Dark Souls Review
-----The 2010’s saw some pretty significant video game releases that defined the entertainment landscape going forward. It can be argued that one of the most significant games of that era was, and still is, Dark Souls. Released in 2011, Dark Souls came around the time when big budget fancies like Call of Duty were reaching their cultural endpoint. Meanwhile, the scene of independently, bedroom created games teased in the 2000’s were starting to become more of a focal point for players. Dark Souls rests somewhere in between those two worlds. It’s production design, scope, and attention to detail points towards a high end software experience. On the flip side the niche setting, uniquely bleak tone, and unforgiving difficulty is something you would normally get from a creator aiming towards a smaller audience. One that values earned experience, abstract storytelling, and a hands-off approach. Since it’s release, Dark Souls has gone on to launch several sequels, a spin-off, influence other developers, and even earn itself a quasi-genre: “Souls-like.” I’d argue that at least culturally, Dark Souls is the Defender of it’s generation. However, like Defender, I also have my specific qualms about this classic hardcore title.
-----
-----First of all, for those of the uninitiated, Dark Souls is a third person Action-RPG where the player takes control of the “chosen undead,” a figure whose purpose is to dethrone the king of Lordran (Dark Souls’s world) and become its new leader. There are more nuances in the lore if you want to get into it, however one rarely plays Dark Souls for it’s story. Really, Dark Souls and the Souls games are all about learned behaviours, patterns, character building, mood, and risk/reward. All of this is fed through a high difficulty lens that only welcomes those who are most familiar with established video game language. Dark Souls is a pretty tough game that offers what can barely be called a tutorial. It’s for the patient, and the tolerant. Depending on if you’re that type of person or not can really decide whether Souls will even appeal to you. For Christ’s sake, there’s a whole community sprung forth from these games that shout “Get Good!” at “filthy casuals” who even ask for advice. Still, the presence of challenge doesn’t mean the game isn’t enjoyable.
-----
-----Through Souls you get some very interesting environments to roam around in and explore. The type that weave in and out, and cleverly hide goodies and shortcuts with great use of 3D. FromSoftware is taking clear pages from D&D, Legend of Zelda, and even Metroid while simultaneously carving it’s own unique identity. Meanwhile the enemies can be classic yet thethening. Ghouls in medieval armor, slimes that wear out your equipment durability, dragons protecting riches on bridges, there’s even some scientific abominations and gargoyle type fiends thrown into the mix. It’s all complimented with the amount of choice the player receives. Off the bat the player can customize their character’s look and name to make their journeys personal. Then once they get out into Lordran there’s plenty of armor combinations and weapon types to choose from if you can get to them. In fact there’s a whole subset of players out there that simply like to play “Fashion Souls” with the amount of equipment FromSoftware offers.
-----
-----As for the combat, it’s complex, but not hard to wrap your head around (mostly). With each weapon you’re given two types of attacks, strong and weak, to use. Meanwhile there’s a wide array of magic to play with, and bows can be equipped for ranged options. As for the defensive, shields offer good blocking and shock absorptions, and a “Dodge Roll” can be executed to safely move one out of harm’s way, or perhaps take one closer to it. All of these actions are enforced at the cost of stamina, which depletes for almost anything you do besides walking, talking, and item use. This makes it so the player can only really execute a set amount of actions in a short amount of time before character exhaustion takes hold and the player's guard is pretty much stripped away. That scenario isn’t one you want to be caught in, as the enemies seem pretty smart. They can be slow and repetitive by design, but will absolutely punish the player’s missteps. These types of engaging encounters only make learning about yourself and your enemies so much more rewarding, and what can make victory taste oh so sweet.
