Dark Souls 3 provides superior gameplay and better bosses than DeS, DS1, and DS2...

>dumbed down

It's mechanically at least on par. Still get charged heavy attacks. Still have phased bosses. Trick weapon combos are replaced by far more weapon variety with lots having unique weapon arts.

There's also magic and faith (don't care about how useful you think they are). If anything BB is still more simple than Dark Souls 3 but it's still my favorite game they've made.

DS1 early game is easy compared to DS3. Just compare Asylum Demon and Iudex Gundyr.
>like 3 attacks
>long wind ups
>just hit him in the butt
>half his health gone in a plunge attack
>no phases
vs
>fast and aggressive
>long range pokes
>lots of moves
>surprising attacks like his shoulder check
>has two phases

Hate to break it to you mate but dark souls 1 only seems harder because that's how you remembered it. Mechanically every souls game has upped the difficulty of enemies or returning players would not be challenged, even really early game.

>PvE
Sekiro>BB(with DLC)>DaS3>DaS1>DeS>DaS2
>PvP
DaS1>DaS3>DeS>BB>DaS2>Pile Human Shit>DaSR
if DaS2 didn't have SoulMemory/ADP it would be no.1 in PvP, bow combat is perfect and miracles were perfect pre-nerf

you forgot about how you can literally panic roll through everything in ds3 and it doesnt matter if its fast and aggressive.

spacing in ds3 doesnt mean much when you can just panicroll 3 times away from the boss and heal. The first playthrough of DS1 willl always be superior to the first playthrough of DS3 by a long shot.

Haven't played remastered. How is the pvp any different that Dark Souls 1?

>Haven't played remastered. How is the pvp any different that Dark Souls 1?
It's dead because nobody bought it.

Not really talking about the difficulty but rather the level design and progress philosophy in DS1 compared to DS3. DS3 you just go in a straight line for the first two hours.

gundyr is a cool boss though

Attached: 1553847446312.png (400x397, 244K)

I really can't rank DeS, DS1, DS3, BB, or Sekiro. They are all 9/10 games to me. Only DS2 stands out as inferior. Each has their weaknesses. For DS3, it was the linearity, boring fanservice, and the ridiculous number of cathedrals and swamps.

Attached: 1554022230202.jpg (1024x951, 176K)

Weapon level from 3 has been integrated fucking up co-opwhich in turn all the twinks are now one-shotting new players with dark bead, dead angling is gone, infinite summon hosts that run away making invasions a chore just like in 3, cheat engine still rampant on PC.
Nothing will bring back the comfiness of pre-pc /DSG/ when /vg/ was first made

>It's mechanically at least on par.
No isn't
>Still get charged heavy attacksIt's not even functionally the same as bloodborne, in bloodborne you have much more to do with it mechanically.
>Still have phased bosses
Darksouls 1 and 2 had that you mong
>Trick weapon combos are replaced by far more weapon variety with lots having unique weapon arts.
It's superflous variety when you've got several variations of sword that are all functionally the same with some having a little bonus tacked on, blood borne has far more true variety.

>There's also magic and faith (don't care about how useful you think they are).
You should because they're functionally useless and barely ought to be in the game. Compare it to darksouls 1 where magic and pyromancy were incredibly viable. BB gets gun focus and arcane focus which are the equivilents of this. In D3 you're basically only doing well wiht a 2h great or soem meta weapon with a cestus for parry that's 90% of builds and teh game's mechanically worse than the previous entries because of how they changed the core gameplay and gameplay elements.

>If anything BB is still more simple than Dark Souls 3
Bloodborne is streamlined, but it's way more complex by virtue of weapons completely changing how you play combined with offhand weapons changing that further. It's a crime it's not on pc yet.

Darksouls 3 is bloodborne but without the depth and you move like darksouls which makes combat fucking awful. Darksousl is designed around slow delibrate movement with poise and magic in mind, when you take that away and try to make it a close ranged parry fest with bloodborne's poise and none of the speed, you get bloodborne. It's a terrible game with good bosses, the inverse of darksouls 2.

>It's a terrible game with good bosses, the inverse of darksouls 2.

Dark Souls 2 has zero redeeming qualities.

I literally can't start a new run of DS3 because the first half of the game is so fucking boring.

youre not supposed to actually post the truth here user your supposed to say "DS2 IS KINO AND EVERY OTHER GAME IN EXISTENCE IS SHIT BTFO LMAO"

>bloodborne weapons have true variety because of morphing
lol no. morphing was useless. it was just superfluous variety because the gameplay meta was unaffected.

They're all the same. You soulsfags are the most delusional people out there jesus christ.
It's just roll, roll, stab every fucking game this company makes.

DS has more shitty unfinished areas than DS3 has unoriginal areas.
DS2 has several copy paste bosses from itself and also ornstein and gargoyles from DS1.
DS1 has the valley of defilement copy and pasted and the common undead enemies are almost exactly the same as the DeS ones.
DS3 is too unoriginal is such a bullshit claim.

There's more to the game than combat you nignog. and fromsoft did a great job making the simple gameplay actually fun and feel different each boss.

>health vials require farming
What were they thinking?

I really hated ds3 generic medieval setting, it drained fun from an otherwise enjoyable game for me. At this point i don't feel like replaying any of the games, ds1-2 are too clunky after ds3 and ds3 is too fucking boring and generic

What the hell is generic about Dark Souls 3's 'medieval' setting?! Undead Burg is less inspired than fucking Undead Settlement.

All locations are castles swamps dungeons and graveyards, it's the most boring setting you can go with

>speed running 20% of the game in an hour
user that's called a casual play through, not a speedrun

Dark Souls 2 had the best fashion.

And HOW is that different from the other Dark Souls games and Demon's Souls? I mean to DeS' fairness, it had a cool fucking mining area and excavation site.

Rolls are broken and the game input reads out the ass to make itself more challenging to compensate. It plays like shit and isn't tuned properly.

Truth

It's the most linear game in the series, every weapon handles identically and magic is nerfed into uselessness.

>tfw dark souls 2 was almost great in a lot of ways

>introduced a lot of cool new lore like the fragments of manus, the scholar's discoveries, and the old chaos (ignored by the sequel)
>almost perfected matchmaking (wish they could have found a way to make soul memory not a ticking clock on the life and fun of a build without bowing to twinks)
>just fucked you up with the size and variety of its world (but it doesn't match 1's kickass metroidvania feel and it doesn't really all fit together)
>loads of bosses (a few too many retreads and all in all not very original)
>a wide variety of interesting and useful magic (nerfed hard)

>says dark souls 3 is dumbed down
>is too stupid to figure out how to use magic effectively
like pottery

the most impressive part of 3 imo is how even though they were following up 2, which had up to that point had the worst fashion in the series, they somehow did worse in 3.

On a serious note, I'm legitimately heartbroken that they were never really able to recapture the bizarrely interconnected feeling of DS1... the series did a lot of good and bad changes going forward but that above all else is the thing I'd go back and change

Attached: 0PaNTVR.jpg (1621x823, 246K)

*panic rolls*
*dies*

Attached: DSP.png (1153x3787, 3.88M)

Jack of all trades
Master of none

Dark Souls 1 had darkroot garden, oolacile, great hollow, and ashen lake. DS3 is lacking for areas in which nature dominates over civilization. The color palette is also very muted I find.