This review contains spoilers
Judging from the status of the Dark Souls franchise by 2016, FromSoft was ready to move on. Bloodborne garnered mass acclaim for taking the Dark Souls formula to another setting, so one could assume that FromSoft would do the same for a few new IPs. Dark Souls seemed like it pioneered a new genre of video game instead of becoming a long-lasting series. Several new IPs have taken the essence of Dark Souls and have rebranded it under a different moniker. Dark Souls became a template instead of a long-lasting franchise. Not to mention that the Dark Souls name was butchered in its sequel, which was made by a totally different group of people. New paths were paved, and the old route was sealed off, or at least suffered from massive fault damage. I’m glad Miyazaki glanced back at the Dark Souls property and decided to give the first game a proper sequel. It would have been a shame to have left the Dark Souls franchise on the sour note that was Dark Souls II. Dark Souls III was a return to form for the franchise. It took everything from the first Dark Souls and revamped it the way a sequel should. For some people, Dark Souls III is the pinnacle of the franchise, taking everything that made the first game great and creasing the hinges for a finer-tuned experience. My opinion of Dark Souls III slightly differs from this. It improves on many aspects from the first game, but I’m only using the word improvement lightly. Dark Souls III takes the base of the first game and buffs the scratches, but it doesn’t really form its own identity in the process.
With the influx of “soulslike” games, it seems like the elements of Dark Souls that made it unique are pretty easy to spot. There’s the level design, lore achieved by world-building, using a consistent marker as checkpoints scattered parsimoniously, and creating a special build by leveling up like an RPG. There are several other elements, but these seem to be the most integral aspects. When it comes to making another iteration of Dark Souls itself, FromSoft tends to unabashedly repeat every single aspect of the first game. The doomed kingdom in Dark Souls III is Lothric, and can you guess what is plaguing this land? The first flame is dying out yet again, and you are the chosen undead who will either prolong the flame or relinquish it. I thought that reusing the plot and lore of the first Dark Souls was emblematic of the lack of inspiration that plagued Dark Souls II, but now I can see that this same loose plot is just the premise of Dark Souls. It’s not the middle ages inspired background mixed with the combat; it’s the damn first flame going out again. This premise carried such a heavy weight throughout the first game, but now it seems trivial because it has just become a common trope of the series.
As previously mentioned, Lothric’s flame is dying out. It can be saved if the five lord souls of Lothric are sacrificed to prolong the flame. However, all of these lord souls are in hiding, and it’s your job as the chosen undead to seek them out like an undead bounty hunter. Essentially, it’s a remix of the second half of the first Dark Souls. Now that I think about it, Dark Souls III is a remix of the first Dark Souls. There are so many moments in this game that scream familiarity. Of course, a sequel is supposed to be somewhat familiar by nature, but Dark Souls III is this to a fault. Lothric is its own sprawling kingdom totally discernable from Lordran in terms of areas and level design, but there are quite a few aspects stripped directly from the first game. For one, Andre the Blacksmith is your main source for modifying and enhancing weapons in the hub world. Andre was probably my favorite NPC in the first game, but why is he here? Did FromSoft really have a hard time thinking of another shredded old man to hammer away all day? This is without mentioning that he resides in a place called the Firelink Shrine, the hub world of Dark Souls III and another obvious call-back to the first game. On another note, the Firelink Shrine in this game is my least favorite hub world across every Souls game. It’s just kind of pale and drab and hard to navigate. It doesn’t have the cozy feeling of the Firelink Shrine from the first game. In fact, it seems a lot more like a “firelink sanctuary” because of how closed off and claustrophobic it comes off as. I’d want to rest at the Firelink Shrine from the first game, but I wouldn’t want to rest at the one here unless I was seeking some kind of refuge. In the Undead Settlement, you come across a man in sturdy onion armor and shriek with giddiness when you think it’s Siegmeyer from Dark Souls 1. You’d be wrong, however, when you discover it’s Siegward, a totally different character with the same armor and name like you’ve just stumbled into some Kafkaesque Dark Souls 1 realm.