-----
-----Of course, in a challenging game such as this, just having victory for victory’s sake would make combat seem a little tedious. That’s why the advent of Souls exists. More than just the namesake, Souls are the lifeblood in the game, perhaps literally. These are rewarded for killing enemies, like experience in a normal RPG. Like experience, it can also be spent at bonfires to level up your character’s stats. Attributes like strength, endurance, faith, and attunement play a key role in how you form your playstyle, and what types of means you have at your disposal for navigating Lordran. However, Souls are also used for currency, which can be traded with the game’s various quirky merchants for very useful key items or support items. This duality of Soul makes them extremely valuable, which makes it more devastating when you die and lose them all. This is the real crux of Dark Souls: the constant anxiety of dealing with tough foes while staring at that growing number Soul at the bottom right of your screen hoping, praying a bonfire will be around the corner to replenish your character’s health and healing items so that you keep that number high for the off chance of spending it for what you want most. In this respect, this is Dark Souls’s strongest risk/reward system, and it’s probably what’s helped the games hold up for so many years.
-----
-----As for my history of the franchise, I haven’t exactly been experiencing the franchise in order. I started the Souls games at installment number two, then Bloodborne, followed by three, and just now getting to the title that made them all possible in the first place. I bring this up because while I enjoyed my time with Dark Souls, my main gripes with it seem to be rooted in the knowledge of what FromSoftware has done with this concept post this game. For example, compared to its successors Dark Souls’s level design is quite open-ended. I don’t think this is a bad thing, but when combined with Souls’s hands-off approach to guiding the player and it’s hard difficulty can make getting lost especially frustrating. It doesn’t help when key bonfires are obscured behind esoteric, illogical hidden routes. I also thought Dark Souls’s beginning third went by at a slower pace than preferred for me. Circling around the boring Undead Burg/Perish wasn’t a particularly engaging experience, especially with it’s shield wielding enemies that demanded the player use Souls’s hard to execute ‘kick’ maneuver. It’s strange because while I think Souls games can generally drag-on, Dark Souls felt relatively well paced save for this one part of the game. In fact I’d say the game gets a lot better in its final third, sort of. You still get some pretty awful level design in the form of the complete darkness of the Tomb of the Giants, or the unfinished lava-filled landscapes of Lost Izalith. Even then, those two levels are only some examples of a handful of times when Dark Souls feels like it’s blatant taking the piss out of you for the sake of being demanding.
-----
-----To go slightly off-topic, each time a Souls game (or even just a Hidetaka Miyazaki directed game it seems) is released, a similar discussion plays out each time; Should a game like Dark Souls have an easy mode? Should less skilled players be allowed to experience the game without Souls’s trademark difficulty? I have my opinions on the discourse, but instead I’d like to laser-focus on one specific argument from one specific side of the discussion. An argument against making an easy mode for Dark Souls is that it would take away the “depth” of the gameplay. What these challenge seekers mean by this is that a huge point of Dark Souls for them is overcoming their own adversities by learning the game the developers set out for them, and conquering them using newly learned strategies. I think there’s merit to this argument, but only if you’re talking about any Souls game but the first. This is because while a core feature of Souls games are repeating the same challenges again and again until you overcome them, there always feels like there’s a sense of progress due to the fact that after defeating the same enemies repeatedly will eventually cause them not to respawn anymore from bonfires or deaths. This feature is one perhaps many Souls fans may not even notice, but I’ve always appreciated it as it was a way to help me feel like the actions I took on a given run would affect the game world. It also helped get rid of some of the biggest blockers for me, or even just help the pace of the game from being the same actions each and every time. I think this non-respawning of commonly defeated enemies is a great feature, and it’s a feature the first Dark Souls lack.
----
----Instead, no matter how many times an enemy is defeated, they will always be there. In the first Dark Souls, the player is expected to execute the path exactly right each time in order to progress. It can be argued that this forces the player to really learn Dark Souls in order to succeed, but I disagree. I feel as if that argument is solely reliant on each encounter in Dark Souls being rooted in skill, which is false. I can think of quite a few times in Dark Souls where luck plays a huge factor in whether you succeed in moving forward. The most glaring and infamous example being the archers in Anor Londo. I must have tried this area several times before looking up a guide, and even then continuing to fail until the archer eventually just fell off due to its own AI. Moments like this to me aren’t “depth,” it’s pure chance. It’s like that popular definition of insanity, and I think in that way Dark Souls can really waste the player’s time in its lowest moments.
