This article contains spoilers of plot points and gameplay scenarios
in Dark Souls II for the PlayStation 3, Xbox 360, PC, PlayStation 4, and Xbox One.
After much deliberation, I think it’s safe to say
that the original Dark Souls is my
favorite game of all time. It’s just such a wonderful thing that I can barely
contain my composure when talking about its vast, sprawling worlds, filled with
things to do, secrets to uncover, and mysteries never to be solved. Huge, imposing
creatures found in the most dank, depressing corners of Lordran. Tough,
imposing, uncompromising, yet doable boss encounters which tested your limits,
pushing you further and further into the brink of uncertainty, kicking you out
from the game for days, weeks, possibly months. But when you returned, fresh
and revitalized, you’d find yourself empowered, a changed person, and would
find the strength and the courage to plow through until the next surprising
twist, the vicious circle beginning anew.
Dark
Souls took me two years to complete; a long time indeed
for a game that’s not really that long in the grand scheme of things, yet the experience of playing it is long.
It felt like finishing a year at school; one takes the time to sit down and look
back at the things that have changed in their life, the friendships mended and
broken, changes in our bodies, maybe finding ourselves in a new place to call
home. Finishing Dark Souls felt like
how I would imagine breaking up with a long-time spouse could feel; it was good
that I had closed the book on it, but I yearned for more. But of course, too
much of a good thing is never a good thing.
I’d already played Hidetaka Miyazaki’s original
masterpiece, Demon’s Souls, in
anticipation for what was then known as Project
Dark. Many fans of the original game seemed absolutely ecstatic about its
spiritual successor, simply on the grounds that it was to be another game in
the vein of the original, but with a wider vision via an open world, it was to
be released on two platforms instead of one and promised to be as brutal,
challenging, and satisfying as Demon’s
Souls before it.
Demon’s
Souls confounded me in ways that a game never really had
before. I remember thinking that the game seemed literally impossible yet
engaging, an unplayable yet strangely parsable mess. Again and again I threw
myself into scenarios which now seem trivial in hindsight, mashing away at the
attack buttons in hopes of overcoming adversity through sheer willpower, each
small battle a grand war of attrition. Souls
aficionados will know this to be a rather futile approach, but it’s the way
we’ve been taught after years of differently-paced action games, games which award
not patience but pure animosity.
This approach to a combat-oriented game is what
makes Dark Souls so brilliant to me.
With Dark Souls, From Software
managed to take the original game’s more level-oriented approach and put it
into an expansive world full of twists and turns, secrets to find, dark
mysteries to unravel. This required the designers harnessing a deep understanding
of the original conceit behind Demon’s
Souls and melding it with a more Zelda-esque
philosophy, minus that franchise’s hand-holding walks through the park moments.
An ambitious undertaking, indeed, but From Software
passed the test with flying colors. Dark
Souls is so good that I wish I were playing it once again
right now instead of writing. How I wish I could re-experience my first time
conquering the impossible duo of Ornstein & Smough (glitchy as they are
menacing); how I would love to go back and find The Great Hollow and Ash Lake
on my own instead of having the surprise ruined for me via the Internet (would
I have found them in the first place? Indeed, I yearn for unadulterated
experience); how I’d like to feel anew the tensions, the heightened nerves, the
heartache of losing victory to the Gaping Dragon when it was so close. The game
is still there, but replaying it, New Game + mode or not, is a different experience,
one that’s no less valid (being able to defeat the Asylum Demon with just a few
simple hits when previously he seemed impossible feels fantastically
liberating) but is still different.
For a long time, I wondered how it would be possible
to follow up such an ambitious feat. A few months after releasing the botched
PC port of the game with the new Artorias
of the Abyss expansion, From Software announced a sequel to the original at
the Spike Video Game Awards. Fan reaction was a bit disjointed; people were
afraid, and rightly so, that an announcement at an event as mainstream as the
VGA’s signaled that the game’s much-beloved difficulty and sense of discovery
would be watered down so as to appeal to a wider audience, one more interested
in shorter, simpler, more straightforward affairs. But From Software made it a
point to assure the fans that those elements of the original Dark Souls would remain intact, while
also adding that the game would have some things changed so as to ensure that
more players would be able to enjoy this new Souls experience. It seemed like a decent compromise to make; after
all, publishers and developers alike do have to make money, and the new Dark Souls II team was larger than the
last, with a new director at the helms to boot. As well, Bandai Namco backed
the game with a much larger marketing push than any of the previous Souls games ever had. Games are
expensive; these are things I’m cognizant of.
