Jaadiel
1986
I can't believe that they made Dark Souls in 1986
2003
Honestly, the game is really good, it's just held back by technical issues and the STUPID decision to make you play through the game FOUR TIMES to see the ending. I could see this going up another star if a remaster were to fix these issues.
1985
Played this for the first time recently. Surprisingly, this one was my least favorite out of the original trilogy. I find it lacks the charm and ingenuity of 2 and 3 (and World).
That being said, it's a trailblazer, and absolutely one of the most important games ever made (maybe THE most important). You can hardly blame it for not living up to the things that came after it, as it's the innovations made by this game that allowed those to even happen.
Don't take that as me saying it isn't fun to play, because it is. I'd recommend playing it. It's pretty crazy to see where all these modern platformer tropes came from.
That being said, it's a trailblazer, and absolutely one of the most important games ever made (maybe THE most important). You can hardly blame it for not living up to the things that came after it, as it's the innovations made by this game that allowed those to even happen.
Don't take that as me saying it isn't fun to play, because it is. I'd recommend playing it. It's pretty crazy to see where all these modern platformer tropes came from.
This review contains spoilers
God dammit, I know it's the worst designed one but I just love it anyway. The hitboxes are terrible, the bosses are way too simplistic, and the game assaults you with bullshit at every turn. However, if you're willing to endure the flaws, there's some great stuff in here.
I think the reason I enjoy it so much is because it's a game that's not afraid to throw new and unique ideas at you every chance it gets. One moment you may be fighting enemies with lava traps in a fire castle, and another you may be in a crypt trying to prevent zombies from ringing a bell that summons deadly ghosts. The straightforward level progression of ds1 and 3 has been exchanged for a series of more puzzle-like mini-areas that demand something more from the player than just getting from one end to another. This is probably the game's greatest strength and greatest weakness.
A strength of this design philosophy is that the game can more easily craft memorable gameplay moments. A standout example of this comes at the end of the game, where the player must do a series of honorable duels with these giant dragon-knights. The player can choose to run past them, but this will trigger all the smaller minions in the area to activate and chase them down. It's just a wonderful way to build up the encounter with the ancient dragon, as it feels as though you've truly proved that you're worthy to be in his presence.
The issue with this design philosophy is that, due to the Dark Souls' series minimalist style, the designers weren't really able to tutorialize each level's unique mechanics. This is made worse by the game's unforgiving difficulty. If the player doesn't approach the gimmick correctly, they will be treated to a swift and brutal death. This can really take the wind out of what could otherwise be a powerful moment. For instance, the aforementioned moment where the player proves their worth to the dragon is a great moment IF you know what the game expects from you. The problem is that the game doesn't clearly communicate the rules to the player, so many people just try to run past the giant knights and get clobbered by the smaller ones.
This is why this game is such a mixed bag. The levels are overly punishing and straight up unfair most of the time. However, once you figure out what the game expects of you, it becomes very enjoyable. In that way, it's an incredibly hard game to rate. Do I rate it as the frustrating experience that I had the first time through? Or, do I rate it as I experience it now? I guess I'll just go in the middle.
That being said, I'd recommend giving it a shot. You may wind up disliking it, but there is the possibility that you'll love it.
I think the reason I enjoy it so much is because it's a game that's not afraid to throw new and unique ideas at you every chance it gets. One moment you may be fighting enemies with lava traps in a fire castle, and another you may be in a crypt trying to prevent zombies from ringing a bell that summons deadly ghosts. The straightforward level progression of ds1 and 3 has been exchanged for a series of more puzzle-like mini-areas that demand something more from the player than just getting from one end to another. This is probably the game's greatest strength and greatest weakness.
A strength of this design philosophy is that the game can more easily craft memorable gameplay moments. A standout example of this comes at the end of the game, where the player must do a series of honorable duels with these giant dragon-knights. The player can choose to run past them, but this will trigger all the smaller minions in the area to activate and chase them down. It's just a wonderful way to build up the encounter with the ancient dragon, as it feels as though you've truly proved that you're worthy to be in his presence.
The issue with this design philosophy is that, due to the Dark Souls' series minimalist style, the designers weren't really able to tutorialize each level's unique mechanics. This is made worse by the game's unforgiving difficulty. If the player doesn't approach the gimmick correctly, they will be treated to a swift and brutal death. This can really take the wind out of what could otherwise be a powerful moment. For instance, the aforementioned moment where the player proves their worth to the dragon is a great moment IF you know what the game expects from you. The problem is that the game doesn't clearly communicate the rules to the player, so many people just try to run past the giant knights and get clobbered by the smaller ones.
This is why this game is such a mixed bag. The levels are overly punishing and straight up unfair most of the time. However, once you figure out what the game expects of you, it becomes very enjoyable. In that way, it's an incredibly hard game to rate. Do I rate it as the frustrating experience that I had the first time through? Or, do I rate it as I experience it now? I guess I'll just go in the middle.
That being said, I'd recommend giving it a shot. You may wind up disliking it, but there is the possibility that you'll love it.
1994
I can't believe they made Hollow Knight in 1996.
2022
Disappointing. The combat has a lot of great aspects, but they're held back by terrible inclusions elsewhere. The field system adds nothing to the combat. It just makes it more tedious to go from fighting one enemy to another. The currency is given out far too slowly (for context, I got pretty high ranks on most of the chapters and didn't buy any items, yet I still was only able to afford 1 move per end of chapter). The item system takes up far too much real estate on the controller, and the camera is one of the worst I've experienced in this type of game, and that says A LOT.
I'd only recommend this to the most diehard of Hack n' Slash fans.
I'd only recommend this to the most diehard of Hack n' Slash fans.