it occurs to me that we've had a copy of dark souls for ages and never even started the game
we've heard it's really good, and have been avoiding spoilers out of an interest in eventually playing it, but still haven't actually played it
@Felthry it's good. Though, there's an in-game player to player hint system that's not as helpful as it's meant to be since fewer people are still playing.
So you'll probably have to look some stuff up.
@Felthry there's things like save points that there's pretty much no way to find organically...
@starkatt Mrf. Did the later ones in the series improve on that any?
I'm interested in it because we've heard it's a really good example of storytelling through indirect means
@Felthry I have no idea, I only played 1.
Yeah though the worldbuilding and tone-setting is really well done. There's a lot of meaning communicated through gameplay and architecture that's rewarding to engage with.
@Felthry hard: having to learn enemy patterns the hard way, fights that require practice, dedication, and composure.
Unfair: hiding save points, map design that deliberately leads new players to an area above their skill level, an area where you have like a five foot light radius and have to navigate cliffs and no-warning ambushes by tough enemies.
@Felthry so Dark Souls 1 has a interesting mix of game design that's really hard and game design that's unfair.
The first is *really* rewarding to engage in, as progress feels like a personal accomplishment. You earn every step.
Less of the game is unfair, but it was enough that I decided I was some before finishing it. I had already gotten through the hardest fight so I called it good.