Why is it so much better than the others?

Why is it so much better than the others?

Attached: des.jpg (466x535, 57K)

mostly because it hadn't had the same pressure that the other games had

Based sony for funding DS and creating the entire souls franchise.

Creative freedom, they didn't have to pander to fans or their publisher.

The atmosphere and designs were a lot fresher and interesting unlike Dark souls where it retained the same style for 3 games. Bloodborne had a good style as well.

DeS, DS1, Bloodborne and Sekiro = soul

Based.

Attached: my waifu.jpg (1920x1080, 294K)

unironically based

Excuse me miss

Attached: IMG_5228.jpg (1620x1111, 171K)

delet

Less balanced
Scraping spear, acid cloud

It was novel. DS1 is the best one.

>a tech demo of the first Dark Souls
>better
oh I'm laffin

Unironically he was right

Attached: Untitled.jpg (216x318, 22K)

it isnt besides the crafting system youre just a nostalgiafag

They put extra care into the atmosphere and world they built. I remember when I was new to it, I was truly scared of dying because it would mean my HP is halved, and I cannot summon people anymore. I would be forced to help others online if I wanted body form back, or use a rare empheral eyes. Each world stage was massively different, and the nexus had so many nooks and crannys. The npc killer was a fresh and unexpected feature. Figuring out the world tendency was a puzzler, and finsing that bloody moonlight great sword was hell. God I miss DeS

i played it, it was my first souls game and it was boring as fuck
is dark souls this boring as well?

because you're a faggot. every game improved on the previous entry

The environment was for the most part fucking good. Tower of Latria second part was absolute fucking genuine shit

Matthew was right. The increasing importance put on combat during development of later titles really ruined the idea these games should have been continued on. Basically combat ruined this genre and the later games. Bloodborne isn't as good as many think it to be.

Actually felt more like a RPG. I think Bloodborne was better overall, but DeS is close second. No areas felt rushed or like fillers, interesting lore, bosses were unique and not showed in like fodder in, nor were they difficult for difficulty's sake. All souls games are good regardless, but DeS was a step above the Dark Souls trio.
A remaster of DeS would be dope as fuck with active online and a consistent framerate greater than 20

Another question when you realize that Tower of Latria is overrated and Shrine of Storms is the true ludo level?

The buggy hitbox crap came in the later entries because From just wanted the games to be harder and harder.

Literally artificial difficulty. It's not like it was in Demons Souls which was always completely fair.

Tried to actually do something unique and each boss has something that makes them different then the others. They aren't really just BIG GUY IN BIG ROOM fights. It has a few like that, but most are unique.
The rest of the souls series doesn't do anything unique with their fights, and if they do, its just an idea that was already done in demons souls.
Thats my main problem with the souls series, it was stagnate as soon as Dark Souls 1 came out. None of the games were really that different besides Bloodborne. Because of that, Bloodborne and Demons are the only good Souls games.

Because average souls fags ego is so fucking huge, that they have to claim the old game that most didn't play is the best so they can at least have a slightly bigger dick than other fans.
Literally nothing else can be the reason it's the "best", except the fact that it's the first one you played and finished.

BB is crap too. DeS and later Sekiro, only unique games.

personally like BB more, but DeS is a close 2nd

Attached: (You).jpg (2560x1440, 1.19M)