Seeing all of these familiar characters in the context of Dark Souls 1 led me to believe that rekindling the fire was the canon ending of the first game. It led me to believe that what the chosen undead of the first game did was birth a new beginning for this land. Perhaps Lothric is the successor to Lordran, and enough time has passed where it’s in the same place as Lordran once was; a once prosperous kingdom showing its age. Perhaps the denizens of Lordran started anew here, which might explain the familiar characters. This theory went out the window once I went past Irythyll of the Boreal Valley into Anor Londo. That’s right, Anor fucking Londo. It’s not the sprawling, picturesque land in perpetual sunset but rather a frosty, nocturnal section of the already cold and dark Boreal Valley. It’s not even there as a lark as one of the main bosses in the game resides in the same arena you fought Ornstein and Smough. You can’t even make out the rest of Anor Londo from the first game because it isn’t there, so where is the rest of Anor Londo, and when was Irythyll of the Boreal Valley built in its place? Did Aldrich devour the rest of Anor Londo along with Gwynevere and Gwyndolin? What the hell is going on here? What is with the inconsistencies?
Trying to make sense of the world in Dark Souls III is very confusing. It seems like Lothric is a revitalized version of Lordran several years into the future after the first game, but including Anor Londo as a part of Lothric doesn’t make sense. It’s not an area of Anor Londo districted off to the kingdom of Lothric because anyone who has played the first game will recognize the building where you fight Ornstein and Smough and the giant blacksmith’s body lies. Did the lords of Lothric revamp Lordran into their own creation after the first flame was rekindled? That might explain why Anor Londo is gone except for the Ornstein and Smough building covered in Aldrich’s sludge. I think the real reason these familiarities are inconsistent lies in a problem outside of the game, and that is Dark Souls III relies too much on the impact of the first game. Dark Souls 1 was an experiment, but Dark Souls III doesn’t take any risks. It’s nice to see Anor Londo again, and it’s nice that Andre the Blacksmith is back, but did we need either of them in this game? We didn’t need to be reminded that this is a sequel to Dark Souls, FromSoft. In fact, all of the callbacks to the first game are total detriments to this one as they project a lack of inspiration and insecurities about this entry into the franchise. Either that or FromSoft ran out of ideas even with Miyazaki back at the helm.
This isn’t to say that Dark Souls III is a bad game. I quite like Dark Souls III and consider it to be a solid entry in the franchise and a great way to cap off the trilogy.
Objectively, it might even be a better game than the first one from a technical standpoint. It may not have the same impact as the first Dark Souls in artistic achievement, but it makes up for it by being the most fine-tuned Dark Souls game. Dark Souls III is the culmination of every previous Souls game, and it also takes elements from Bloodborne. Dark Souls III is a testament to the evolution of the Dark Souls formula. It’s not just a proper sequel to the first Dark Souls, but to every previous game in the franchise.
I mentioned in my Dark Souls II review that all of the changes the game made inadvertently caused it to feel more “video gamey.” These changes cheapened the impact that the first game had because they were so shoddily implemented. In the case of Dark Souls III, the “video gamey” changes from Dark Souls II are improved upon because the impetus of Dark Souls III was to shave off the esoteric aspects of the first game. FromSoft wanted to make a more accessible Dark Souls experience, which they achieved by toning up every aspect of the series. Just to be clear, accessibility is not necessarily a bad thing. All of the “video gamey” changes to Dark Souls II were made to be as inaccessible as possible. Dark Souls III fixed these up and made them palatable.
One of these was the estus system from Dark Souls II. Again, I’m not sure what was wrong with the estus system from the first game, but at least the system in Dark Souls III makes sense. You start with five estus flasks, a reasonable number instead of the rationed one estus flask from Dark Souls II (and no, there aren’t any weird healing crystals that slowly heal you that the developers make you rely on. Miyazaki wouldn’t fuck you over like that). You can explore to find more estus shards to increase the total number of flasks giving you a naturally occurring leveling system for the estus flasks as the game gets harder. There are 15 instead of 20, but I rarely ran dry on estus anyways. There is also an option to divide your estus flasks into blue ashen estus flasks to refill your magic meter. I suppose this is good news for magic users, but I never bothered with them because I am a brutish melee player. The human effigies that replace humanity in Dark Souls II have been changed to embers in Dark Souls III. Instead of restoring your maximum health due to death penalties, embers give you a 30% maximum health boost. They are in finite supply like human effigies, but they occur automatically once you defeat a boss. Once you die, the effect is no longer there. It’s refreshing to be rewarded for victory instead of being punished for failure. One of the negative aspects of “video gamey” accessibility is the placement of the bonfires. I mentioned in my Dark Souls 1 review that bonfires acted as checkpoints but were not dispersed in typical video game fashion like getting to a new area or defeating a boss. In the spirit of accessibility, Dark Souls III gives you a bonfire every time you get to a new area or defeat a boss. Because of this, the intense nature of leveraging your estus and trying to find a bonfire is seldom present. They really implemented this to fault as some bonfires are merely a couple of yards away from one another. Thanks for looking out for me, FromSoft. I’ll be careful not to get massacred walking twenty feet.