-----
-----That being said, it’s not like Dark Souls’s repetition is it’s own fault all the time. I’ve been known to play video games in a particular way, and I think that stands true here. I think and tackle challenges very linearly at times, which caused me to not touch magic at all, nor did I take advantage of the parry mechanic all too much (not like it’s very easy to execute anyway). I also just don’t play multiplayer anymore, so I didn’t experience any PvP, world raids, or even Dark Souls’s beloved soapstone messages. However, it’s not like I don’t remember a time when that was very popular. In fact, while I mentioned the gatekeeping part of the Dark Souls fanbase in the beginning of this review, there must be an equal amount of fans who engage in “jolly cooperation.” They lay down summon signs, make detailed guides, and even have a strong presence on platforms like YouTube. I actually ran into a pretty great but unfinished guide series called “The Dumbshits Guide” by YouTuber Wildpie101. Watching these videos cause memories of how great and unique Dark Souls’s community can be, and I think my lonesome playthrough helped me appreciate that part of the game much more.
-----
-----Overall, I’ve conquered Dark Souls and come through the other side mostly happy. The classic mechanics and tone of the game still shines through to this day with one foot in great production, and the other in niche focus. I thought while the game dragged in the beginning, it eventually got better and I became more appreciative of it’s options. While Dark Souls seemed to rely on luck on occasion, I’d say the challenge and character building was rewarding enough to keep going and play it through to the end. Finally, while I didn’t play with magic or online features, I still feel like I got a full experience. One that required guides, which is a point against the game for me, but still it was like a good meal. If you’re wondering if you should pick up the first Dark Souls ten years after it’s release, I think it’s a good idea. Just so long as you’re the patient and tolerant type, and don’t mind looking at guides and wiki’s to find where you’re going or what you need to do, then I think Dark Souls can appeal to you. I do think that the games that followed after Dark Souls are a better starting point for new players, perhaps you may be able to appreciate Soul’s non-linear, hands-off approach. Praise the sun, practice your parry, and don’t be afraid to take your time in “getting good.” - [07/10]
-----The 2010’s saw some pretty significant video game releases that defined the entertainment landscape going forward. It can be argued that one of the most significant games of that era was, and still is, Dark Souls. Released in 2011, Dark Souls came around the time when big budget fancies like Call of Duty were reaching their cultural endpoint. Meanwhile, the scene of independently, bedroom created games teased in the 2000’s were starting to become more of a focal point for players. Dark Souls rests somewhere in between those two worlds. It’s production design, scope, and attention to detail points towards a high end software experience. On the flip side the niche setting, uniquely bleak tone, and unforgiving difficulty is something you would normally get from a creator aiming towards a smaller audience. One that values earned experience, abstract storytelling, and a hands-off approach. Since it’s release, Dark Souls has gone on to launch several sequels, a spin-off, influence other developers, and even earn itself a quasi-genre: “Souls-like.” I’d argue that at least culturally, Dark Souls is the Defender of it’s generation. However, like Defender, I also have my specific qualms about this classic hardcore title.
-----
-----First of all, for those of the uninitiated, Dark Souls is a third person Action-RPG where the player takes control of the “chosen undead,” a figure whose purpose is to dethrone the king of Lordran (Dark Souls’s world) and become its new leader. There are more nuances in the lore if you want to get into it, however one rarely plays Dark Souls for it’s story. Really, Dark Souls and the Souls games are all about learned behaviours, patterns, character building, mood, and risk/reward. All of this is fed through a high difficulty lens that only welcomes those who are most familiar with established video game language. Dark Souls is a pretty tough game that offers what can barely be called a tutorial. It’s for the patient, and the tolerant. Depending on if you’re that type of person or not can really decide whether Souls will even appeal to you. For Christ’s sake, there’s a whole community sprung forth from these games that shout “Get Good!” at “filthy casuals” who even ask for advice. Still, the presence of challenge doesn’t mean the game isn’t enjoyable.
