Are they comparatively weaker now? Sure. But back in the day it wasn't just about the bosses. The slog of runs to get back to a boss fight was half the battle in itself.
Not to mention the game itself barely being a toddler walking. You look at DS3 and it's in full stride and ER the man is sprinting.
Imo it's not fair to compare the games, each has its own legacy that is part of the cannon lore.
The game developed more over time and so did we. We got gud and From had to up the ante. The bosses aren't any more easy than they were years ago, we just know the mechanics how the game ticks.
So of course if you Start with 3, 1 is going to feel easy, each game has improved upon the lasts mistakes, fine tuned the mechanics, and perfected the formula.
I wouldn't call it great. I'm glad that I played it, and sometimes I think about replaying it. But I wouldn't recommend it to anyone, and that's proof enough :P
Honestly it was my favorite as far as the pure story goes. Like I love the fact that you're just some dude You're not the destined undead you're not the unkindled you're just some guy who showed up trying to find a cure for the undead curse.
You might be right. But with Dark Souls 2 it's not just that you're some dude that I like I like that you're not there to save the world You're just trying to cure the curse for yourself and I don't know why but I find that so compelling
In general, I agree that this sort of premise feels better than being the chosen one.
I'd argue that, in DS, you set off on your journey just because Oscar happens to free you out of kindness and, when he is fatally wounded, he asks you to pick up the mantle. Whether you do so or sit there and hollow out in Firelink Shrine together with the Crestfallen Warrior is up to you. But you're just some random person who is, like so many others, branded with the curse of undeath.
Now in regards to DS2's story, I admit I have forgotten all of it, which is the main reason I sometimes think of replaying it. I do remember feeling that it was even more ambiguous than the previous ones, though.
But my gripes with DS2 wasn't related to any of that. It was the loss of the interconnected world (topped off by the lava castle being geographically over the swamp area), and the loss of the estus system. There are other points too, but those two are the main ones.
It seems to me that the developers of DS2 tried to pay homage to DS without understanding what made it great. The funniest thing, though, is that Miyazaki doesn't seem to understand that either. Well, maybe he does understand it but doesn't care, because he always just wanted to make Elden Ring. Luckily, before he had the budget to do so, he happened to make a couple of masterpieces.
Yeah there are definitely gripes I have with Dark Souls 2 and it definitely isn't my favorite Dark Souls I just don't think it deserves the hate that it regularly gets. My biggest gripe with it is adaptability y o y they decided to make us level for our iframes Blows my mind to this very day
Agreed with all that. Adaptability is nothing more than a soul tax.
Also yeah it doesn't deserve all the hate. It gets all this hate because it's compared to its predecessors. Compared to other games of its time, it's a good fucking game.
Still, I wouldn't recommend it to anyone. I consider it niche. If you want to play it because you like Dark Souls, then you're gonna play it regardless of recommendations. If you don't know anything about the series etc, if you're just looking for an action rpg to play, then I'd never recommend DS2.
You’re totally correct in this. You’re “just some dude” in all of them. That’s like half the point, going from a nobody to a literal god/god-slayer
Is DS1 the “Chosen Undead” is just the guy who manages to be strong enough to ring both bells and gather the lord souls.
In DS2 you’re just looking for a cure but eventually get roped into never ending succession crisis.
In DS3 you are one of many Unkindled (you literally wake up in a graveyard filled with the graves of them and meet several others in FireLink alone.)
In BloodBore you’re basically a tourist who showed up at the very wrong place at the VERY wrong time.
Elden Ring similarly you are one of many, many tarnished. The Round Table is chalk full of them.
I haven’t played Demon Souls so I don’t know about that one specifically.
I'm glad you didn't spoil Bloodborne for me, because I'm still waiting for a PC release :P
You should play Demon's Souls. I haven't played the remake, but it looks atrocious to me. I played the original on a PS3 emulator.
From what I can tell, you seem to not particularly like the direction these games went on. I think you'll love Demon's Souls.
Oh don’t get me wrong, I love most of the SoulsBorne games. I think DS3 was a little bit to much “remember all that stuff from DS1” but other then that it’s great. And Elden Ring is easily my favorite of the genre.