The elements Dark Souls III borrows from Bloodborne are even more readily apparent. It seems that FromSoft decided that the more aggressive, faster-paced gameplay in Bloodborne was the optimal approach to combat. In the scope of Dark Souls, it’s a little mixed. The enemies in this game are so relentless that you question whether or not you need a shield since you need to attack them with the same high energy. It works, but it feels a little TOO much like Bloodborne. Following suit with Bloodborne’s unpredictable aggression are the bosses. Not only do they never let up, but each boss has one or two more phases to throw you off. This starts as early as the first boss, Iudex Gundyr, who seems like a simple weapon-wielding humanoid boss to teach new players how to dodge attacks or parry. That is until he sprouts a tar-black, reptilian-looking demon out of his orifices at half health, and you start pelting firebombs at him out of shock and terror. Get used to this because almost every boss will present a new obstacle for you to work around. Personally, I think boss phases are a great way to keep the player on edge and offer a challenge that fits organically with the boss battles of the series.
The world design of Lothric also reminds me of the world from Bloodborne. The level progression is mostly a linear path of several levels with a little deviation from the main path. It’s underwhelming compared to the world of the first Dark Souls and even Bloodborne, but each level is still designed superbly.
I’ve already gone into fine detail about what Dark Souls III emulates from the first game. I’m not impressed by Dark Souls III’s tendency to use the first game as a crutch regarding its lore and settings. With all this in mind, I think some individual aspects of Dark Souls III are comparatively better than in the first game. The world isn’t as impressively designed as in the first game The closest Dark Souls III comes to capturing the grand juxtaposition between areas are the areas between Irythyll of the Boreal Valley. It feels great unearthing oneself from the catacombs to uncover the frigid wonderland that is Irythyll of the Boreal Valley, like resurfacing from the water to breathe fresh air. The Irythyll Dungeon acts like the Painted World of Ariamis in that it shows the seedy underbelly of the seemingly magnificent Irythyll, except the underlings are far more unsettling, and it feels far more claustrophobic. This is as close as the world of Dark Souls III gets to provide the same impact as the first game through level progression. However, the individual levels are consistently better in Dark Souls III. There are some levels in the first game that I still dread visiting, like Tomb of the Giants, New Londo Ruins, and the Catacombs. Still, I forgive them individually because they are essential in crafting the entirety of the world of Lordran. Because Dark Souls III takes a different approach to world design, the areas don’t exactly fit a cohesive whole, but they don’t have to. Each area feels different from the last one, and I don’t have any gripes about them. Areas that drew ire from me initially have grown on me, and I now appreciate them like the poison pool, Blighttown-esque Farron Keep to the aforementioned Irythyll Dungeon. The stand-out area in this game is definitely Irythyll of the Boreal Valley. It’s the gigantic, mid-game capital in the same vein as Anor Londo, so the grand scale of it automatically elevates the area above everywhere else.
The bosses in Dark Souls III are also consistently better than the ones in the first Dark Souls. Most of them aren’t as memorable as, say, Ornstein and Smough or Quelaag, but none of the bosses in Dark Souls III piss me off like the Four Kings or the Bed of Chaos. Many bosses in this game boil down to the mechanics of a humanoid sword wielder. They come in a wide variety in design, but there are so many sword-wielding bosses that parry enthusiasts will speed through this game. It’s a little tiring. The bosses in the first game were far more memorable, but some of the gimmicks didn’t work. When the bosses in Dark Souls III have gimmicks that make them unique, the gimmicks make their fights much more interesting instead of grating. One of my favorite bosses in the game is the two princes. Once you defeat Lorian, Prince Lothric resurrects him and jumps on his back with his own health bar while Lorian’s health is halved. You have to cripple Lorian some more to get to Lothric, but you only have to defeat Lothric to win the fight. It’s not a gank boss, but this fight between two bosses is much better executed than several other gank bosses across the series. The gimmick with the Ancient Wyvern is fantastic. Many people feel cheated by a boss that dies in one hit, but plunging my sword into his brain and watching his health bar drop like the 1929 stock market crash is hilarious. The one boss in this game that stands out above the rest is the Nameless King, who is arguably the perfect Dark Souls boss. He’s a strapping, formidable foe who rides a dragon and has the power of wind and lightning on his side. He even seems more god-like than Gwyn. The first phase of his fight with the Dragon is easy, but his second phase is easily the hardest fight in the game. Even though he is learnable if you play it safe, his fight is still tough as nails. Taking him down feels like taking down Zeus.