-----
-----Through Souls you get some very interesting environments to roam around in and explore. The type that weave in and out, and cleverly hide goodies and shortcuts with great use of 3D. FromSoftware is taking clear pages from D&D, Legend of Zelda, and even Metroid while simultaneously carving it’s own unique identity. Meanwhile the enemies can be classic yet thethening. Ghouls in medieval armor, slimes that wear out your equipment durability, dragons protecting riches on bridges, there’s even some scientific abominations and gargoyle type fiends thrown into the mix. It’s all complimented with the amount of choice the player receives. Off the bat the player can customize their character’s look and name to make their journeys personal. Then once they get out into Lordran there’s plenty of armor combinations and weapon types to choose from if you can get to them. In fact there’s a whole subset of players out there that simply like to play “Fashion Souls” with the amount of equipment FromSoftware offers.
-----
-----As for the combat, it’s complex, but not hard to wrap your head around (mostly). With each weapon you’re given two types of attacks, strong and weak, to use. Meanwhile there’s a wide array of magic to play with, and bows can be equipped for ranged options. As for the defensive, shields offer good blocking and shock absorptions, and a “Dodge Roll” can be executed to safely move one out of harm’s way, or perhaps take one closer to it. All of these actions are enforced at the cost of stamina, which depletes for almost anything you do besides walking, talking, and item use. This makes it so the player can only really execute a set amount of actions in a short amount of time before character exhaustion takes hold and the player's guard is pretty much stripped away. That scenario isn’t one you want to be caught in, as the enemies seem pretty smart. They can be slow and repetitive by design, but will absolutely punish the player’s missteps. These types of engaging encounters only make learning about yourself and your enemies so much more rewarding, and what can make victory taste oh so sweet.
-----
-----Of course, in a challenging game such as this, just having victory for victory’s sake would make combat seem a little tedious. That’s why the advent of Souls exists. More than just the namesake, Souls are the lifeblood in the game, perhaps literally. These are rewarded for killing enemies, like experience in a normal RPG. Like experience, it can also be spent at bonfires to level up your character’s stats. Attributes like strength, endurance, faith, and attunement play a key role in how you form your playstyle, and what types of means you have at your disposal for navigating Lordran. However, Souls are also used for currency, which can be traded with the game’s various quirky merchants for very useful key items or support items. This duality of Soul makes them extremely valuable, which makes it more devastating when you die and lose them all. This is the real crux of Dark Souls: the constant anxiety of dealing with tough foes while staring at that growing number Soul at the bottom right of your screen hoping, praying a bonfire will be around the corner to replenish your character’s health and healing items so that you keep that number high for the off chance of spending it for what you want most. In this respect, this is Dark Souls’s strongest risk/reward system, and it’s probably what’s helped the games hold up for so many years.
-----
-----As for my history of the franchise, I haven’t exactly been experiencing the franchise in order. I started the Souls games at installment number two, then Bloodborne, followed by three, and just now getting to the title that made them all possible in the first place. I bring this up because while I enjoyed my time with Dark Souls, my main gripes with it seem to be rooted in the knowledge of what FromSoftware has done with this concept post this game. For example, compared to its successors Dark Souls’s level design is quite open-ended. I don’t think this is a bad thing, but when combined with Souls’s hands-off approach to guiding the player and it’s hard difficulty can make getting lost especially frustrating. It doesn’t help when key bonfires are obscured behind esoteric, illogical hidden routes. I also thought Dark Souls’s beginning third went by at a slower pace than preferred for me. Circling around the boring Undead Burg/Perish wasn’t a particularly engaging experience, especially with it’s shield wielding enemies that demanded the player use Souls’s hard to execute ‘kick’ maneuver. It’s strange because while I think Souls games can generally drag-on, Dark Souls felt relatively well paced save for this one part of the game. In fact I’d say the game gets a lot better in its final third, sort of. You still get some pretty awful level design in the form of the complete darkness of the Tomb of the Giants, or the unfinished lava-filled landscapes of Lost Izalith. Even then, those two levels are only some examples of a handful of times when Dark Souls feels like it’s blatant taking the piss out of you for the sake of being demanding.