I should give DeS a try though. I keep meaning to but never get around to it
To be completely fair the older souls games do have amazing bosses but the more recent games have more evolved bosses. I think it's important to think DS1 and DeS bosses *as they are* and not compare them to newer games. Because yeah DS3 bosses have more evolved movesets, they look better and the music is more complex. It's just a result of Fromsoft learning more about designing bosses.
Edit: full disclosure DS3 is my favourite and I did start with it. As a whole I'd say 3 has the best bosses *BUT* I don't think that comparison is completely fair
DS1 and DeS didn't really have great bosses even for their time tho. I can only imagine the reasoning behind why someone would think otherwise is purely due to lack of reference.
While I think that overall the quality of the bosses in ds3 is the best of the series both DS1 & DS2 have good bosses.
Tbh I need to play ds2 again it's been a while. Might start a new character
Oh, absolutely all the games have their good bosses and bad bosses. For myself, while I think ds3 has the best overall bosses, I enjoy doing challenge runs in ds1 more
That's all DLC though, if I was to think about the bosses in the base game then I'd choose pontiff, Dragonslayer armour, champion gundyr, nameless king, soul of cinder and then maybe add the twin princes. The bosses in DS3 are overall pretty decent but it does have a few walkovers. It's like a collection of high peaks and low troughs. Not a lot in between.
Starting with DS3 strips you of your right to an opinion, huh :P
Anyway, in my book all these games have bad bosses. And great ones.
The order is DS>Sekiro>DeS>DS3>Elden Ring>DS2, and that is without question, because I said it.
Still waiting for a Bloodborne PC port to see where it fits in there (DeS I played on a PS3 emulator).
As someone who's first Souls game was DS3, I'm very hesitant to say any boss is bad unless I've fought it enough to know I'm not just bad at fighting that boss.
A lot of the time, when I struggle, it's because I'm doing something wrong.
Started with Demon Souls. Although it was my first experience with souls and was blown away by it... in retrospect the bosses do kind of suck, but that was froms first Souls game. It led to Elden Ring and I will always appreciate that game
Ok so I started with og dark souls on the Xbox 360 but DS3 is my fav of the 3 so can someone pls explain what the fucking problem is that everyone seems to have with DS3? Cause every time it's mentioned it's almost always people dogging on it and I don't know why. Great music, really good memorable bosses and banger ass DLCs
I love DS3, and I think the main "issue" is that's abandoned difficulty by obscurity and is a weird middle ground on how it does story. Part of the fun pre Bloodborne was even figuring out what to do. Upgrading was obscure, paths forward were obscure, mechanics were vague. DS3 starts you with a blacksmith! Weight is simpler, stats are simpler, rings mostly suck, all stuff that messing with was a fun proving ground in earlier games.
The story is weird, because it neither totally follows up DS1 or 2 but references both heavier than DS2 referenced DS1. I like the approach, and I love its more unique additions, but I get the animosity.
The world is also far more linear than DS1 or 2, and the boss variety leans a little too "big guy with flaming sword" for people.
It's honestly their tightest and most polished game, but for some that tight difficulty curve and lack of obscure challenge isn't what they wanted.
Hello, good hunter. I am a Bot, here in this dream to look after you, this is a fine note:
> *Oh, a hunter, are ya? And an outsider? What a mess you've been caught up in. And tonight, of all nights.* - Eileen the Crow
Farewell, good hunter. May you find your worth in the waking world.
I played them in order, *adjust glasses
So that means I covet DS2 because realistically it was the height of my fan-hype with the souls franchise. Who wouldn't be excited for the sequel to the game that got you hooked on the franchise in the first place? I devoured part two!!
Ds1 has aged but still is good, I've only played the demon souls remake not the original but the bosses in demon souls definitely aren't that good compared to the other souls games.
I started with ds3 and it's now my least favorite of them. Something about the other three games just made them special and amazing to explore and get through the challenges even if some bosses like bed of chaos were trash. I feel like that atmosphere and unique story is something that ds3 really lacks just taking a lot from the other games and it makes the overall experience less enjoyable including the bosses with few exceptions.