Once you retrieve the four lord souls, the final battle in Dark Souls III takes place in the “Kiln of the First Flame.” This place merely shares the same name as the final area of the first game as it is structured differently. It could be the same place, but that would unearth my confusion about Lothric in the place of Lordran again. The final boss is the Soul of Cinder, another humanoid boss with a multi-faceted moveset with two different phases with their own hulking health bars. Getting to this fight doesn’t have the same weight as getting to Gwyn, but the Soul of Cinder is an estus drainer that will have you holding on by a thread at the end of it. Is the Soul of Cinder supposed to be your character from the first game? Who knows, but I wish my character from Dark Souls 1 could combo and whip magic out of his ass like the Soul of Cinder. Once the fight is over, you either sacrifice yourself to prolong the suffering or extinguish the land and have darkness sweep it away. However, there is another ending option that is a little more ambiguous. You can “usurp” the fire, which has more complex implications. It’s arguably the best ending because it’s different, and it forces you to get more involved with the lore of this game but unlocking it is incredibly particular and circuitous. I don’t recommend attempting to get this ending on your first playthrough.
Whether you decide to kindle the first flame or douse it, the light that was the Dark Souls series was stamped out by FromSoft. Considering how much they borrowed from the first game, it was indicative of how quickly FromSoft ran out of ideas for the franchise. Fortunately, the swan song of Dark Souls managed to implement everything great from the previous games, fixing every loose screw. Does its lack of unique identity ultimately put it in the shadow of Dark Souls 1? Unfortunately, yes. I hate to give Dark Souls II any credit, but at least it was different from the first game. Games like Bloodborne and other soulslike games seem to be stronger successors to the legacy of Dark Souls, but this doesn’t mean that Dark Souls III is useless. If Dark Souls 1 is the sun, Dark Souls is a lightbulb. It doesn’t have the same scope as the sun, but it serves its purpose with essentially the same function and even has its own unique utility. And if you're wondering what Dark Souls II is in this analogy, it's like a shitty model of the sun made by a seventh grader for their science class.
———
Attribution: https://erockreviews.blogspot.com
With the influx of “soulslike” games, it seems like the elements of Dark Souls that made it unique are pretty easy to spot. There’s the level design, lore achieved by world-building, using a consistent marker as checkpoints scattered parsimoniously, and creating a special build by leveling up like an RPG. There are several other elements, but these seem to be the most integral aspects. When it comes to making another iteration of Dark Souls itself, FromSoft tends to unabashedly repeat every single aspect of the first game. The doomed kingdom in Dark Souls III is Lothric, and can you guess what is plaguing this land? The first flame is dying out yet again, and you are the chosen undead who will either prolong the flame or relinquish it. I thought that reusing the plot and lore of the first Dark Souls was emblematic of the lack of inspiration that plagued Dark Souls II, but now I can see that this same loose plot is just the premise of Dark Souls. It’s not the middle ages inspired background mixed with the combat; it’s the damn first flame going out again. This premise carried such a heavy weight throughout the first game, but now it seems trivial because it has just become a common trope of the series.
