffer in stature compared to 3, and they don't have the nostalgia of the first game. I think the only genuinely horrible one is the Covetous Demon because it's so easy it's nearly pointless to even include it. But Dark Souls 1 has more than a handful of awful bosses on it's own. The Capra Demon, Ceaseless Discharge, and no less than 3 Asylum Demons come to mind.
Well I was more talking about the visuals. Like, Moonlight Butterfly is otherworldly, the Gaping Dragon is actually kind of scary, and Seath is just plain weird. Dark Souls II doesn't really go very far outside of a rather limited palette. That's basically my only criticism and doesn't really reflect on the overall quality of each boss fight.
@jjstraka34 I totally agree that Dark Souls II is unfairly maligned. I think sometimes it gets harsher criticism than it deserves because Miyazaki didn't work on it. I mean there are also a lot of valid criticisms (why so many bosses who are guys in armor?) too, so I'm not trying to say it's perfect. I just think it's better than consensus tends to indicate.
I'd definitely say the boss fights suffer in stature compared to 3, and they don't have the nostalgia of the first game. I think the only genuinely horrible one is the Covetous Demon because it's so easy it's nearly pointless to even include it. But Dark Souls 1 has more than a handful of awful bosses on it's own. The Capra Demon, Ceaseless Discharge, and no less than 3 Asylum Demons come to mind.
Well I was more talking about the visuals. Like, Moonlight Butterfly is otherworldly, the Gaping Dragon is actually kind of scary, and Seath is just plain weird. Dark Souls II doesn't really go very far outside of a rather limited palette. That's basically my only criticism and doesn't really reflect on the overall quality of each boss fight.
I think Moonlight Butterfly gets most of it's atmosphere from the music and how slowly it moves at the same time. The fight itself (like alot of them in Dark Souls) is really quite weak, but it's hard not to enjoy it all the same. Same thing with the Gaping Dragon, it looks intimidating, but once you learn to bait it's crawl attack, it becomes harder to GET hit than not get hit.
Dark Souls 2 doesn't have any big set pieces (which is what we'll call visuals). Dark Souls 3 is untouchable in this department. Even fairly benign ideas like the Crystal Sage or Deacons of the Deep are presented in such a cinematic grandeur that it's hard to hate any of them. Same thing with the Curse-Rotted Greatwood. Alot of people think it's trash, but it's probably one of my favorite fights in the series. Again, Dark Souls 2 doesn't have these set pieces (Last Giant maybe), at least up until the DLC. There are alot of humanoids, and even the ones that aren't don't really have much too them. But I half expect this (like alot of things about Dark Souls 2) was by design. I think the world of Drangleic is SUPPOSED to feel less impressive than Lordran.
Yeah, both the butterfly and Gaping Dragon are easy fights. I can think of several other bosses in Dark Souls III (as you mentioned) and Bloodborne as well.
If they set out to make Drangleic less impressive, that's fine. I mean my criticism of the boss design is relatively minor given the fact that DSII is a good game.
One very interesting thing that I think lends a little credence to my theory about Dark Souls 2 (even though Miyazaki wasn't director) is what he himself said after Artorias of the Abyss was released. He was asked why there seemed to be such an inconsistency to what was said about Artorias in the main game and what ended up happening in the DLC. And he said it wasn't a mistake, and that it was completely intentional. That Artorias' legend, like most legends, was blown all out of proportion and made more heroic, because that is how humans pass things down. I'm guessing Miyazaki was seen "Rashomon" the seminal Japanese cinematic classic, a time or two. Basically, it's about how a crime was committed, but every single character, when asked about it in their portion of the movie, describes the same events they saw in completely different ways that are totally at odds with each other.
Comments
I mean it's a pre-load, of course.
The way you access this area though is profoundly lazy. A bonfire spawns a few feet from the post-boss bonfires at either the Kiln or the site of the Sister Freide battle, to grant access. Putting in some sort of object, or touching a statue or tree or ANYTHING would be better. I still think the bonfire placement in Dark Souls 3 (outside of the fantastic Cathedral of the Deep) is FAR worse than the much maligned Dark Souls 2 placement. This cements that theory permanently.
My thought is very much that Gael is a Gollum-like creature. He got this far by deviousness and wit, and it is likely his entrance to the wasteland was what caused the first crack in the shell, with yours destroying what appears to be an illusion entirely. Filianore seems to be serving the same sort of purpose Rom did in Bloodborne. She is essentially a Dreamcatcher, and while you can't say the Ringed City is entirely an illusion, it also ceases to exist when she wakes.
You come upon Gael who is literally eating the remains of the remaining pygmies, consuming their portion of the Dark Soul found by the Furtive Pygmy so long ago. He, after all, still wants it for his lady's painting. Gael essentially becomes an abomination, a hybrid of Artorias (obvious references here) and Orphan of Kos. And you battle him in an Ash swept wasteland until you claim the blood of the Dark Soul, which is all that is left.
You return to the painting, and the girl thanks you. She will now paint the new world, and it will be named after you. And....that's the end. The cycle may be ended, but life will carry on in the new Painted World regardless of what happens in the real world. But what the hell is the real world?? If this is the case, has this ALL been a painting the whole time?? Is EVERYTHING a painting?? As Filianore's slumber proves, is anything real at all but an Ash covered wasteland?? Likely not, and that the painting is simply an escape from a dying world. But a famous 80s prime-time soap opera called "Dallas" asked the question for an entire season of "who shot JR??" And in the end, no one had shot JR, it had all been a dream. It was considered one of the biggest cop outs in TV history. This ending actually worked really well in Monkey Island 2. But here, I just don't know. The locations and boss fights as sights and sounds in this DLC are simply breathtaking. But does any of this make a lick of sense, or are we just forever left with 100s of unanswered (and unanswerable) questions??