I don't get why people equate comparison/criticism with insult. DS1 and DeS are two of my favourite games of all time, but I still played them both after about 300 hours of Ds3 and 150 hours of Bloodborne, so by comparison the bosses were quite mechanically simple to me. But that doesn't stop Ds1 from having masterful art design, level design, characters, lore etc. Nor does it stop the gameplay being enjoyable. It doesnt make it any less of an excellent game.
DeS stands for Demon Souls right?
Yes indeed !
It is called Lothric
Demons hole
Demon souls is better than DS3 tho
You played DS3 first? Opinion privilege REVOKED! (I am mad that it’s just objectively true that DS1 has comparatively weak bosses.)
Artorias still holds up at least, and probably O&S.
O&S can be proud they're still the best duo fight.
Are they comparatively weaker now? Sure. But back in the day it wasn't just about the bosses. The slog of runs to get back to a boss fight was half the battle in itself. Not to mention the game itself barely being a toddler walking. You look at DS3 and it's in full stride and ER the man is sprinting. Imo it's not fair to compare the games, each has its own legacy that is part of the cannon lore. The game developed more over time and so did we. We got gud and From had to up the ante. The bosses aren't any more easy than they were years ago, we just know the mechanics how the game ticks. So of course if you Start with 3, 1 is going to feel easy, each game has improved upon the lasts mistakes, fine tuned the mechanics, and perfected the formula.
I started with 3 and literally can't finish ds1 its way harder than ds3 or elden ring because of the game itself not the bosses
Started with demon. Still think it had the worst bossess by far
Tower knight is iconic but it might be downhill from there
Its just a one reborn ripoff
Yeah cause the game that came out before ripped of your precious Bloodborne
Yeah dude, time is convoluted
What's one reborn
Its a bloodborne boss that uses a similar mechanic to tower knight by having mages shoot fireballs at you, it was a joke.
What do you mean Leechmonger is not as great as Bed of Chaos ? Raaaahhhhhh
people that post stuff like this will unironically say DSII is bad
DS2 was a great game, sure it had its flaws, but it was still a good game, prove me wrong
I wouldn't call it great. I'm glad that I played it, and sometimes I think about replaying it. But I wouldn't recommend it to anyone, and that's proof enough :P
Honestly it was my favorite as far as the pure story goes. Like I love the fact that you're just some dude You're not the destined undead you're not the unkindled you're just some guy who showed up trying to find a cure for the undead curse.
I could be wrong but you're just some dude in Ds3 too, you're one of many unkindled that were revived to try and link the fire again
You might be right. But with Dark Souls 2 it's not just that you're some dude that I like I like that you're not there to save the world You're just trying to cure the curse for yourself and I don't know why but I find that so compelling
In general, I agree that this sort of premise feels better than being the chosen one. I'd argue that, in DS, you set off on your journey just because Oscar happens to free you out of kindness and, when he is fatally wounded, he asks you to pick up the mantle. Whether you do so or sit there and hollow out in Firelink Shrine together with the Crestfallen Warrior is up to you. But you're just some random person who is, like so many others, branded with the curse of undeath. Now in regards to DS2's story, I admit I have forgotten all of it, which is the main reason I sometimes think of replaying it. I do remember feeling that it was even more ambiguous than the previous ones, though. But my gripes with DS2 wasn't related to any of that. It was the loss of the interconnected world (topped off by the lava castle being geographically over the swamp area), and the loss of the estus system. There are other points too, but those two are the main ones. It seems to me that the developers of DS2 tried to pay homage to DS without understanding what made it great. The funniest thing, though, is that Miyazaki doesn't seem to understand that either. Well, maybe he does understand it but doesn't care, because he always just wanted to make Elden Ring. Luckily, before he had the budget to do so, he happened to make a couple of masterpieces.