As previously mentioned, Lothric’s flame is dying out. It can be saved if the five lord souls of Lothric are sacrificed to prolong the flame. However, all of these lord souls are in hiding, and it’s your job as the chosen undead to seek them out like an undead bounty hunter. Essentially, it’s a remix of the second half of the first Dark Souls. Now that I think about it, Dark Souls III is a remix of the first Dark Souls. There are so many moments in this game that scream familiarity. Of course, a sequel is supposed to be somewhat familiar by nature, but Dark Souls III is this to a fault. Lothric is its own sprawling kingdom totally discernable from Lordran in terms of areas and level design, but there are quite a few aspects stripped directly from the first game. For one, Andre the Blacksmith is your main source for modifying and enhancing weapons in the hub world. Andre was probably my favorite NPC in the first game, but why is he here? Did FromSoft really have a hard time thinking of another shredded old man to hammer away all day? This is without mentioning that he resides in a place called the Firelink Shrine, the hub world of Dark Souls III and another obvious call-back to the first game. On another note, the Firelink Shrine in this game is my least favorite hub world across every Souls game. It’s just kind of pale and drab and hard to navigate. It doesn’t have the cozy feeling of the Firelink Shrine from the first game. In fact, it seems a lot more like a “firelink sanctuary” because of how closed off and claustrophobic it comes off as. I’d want to rest at the Firelink Shrine from the first game, but I wouldn’t want to rest at the one here unless I was seeking some kind of refuge. In the Undead Settlement, you come across a man in sturdy onion armor and shriek with giddiness when you think it’s Siegmeyer from Dark Souls 1. You’d be wrong, however, when you discover it’s Siegward, a totally different character with the same armor and name like you’ve just stumbled into some Kafkaesque Dark Souls 1 realm.
Seeing all of these familiar characters in the context of Dark Souls 1 led me to believe that rekindling the fire was the canon ending of the first game. It led me to believe that what the chosen undead of the first game did was birth a new beginning for this land. Perhaps Lothric is the successor to Lordran, and enough time has passed where it’s in the same place as Lordran once was; a once prosperous kingdom showing its age. Perhaps the denizens of Lordran started anew here, which might explain the familiar characters. This theory went out the window once I went past Irythyll of the Boreal Valley into Anor Londo. That’s right, Anor fucking Londo. It’s not the sprawling, picturesque land in perpetual sunset but rather a frosty, nocturnal section of the already cold and dark Boreal Valley. It’s not even there as a lark as one of the main bosses in the game resides in the same arena you fought Ornstein and Smough. You can’t even make out the rest of Anor Londo from the first game because it isn’t there, so where is the rest of Anor Londo, and when was Irythyll of the Boreal Valley built in its place? Did Aldrich devour the rest of Anor Londo along with Gwynevere and Gwyndolin? What the hell is going on here? What is with the inconsistencies?
Trying to make sense of the world in Dark Souls III is very confusing. It seems like Lothric is a revitalized version of Lordran several years into the future after the first game, but including Anor Londo as a part of Lothric doesn’t make sense. It’s not an area of Anor Londo districted off to the kingdom of Lothric because anyone who has played the first game will recognize the building where you fight Ornstein and Smough and the giant blacksmith’s body lies. Did the lords of Lothric revamp Lordran into their own creation after the first flame was rekindled? That might explain why Anor Londo is gone except for the Ornstein and Smough building covered in Aldrich’s sludge. I think the real reason these familiarities are inconsistent lies in a problem outside of the game, and that is Dark Souls III relies too much on the impact of the first game. Dark Souls 1 was an experiment, but Dark Souls III doesn’t take any risks. It’s nice to see Anor Londo again, and it’s nice that Andre the Blacksmith is back, but did we need either of them in this game? We didn’t need to be reminded that this is a sequel to Dark Souls, FromSoft. In fact, all of the callbacks to the first game are total detriments to this one as they project a lack of inspiration and insecurities about this entry into the franchise. Either that or FromSoft ran out of ideas even with Miyazaki back at the helm.
This isn’t to say that Dark Souls III is a bad game. I quite like Dark Souls III and consider it to be a solid entry in the franchise and a great way to cap off the trilogy.
Objectively, it might even be a better game than the first one from a technical standpoint. It may not have the same impact as the first Dark Souls in artistic achievement, but it makes up for it by being the most fine-tuned Dark Souls game. Dark Souls III is the culmination of every previous Souls game, and it also takes elements from Bloodborne. Dark Souls III is a testament to the evolution of the Dark Souls formula. It’s not just a proper sequel to the first Dark Souls, but to every previous game in the franchise.
