Dark Souls V Bloodbourne

Paddy Dreadful

Which is better and why?

strelok

dark souls because I love dark souls and I haven't played bloodborne

johnny_ultimate

They both have lovely bottoms.

Don't think there's any real value in having to settle on one being better than the other. They're both simply exceptional, and I think that's more than enough. If Bloodborne inevitably lost some of the sheer newness of Dark Souls and Demon's Souls before it it more than made up for in terms of its impeccable new combat system, art direction and storytelling. They're both intelligent, challenging works from one of gaming's few genuine 'auteurs', with their own strengths and quirks as well as the enviable DNA they share in common.

All that really matters is they're both better than Dark Souls 2

Zero-Cool

Dark Souls. I prefer the sword and shield gameplay. Bloodborne is a great game and the movement was class, nice and fast but by the end of it, I felt like I was gliding through it & a bit disconnected and didn't really feel like going through it again.

I suppose to sum up, I'm more looking forward to Dark Souls 3 than a possible Bloodborne 2.

Randall Floyd

It's a pointless comparison, they're too different.


Bloodborne

Kiith

I couldn't get into Bloodborne like i did with Dark Souls. Not sure what it was, it just didn't click with.

Although saying that, Dark Souls 2 didn't really hold my attention for too long either. Maybe it's just that Dark Souls was so brilliant, the rest just pale in comparison.

Generic Dreadhead

Jagged Alliance 2

Retr0gamer

Dark Souls for me. Bloodborne has the better combat but I still think it's very close between it and Dark Souls. Dark Souls on the other hand has more content, is far more challenging and tonnes of replay value due to the levelling system and the endless amounts of builds you can make. Bloodborne was too short for me (although left wanting more of a good thing isn't bad) and I felt the game was a bit of a breeze after the beginning. Also there's no real builds in the game, armour makes very little difference and builds only differ by the small selection of weapons. PvP is also kind of crap in bloodborne and has died off.

Still DLC could change that, the DS2 DLC was probably the best Souls/Bloodborne gameplay so far and From have a habit of out doing themselves with it.

Kiith

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Still DLC could change that, the DS2 DLC was probably the best Souls/Bloodborne gameplay so far and From have a habit of out doing themselves with it.

Was the DS2 DLC that good? Better then Artorias for DS1?

Retr0gamer

Kiith wrote: »

Was the DS2 DLC that good? Better then Artorias for DS1?

Yes, all three are amazing. The level design is superb and it's got some of the best boss battles in the series so far. The final battle is beyond epic. I played through scholar of the first sin recently to play the DLC since I never got around to it. It was so worth doing and it's still very active for PvP and co-op, well on PC at least. It's also good to see the From B team really learn from their mistakes with DS2, they really knocked it out of the park with the DLC.

johnny_ultimate

Still haven't gotten around to playing Artorias, but the DS2 DLC is pretty damn good. Definitely has some of the most memorable locations and level designs from the whole series, even boasting quite novel mechanics that mix up the flow of the gameplay.

Only thing I didn't like about it were some of the bosses were more battles of attrition than anything else, unreasonably buffed up which made a couple of the fights more tedious and frustrating that enjoyably challenging (although I'd say that's dependent on one's build as well). Which is a shame, as otherwise they were well designed with plenty of good ideas and as mentioned above a few of them were among the series' best.

sweetie

DS1 for me too having played all the souls games over the course of the year and agree with Retro, the DS2 DLC was epic, proper tough too. Could never beat two of the side bosses although could never get a summons for them either.

Kiith

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Yes, all three are amazing. The level design is superb and it's got some of the best boss battles in the series so far. The final battle is beyond epic. I played through scholar of the first sin recently to play the DLC since I never got around to it. It was so worth doing and it's still very active for PvP and co-op, well on PC at least. It's also good to see the From B team really learn from their mistakes with DS2, they really knocked it out of the park with the DLC.

I know what i'm playing tonight so

Kirby

Bloodborne.

I'm a sword and board type guy. In Bloodborne you can't block so the transition into Bloodborne should have been tough......but it wasnt because the combat is much improved. It's still a little janky and old school for sure but it is much superior to the 90's ps1 style from Dark souls. Souls combat is just poor. It's slow, laggy, buggy and it doesnt look good with clunky animations and lots of clipping. Bloodborne has more smoothness,speed and elegance to its combat so it gets the nod there.

It still has that very japanese trait of not explaining the world to you or what is going on.....but its slightly better in that regard than demons souls and DS1. It's a little less obtuse which is nice for newcomers.

Visually while Bloodborne is a prettier game due to the hardware of the ps4, I prefer the worlds of the souls games. I'm not a massive "lovecraft" fan. I think the way the DS1 world was stitched together was superb. So I preferred DS1 for that even though it was visually inferior, it felt cooler to explore.

I'm eager to see what sort of Dark souls 3 we shall see. I'm hoping they will take the aspects of Bloodborne that worked and apply them. I'm also hoping that after 4 games, they finally have figured out how to do Pvp and Co-op that is easy to use and not an exercise in frustration.