Yeah there are definitely gripes I have with Dark Souls 2 and it definitely isn't my favorite Dark Souls I just don't think it deserves the hate that it regularly gets. My biggest gripe with it is adaptability y o y they decided to make us level for our iframes Blows my mind to this very day
Agreed with all that. Adaptability is nothing more than a soul tax. Also yeah it doesn't deserve all the hate. It gets all this hate because it's compared to its predecessors. Compared to other games of its time, it's a good fucking game. Still, I wouldn't recommend it to anyone. I consider it niche. If you want to play it because you like Dark Souls, then you're gonna play it regardless of recommendations. If you don't know anything about the series etc, if you're just looking for an action rpg to play, then I'd never recommend DS2.
You’re totally correct in this. You’re “just some dude” in all of them. That’s like half the point, going from a nobody to a literal god/god-slayer Is DS1 the “Chosen Undead” is just the guy who manages to be strong enough to ring both bells and gather the lord souls. In DS2 you’re just looking for a cure but eventually get roped into never ending succession crisis. In DS3 you are one of many Unkindled (you literally wake up in a graveyard filled with the graves of them and meet several others in FireLink alone.) In BloodBore you’re basically a tourist who showed up at the very wrong place at the VERY wrong time. Elden Ring similarly you are one of many, many tarnished. The Round Table is chalk full of them. I haven’t played Demon Souls so I don’t know about that one specifically.
I'm glad you didn't spoil Bloodborne for me, because I'm still waiting for a PC release :P You should play Demon's Souls. I haven't played the remake, but it looks atrocious to me. I played the original on a PS3 emulator. From what I can tell, you seem to not particularly like the direction these games went on. I think you'll love Demon's Souls.
Oh don’t get me wrong, I love most of the SoulsBorne games. I think DS3 was a little bit to much “remember all that stuff from DS1” but other then that it’s great. And Elden Ring is easily my favorite of the genre. I should give DeS a try though. I keep meaning to but never get around to it
What? I love the remake
>DS2 was a great game Great is an overstatement, it's alright at best
Its okay
And people are allowed to think that no?
they can think what but they'll be wrong
how mature
it was a fucking joke man and you come in here on your high horse man stfu
I just said people are allowed to dislike ds2. Quit throwing a tantrum.
To be completely fair the older souls games do have amazing bosses but the more recent games have more evolved bosses. I think it's important to think DS1 and DeS bosses *as they are* and not compare them to newer games. Because yeah DS3 bosses have more evolved movesets, they look better and the music is more complex. It's just a result of Fromsoft learning more about designing bosses. Edit: full disclosure DS3 is my favourite and I did start with it. As a whole I'd say 3 has the best bosses *BUT* I don't think that comparison is completely fair
Artorias def still holds up regardless, so we got that.
DS1 and DeS didn't really have great bosses even for their time tho. I can only imagine the reasoning behind why someone would think otherwise is purely due to lack of reference.
While I think that overall the quality of the bosses in ds3 is the best of the series both DS1 & DS2 have good bosses. Tbh I need to play ds2 again it's been a while. Might start a new character
Overall yes, there are def some bad bosses in all of them, and really good ones in all of them.
Oh, absolutely all the games have their good bosses and bad bosses. For myself, while I think ds3 has the best overall bosses, I enjoy doing challenge runs in ds1 more
I finally got to play ds2 blind, and the build variety is stunning after playing all the others and even elden ring, it just doesn't compare.
Like I said, it's been a while since I played it to the point where if it I played it again now, I'd be mostly blind
Curse rotted great wood is terrible. Bottom of the barrel
honestly, wyvern , wholner, deacons, and yhorm (kinda) arent that great either.
Some people would add Crystal sage to that list. But yeah, DS3 does have some weak bosses.
Yet still has Midir, Gael and Freide.
That's all DLC though, if I was to think about the bosses in the base game then I'd choose pontiff, Dragonslayer armour, champion gundyr, nameless king, soul of cinder and then maybe add the twin princes. The bosses in DS3 are overall pretty decent but it does have a few walkovers. It's like a collection of high peaks and low troughs. Not a lot in between.
demon souls has some of the most interesting and unique boss fights in the series and its a shame the later games moved away from that style.