I mentioned in my Dark Souls II review that all of the changes the game made inadvertently caused it to feel more “video gamey.” These changes cheapened the impact that the first game had because they were so shoddily implemented. In the case of Dark Souls III, the “video gamey” changes from Dark Souls II are improved upon because the impetus of Dark Souls III was to shave off the esoteric aspects of the first game. FromSoft wanted to make a more accessible Dark Souls experience, which they achieved by toning up every aspect of the series. Just to be clear, accessibility is not necessarily a bad thing. All of the “video gamey” changes to Dark Souls II were made to be as inaccessible as possible. Dark Souls III fixed these up and made them palatable.
One of these was the estus system from Dark Souls II. Again, I’m not sure what was wrong with the estus system from the first game, but at least the system in Dark Souls III makes sense. You start with five estus flasks, a reasonable number instead of the rationed one estus flask from Dark Souls II (and no, there aren’t any weird healing crystals that slowly heal you that the developers make you rely on. Miyazaki wouldn’t fuck you over like that). You can explore to find more estus shards to increase the total number of flasks giving you a naturally occurring leveling system for the estus flasks as the game gets harder. There are 15 instead of 20, but I rarely ran dry on estus anyways. There is also an option to divide your estus flasks into blue ashen estus flasks to refill your magic meter. I suppose this is good news for magic users, but I never bothered with them because I am a brutish melee player. The human effigies that replace humanity in Dark Souls II have been changed to embers in Dark Souls III. Instead of restoring your maximum health due to death penalties, embers give you a 30% maximum health boost. They are in finite supply like human effigies, but they occur automatically once you defeat a boss. Once you die, the effect is no longer there. It’s refreshing to be rewarded for victory instead of being punished for failure. One of the negative aspects of “video gamey” accessibility is the placement of the bonfires. I mentioned in my Dark Souls 1 review that bonfires acted as checkpoints but were not dispersed in typical video game fashion like getting to a new area or defeating a boss. In the spirit of accessibility, Dark Souls III gives you a bonfire every time you get to a new area or defeat a boss. Because of this, the intense nature of leveraging your estus and trying to find a bonfire is seldom present. They really implemented this to fault as some bonfires are merely a couple of yards away from one another. Thanks for looking out for me, FromSoft. I’ll be careful not to get massacred walking twenty feet.
The elements Dark Souls III borrows from Bloodborne are even more readily apparent. It seems that FromSoft decided that the more aggressive, faster-paced gameplay in Bloodborne was the optimal approach to combat. In the scope of Dark Souls, it’s a little mixed. The enemies in this game are so relentless that you question whether or not you need a shield since you need to attack them with the same high energy. It works, but it feels a little TOO much like Bloodborne. Following suit with Bloodborne’s unpredictable aggression are the bosses. Not only do they never let up, but each boss has one or two more phases to throw you off. This starts as early as the first boss, Iudex Gundyr, who seems like a simple weapon-wielding humanoid boss to teach new players how to dodge attacks or parry. That is until he sprouts a tar-black, reptilian-looking demon out of his orifices at half health, and you start pelting firebombs at him out of shock and terror. Get used to this because almost every boss will present a new obstacle for you to work around. Personally, I think boss phases are a great way to keep the player on edge and offer a challenge that fits organically with the boss battles of the series.
The world design of Lothric also reminds me of the world from Bloodborne. The level progression is mostly a linear path of several levels with a little deviation from the main path. It’s underwhelming compared to the world of the first Dark Souls and even Bloodborne, but each level is still designed superbly.
I’ve already gone into fine detail about what Dark Souls III emulates from the first game. I’m not impressed by Dark Souls III’s tendency to use the first game as a crutch regarding its lore and settings. With all this in mind, I think some individual aspects of Dark Souls III are comparatively better than in the first game. The world isn’t as impressively designed as in the first game The closest Dark Souls III comes to capturing the grand juxtaposition between areas are the areas between Irythyll of the Boreal Valley. It feels great unearthing oneself from the catacombs to uncover the frigid wonderland that is Irythyll of the Boreal Valley, like resurfacing from the water to breathe fresh air. The Irythyll Dungeon acts like the Painted World of Ariamis in that it shows the seedy underbelly of the seemingly magnificent Irythyll, except the underlings are far more unsettling, and it feels far more claustrophobic. This is as close as the world of Dark Souls III gets to provide the same impact as the first game through level progression. However, the individual levels are consistently better in Dark Souls III. There are some levels in the first game that I still dread visiting, like Tomb of the Giants, New Londo Ruins, and the Catacombs. Still, I forgive them individually because they are essential in crafting the entirety of the world of Lordran. Because Dark Souls III takes a different approach to world design, the areas don’t exactly fit a cohesive whole, but they don’t have to. Each area feels different from the last one, and I don’t have any gripes about them. Areas that drew ire from me initially have grown on me, and I now appreciate them like the poison pool, Blighttown-esque Farron Keep to the aforementioned Irythyll Dungeon. The stand-out area in this game is definitely Irythyll of the Boreal Valley. It’s the gigantic, mid-game capital in the same vein as Anor Londo, so the grand scale of it automatically elevates the area above everywhere else.