-----
-----To go slightly off-topic, each time a Souls game (or even just a Hidetaka Miyazaki directed game it seems) is released, a similar discussion plays out each time; Should a game like Dark Souls have an easy mode? Should less skilled players be allowed to experience the game without Souls’s trademark difficulty? I have my opinions on the discourse, but instead I’d like to laser-focus on one specific argument from one specific side of the discussion. An argument against making an easy mode for Dark Souls is that it would take away the “depth” of the gameplay. What these challenge seekers mean by this is that a huge point of Dark Souls for them is overcoming their own adversities by learning the game the developers set out for them, and conquering them using newly learned strategies. I think there’s merit to this argument, but only if you’re talking about any Souls game but the first. This is because while a core feature of Souls games are repeating the same challenges again and again until you overcome them, there always feels like there’s a sense of progress due to the fact that after defeating the same enemies repeatedly will eventually cause them not to respawn anymore from bonfires or deaths. This feature is one perhaps many Souls fans may not even notice, but I’ve always appreciated it as it was a way to help me feel like the actions I took on a given run would affect the game world. It also helped get rid of some of the biggest blockers for me, or even just help the pace of the game from being the same actions each and every time. I think this non-respawning of commonly defeated enemies is a great feature, and it’s a feature the first Dark Souls lack.
----
----Instead, no matter how many times an enemy is defeated, they will always be there. In the first Dark Souls, the player is expected to execute the path exactly right each time in order to progress. It can be argued that this forces the player to really learn Dark Souls in order to succeed, but I disagree. I feel as if that argument is solely reliant on each encounter in Dark Souls being rooted in skill, which is false. I can think of quite a few times in Dark Souls where luck plays a huge factor in whether you succeed in moving forward. The most glaring and infamous example being the archers in Anor Londo. I must have tried this area several times before looking up a guide, and even then continuing to fail until the archer eventually just fell off due to its own AI. Moments like this to me aren’t “depth,” it’s pure chance. It’s like that popular definition of insanity, and I think in that way Dark Souls can really waste the player’s time in its lowest moments.
-----
-----That being said, it’s not like Dark Souls’s repetition is it’s own fault all the time. I’ve been known to play video games in a particular way, and I think that stands true here. I think and tackle challenges very linearly at times, which caused me to not touch magic at all, nor did I take advantage of the parry mechanic all too much (not like it’s very easy to execute anyway). I also just don’t play multiplayer anymore, so I didn’t experience any PvP, world raids, or even Dark Souls’s beloved soapstone messages. However, it’s not like I don’t remember a time when that was very popular. In fact, while I mentioned the gatekeeping part of the Dark Souls fanbase in the beginning of this review, there must be an equal amount of fans who engage in “jolly cooperation.” They lay down summon signs, make detailed guides, and even have a strong presence on platforms like YouTube. I actually ran into a pretty great but unfinished guide series called “The Dumbshits Guide” by YouTuber Wildpie101. Watching these videos cause memories of how great and unique Dark Souls’s community can be, and I think my lonesome playthrough helped me appreciate that part of the game much more.
-----
-----Overall, I’ve conquered Dark Souls and come through the other side mostly happy. The classic mechanics and tone of the game still shines through to this day with one foot in great production, and the other in niche focus. I thought while the game dragged in the beginning, it eventually got better and I became more appreciative of it’s options. While Dark Souls seemed to rely on luck on occasion, I’d say the challenge and character building was rewarding enough to keep going and play it through to the end. Finally, while I didn’t play with magic or online features, I still feel like I got a full experience. One that required guides, which is a point against the game for me, but still it was like a good meal. If you’re wondering if you should pick up the first Dark Souls ten years after it’s release, I think it’s a good idea. Just so long as you’re the patient and tolerant type, and don’t mind looking at guides and wiki’s to find where you’re going or what you need to do, then I think Dark Souls can appeal to you. I do think that the games that followed after Dark Souls are a better starting point for new players, perhaps you may be able to appreciate Soul’s non-linear, hands-off approach. Praise the sun, practice your parry, and don’t be afraid to take your time in “getting good.” - [07/10]