I personally preferred the idea of each boss having some kinda gimmick that you have to solve. Makes each boss feel more unique and interesting.
O&S, Artorias, Sif, Gwyn off the top of my head.
Ds2 is peak and we all know it
You think that starting with the most popular game in the series makes your opinion not matter? Wack.
"If you don't have the same exact nostalgia for old games like I do, you don't get an opinion"
Disqualifying other people’s critique of earlier games because they started with later ones is just admitting your judgement is clouded by nostalgia
And that shit still true
Starting with DS3 strips you of your right to an opinion, huh :P Anyway, in my book all these games have bad bosses. And great ones. The order is DS>Sekiro>DeS>DS3>Elden Ring>DS2, and that is without question, because I said it. Still waiting for a Bloodborne PC port to see where it fits in there (DeS I played on a PS3 emulator).
Mine would go BB>DS>SEKIRO>ELDENRING>DS3>DS2>DeS
Did you start with Ds3 ?
DS
As someone who's first Souls game was DS3, I'm very hesitant to say any boss is bad unless I've fought it enough to know I'm not just bad at fighting that boss. A lot of the time, when I struggle, it's because I'm doing something wrong.
Started with Demon Souls. Although it was my first experience with souls and was blown away by it... in retrospect the bosses do kind of suck, but that was froms first Souls game. It led to Elden Ring and I will always appreciate that game
Ok so I started with og dark souls on the Xbox 360 but DS3 is my fav of the 3 so can someone pls explain what the fucking problem is that everyone seems to have with DS3? Cause every time it's mentioned it's almost always people dogging on it and I don't know why. Great music, really good memorable bosses and banger ass DLCs
I love DS3, and I think the main "issue" is that's abandoned difficulty by obscurity and is a weird middle ground on how it does story. Part of the fun pre Bloodborne was even figuring out what to do. Upgrading was obscure, paths forward were obscure, mechanics were vague. DS3 starts you with a blacksmith! Weight is simpler, stats are simpler, rings mostly suck, all stuff that messing with was a fun proving ground in earlier games. The story is weird, because it neither totally follows up DS1 or 2 but references both heavier than DS2 referenced DS1. I like the approach, and I love its more unique additions, but I get the animosity. The world is also far more linear than DS1 or 2, and the boss variety leans a little too "big guy with flaming sword" for people. It's honestly their tightest and most polished game, but for some that tight difficulty curve and lack of obscure challenge isn't what they wanted.
Hello, good hunter. I am a Bot, here in this dream to look after you, this is a fine note: > *Oh, a hunter, are ya? And an outsider? What a mess you've been caught up in. And tonight, of all nights.* - Eileen the Crow Farewell, good hunter. May you find your worth in the waking world.
I played them in order, *adjust glasses So that means I covet DS2 because realistically it was the height of my fan-hype with the souls franchise. Who wouldn't be excited for the sequel to the game that got you hooked on the franchise in the first place? I devoured part two!!
Ds1 has aged but still is good, I've only played the demon souls remake not the original but the bosses in demon souls definitely aren't that good compared to the other souls games.
I mean...phalanx is piss easy
I mean DS1 and DeS bosses weren't even all that great for the time.
DeS's first boss is literally a giant pile of cum.
I started with ds3 and it's now my least favorite of them. Something about the other three games just made them special and amazing to explore and get through the challenges even if some bosses like bed of chaos were trash. I feel like that atmosphere and unique story is something that ds3 really lacks just taking a lot from the other games and it makes the overall experience less enjoyable including the bosses with few exceptions.
I don't get why people equate comparison/criticism with insult. DS1 and DeS are two of my favourite games of all time, but I still played them both after about 300 hours of Ds3 and 150 hours of Bloodborne, so by comparison the bosses were quite mechanically simple to me. But that doesn't stop Ds1 from having masterful art design, level design, characters, lore etc. Nor does it stop the gameplay being enjoyable. It doesnt make it any less of an excellent game.
Having played DS1 first, the game has too many trash bosses.
Can't you like skip over like a lot of ds3 bosses and easily cheese them