The bosses in Dark Souls III are also consistently better than the ones in the first Dark Souls. Most of them aren’t as memorable as, say, Ornstein and Smough or Quelaag, but none of the bosses in Dark Souls III piss me off like the Four Kings or the Bed of Chaos. Many bosses in this game boil down to the mechanics of a humanoid sword wielder. They come in a wide variety in design, but there are so many sword-wielding bosses that parry enthusiasts will speed through this game. It’s a little tiring. The bosses in the first game were far more memorable, but some of the gimmicks didn’t work. When the bosses in Dark Souls III have gimmicks that make them unique, the gimmicks make their fights much more interesting instead of grating. One of my favorite bosses in the game is the two princes. Once you defeat Lorian, Prince Lothric resurrects him and jumps on his back with his own health bar while Lorian’s health is halved. You have to cripple Lorian some more to get to Lothric, but you only have to defeat Lothric to win the fight. It’s not a gank boss, but this fight between two bosses is much better executed than several other gank bosses across the series. The gimmick with the Ancient Wyvern is fantastic. Many people feel cheated by a boss that dies in one hit, but plunging my sword into his brain and watching his health bar drop like the 1929 stock market crash is hilarious. The one boss in this game that stands out above the rest is the Nameless King, who is arguably the perfect Dark Souls boss. He’s a strapping, formidable foe who rides a dragon and has the power of wind and lightning on his side. He even seems more god-like than Gwyn. The first phase of his fight with the Dragon is easy, but his second phase is easily the hardest fight in the game. Even though he is learnable if you play it safe, his fight is still tough as nails. Taking him down feels like taking down Zeus.
Once you retrieve the four lord souls, the final battle in Dark Souls III takes place in the “Kiln of the First Flame.” This place merely shares the same name as the final area of the first game as it is structured differently. It could be the same place, but that would unearth my confusion about Lothric in the place of Lordran again. The final boss is the Soul of Cinder, another humanoid boss with a multi-faceted moveset with two different phases with their own hulking health bars. Getting to this fight doesn’t have the same weight as getting to Gwyn, but the Soul of Cinder is an estus drainer that will have you holding on by a thread at the end of it. Is the Soul of Cinder supposed to be your character from the first game? Who knows, but I wish my character from Dark Souls 1 could combo and whip magic out of his ass like the Soul of Cinder. Once the fight is over, you either sacrifice yourself to prolong the suffering or extinguish the land and have darkness sweep it away. However, there is another ending option that is a little more ambiguous. You can “usurp” the fire, which has more complex implications. It’s arguably the best ending because it’s different, and it forces you to get more involved with the lore of this game but unlocking it is incredibly particular and circuitous. I don’t recommend attempting to get this ending on your first playthrough.
Whether you decide to kindle the first flame or douse it, the light that was the Dark Souls series was stamped out by FromSoft. Considering how much they borrowed from the first game, it was indicative of how quickly FromSoft ran out of ideas for the franchise. Fortunately, the swan song of Dark Souls managed to implement everything great from the previous games, fixing every loose screw. Does its lack of unique identity ultimately put it in the shadow of Dark Souls 1? Unfortunately, yes. I hate to give Dark Souls II any credit, but at least it was different from the first game. Games like Bloodborne and other soulslike games seem to be stronger successors to the legacy of Dark Souls, but this doesn’t mean that Dark Souls III is useless. If Dark Souls 1 is the sun, Dark Souls is a lightbulb. It doesn’t have the same scope as the sun, but it serves its purpose with essentially the same function and even has its own unique utility. And if you're wondering what Dark Souls II is in this analogy, it's like a shitty model of the sun made by a seventh grader for their science class.
———
Attribution: https://erockreviews.blogspot.com