Edit: This is perhaps the most telling item description in any of the games:
For the pygmies, who took the dark soul, the Great Lord gifted the Ringed City, an isolated place at world's end, and his beloved youngest daughter, promising her that he would come for her when the day came.
Filianore is Gywn's youngest daughter (wasn't aware he had another daughter, but ok). The Pygmies held the burden of the Dark Soul, and Gywn gifted them a home and his daughter to watch over them. Clearly Gwyn never predicted his own downfall, and Filianore rested in eternal slumber until.....well, until today. And in the end, the only person who gets out of this without so much as a scratch remains.....Gwynevere. Forever lost to time.
So the Dark Sign is essentially a seal of fire against the corruption of the abyss. Gwyn recognized the threat of the Dark Soul and tried to contain those who had it in them by granting them a kingdom at the end of the world, along with his daughter and a whole honor guard dedicated to protecting her.
Miyazaki is more gifted in creating new worlds then extending it, It was kind of obvious that Dark Souls 1 was intended to be a singular complete game, the subsequent games have only really awkwardly extended the lore.
I would say that the influence of Bloodborne onto Dark souls 3 is a bit of a mixed bag, Dark Souls combat was designed to be slower-paced and doesn't feel the same with Bloodborne style combat.
For the record, I like the general content I've seen of The Ringed City, especially the finale, which I think is fitting and as good an ending as anything. I just feel like Miyazaki never intended to make this game, and they just threw stuff at the wall to see what would stick. That's why, as much as in many ways it would be awesome, Bloodborne SHOULD NOT get a sequel. It's a singular experience that can't really benefit from anymore elaboration.
Ninja-flipping heavy armor knights just seems a bit immersion breaking and theres no more weight in combat because of that.
And i agree that now i don't want a bloodborne sequel, I LOVE bloodborne and i'm eagerly waiting for the Design Works of Bloodborne to be released in English. I have the Dark Souls one.
I do hope though that if Miyazaki makes another great game with great lore, he plans on a far more expansive lore that can be explored across multiple sequels.
The 4 great souls are held by beings that almost came upon them incidentally. The Rotten isn't the Lord of the Grave, it's just what happened when so many things got thrown away into The Gutter. The Duke's Dear Freja is simply in the grand tradition of Shelob. Who knows how long she has been there, or what beings have let her be for how long for their own purposes. The Lost Sinner is, again, just someone who couldn't handle coming into contact with soul of The Witch of Izalith. And the Old Iron King was simply a bad king who was easily corruptible. The point being, all these beings are relatively pathetic when it comes down to comparisons to the the respective Souls they carry. And that is by design. Because even the name Lordran was been lost to time. YOU as the player recognize some things, but that has nothing to do with what is going on in the game world.
Dark Souls 3 doesn't really have a story at all. It's "converging lands" theme is simply a mechanism to drop parts of Dark Souls 1 wherever it feels like it. No effort is really made to explain why a Black Knight would be hanging out in the Road of Sacrifices, why Anor Londo is melded onto the back of Irithyll, or why Andre would just be sitting in this Shrine along with a Handmaiden from 2.
By the way, if no one noticed before, besides gameplay mechanics, there is a perfectly logical lore explanation for why you can warp between bonfires at the start of the game. In the basement of the Majula mansion, you can clearly see the broken shards of the Lord Vessel.
I'm not criticizing that view, btw. I find what you posted pretty interesting and worth reading.
Dark Souls II seems harder to me because it's Scholar of the First Sin and there's greater enemy density, at least early on. I had better success with melee.
That's another reason why Scholar is my favorite in the series. The sheer amount of builds rivals almost something like Diablo 2, the ways you are given to manipulate your own gameplay through Bonfire Aesetics, the amount of weapons and builds and infusions that can be put on all of them. I defend it so much because I think it's unfairly maligned to the point of being absurd. I'd compare the first two games to two Zeppelin albums: IV and III. IV is Dark Souls. It's obviously the more important album, it stands like a monolith on it's own, and exists as a singular experience that can't be bettered. III is Scholar of the First Sin. It's different, varied, quirky, goes out on a limb. And it's what I'd rather listen to 75% of the time.
Some japanese players are borderline insane with their crazy skills.
Here's one of the best and craziest pure pyromancy vids from a jap player, his aiming is out of this world.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsi0z-rurGV30mc_wFnyA7A
Dark Souls 2 doesn't have any big set pieces (which is what we'll call visuals). Dark Souls 3 is untouchable in this department. Even fairly benign ideas like the Crystal Sage or Deacons of the Deep are presented in such a cinematic grandeur that it's hard to hate any of them. Same thing with the Curse-Rotted Greatwood. Alot of people think it's trash, but it's probably one of my favorite fights in the series. Again, Dark Souls 2 doesn't have these set pieces (Last Giant maybe), at least up until the DLC. There are alot of humanoids, and even the ones that aren't don't really have much too them. But I half expect this (like alot of things about Dark Souls 2) was by design. I think the world of Drangleic is SUPPOSED to feel less impressive than Lordran.
If they set out to make Drangleic less impressive, that's fine. I mean my criticism of the boss design is relatively minor given the fact that DSII is a good game.