That said, having put a lot of time into the final
game (I completed it in under two weeks), I can’t help but shake the feeling
that Dark Souls II feels like a huge
cash grab in a lot of different, dissappointing ways. I feel that the game is a
rushed “product” more so than a intelligently-curated experience, a
fundamentally broken game which arbitrarily changed some things while also not
attempting to surprise players enough that overall makes for a generally stagnant
experience.
From the game’s onset, immediately something feels
amiss. A long introductory CGI cutscene plays, a far cry from the original Dark Souls’ short but sweet camera pan
into the prison we find ourselves in. We’re privy to a good deal of exposition,
though it’s still all quite vague in that signature Dark Souls way.
Once all the talk is over, we’re thrown into Things
Betwixt. Walking forward, we meet an old woman who gives us even more talk. I
actually skipped it about halfway through as I was just kind of done listening
and wanted to start exploring; I feel there are more interesting and concise
ways to introduce your game’s story, especially in a game like the Souls franchise.
Luckily, while the next area does contain some
tutorial sections, they are in fact optional; we can just walk right by them.
It is important to teach players the controls, as the Souls games do have a good deal of context-sensitive actions which
can require quite tricky button presses and timing, so I absolutely don’t mind
this style of tutorial, especially since as an experienced player I can just
walk by them. I like that they kept this stuff pretty short and to the point,
but it still isn’t as quick and forceful as the original game’s intro, which
teaches you by throwing you right into one of the game’s signature boss
encounters; instruction by failure at its most poignant.
We soon leave Things Betwixt and are introduced to
Majula. Majula serves as a hub of sorts, less so than the Nexus from Demon’s Souls, but they definitely share
some characteristics. We’re forced to level up here, replacing the previous
game’s convenient way of being allowed to level up at the game’s bonfire
checkpoints. Both games feature a maiden who we talk to quite a bit, though the
original game’s is more whimsical and less bothersome (we end up seeing her in
more places than just here, as we’ll later find out). There are merchants,
though they’re a little more spread out, as Majula is sort of like a very small
town or commune. A few locations are initially locked away, such as the
blacksmith’s house, the mansion, and the well (this isn’t actually locked away
but can only be explored by obtaining a ring which reduces our fall damage or
by meeting a character who can put ladders in one of two locations). This
aspect of Majula was interesting; it’s different to have a hub location in a
game which has immediate mysteries to solve. I do hope if future games in the
series have hub worlds that this trend continues.
After getting settled in and spending our souls on
precious stats, it’s time to go on our way. You see, in Dark Souls II, we play as an Undead human who bears a dark curse,
whom has travelled to the land of Drangleic in search of revived humanity. The
Emerald Herald at Majula informs us that if we are to slay the four Great
Souls, owned by the Old Iron King at the Iron Keep, the Rotten at the Black
Gulch, the Lost Sinner at Sinner’s Rise, and the Duke’s Dear Freja at Brightstone
Cove Tseldora, we will gain access to Drangleic Castle, home of King Vendrick
and Queen Nashandra, in hopes of restoring our character to their former
selves.
If this general conceit seems familiar, that’s
because it is, in more ways than one. Dark
Souls as well had four important bosses to slay, which would give us access
to the final encounter. In the sequel, finishing off the four bosses doesn’t
quite bring us to the conclusion, as there are a couple more things on the
checklist to carry out, but it bears similarity. In fact, upon playing the game
anew in New Game + and slaying the bosses again, we’re told that the four Great
Souls bosses are actually directly related to their Dark Souls descendants (the Old Iron King to Lord Gwyn, the Duke’s
Dear Freja to Seath the Scaleless, the Rotten to Gravelord Nito, and the Lost
Sinner to the Witch of Izalith, also known as the Bed of Chaos).
And so we venture
forth, given a choice between the Forest of the Fallen Giants (you’ll hear a
lot about the Giants throughout your time in Dark Souls II) and Heide’s Tower of Flame. The immediately striking
thing about this game is how linear it is; once in a while you’ll be given a
choice on where you can go, like in the introduction or in a fork in the road
in the Shaded Woods, but the game is much more of a set of differing branching
paths than it is a dense, sometimes confusing yet also clear sprawling recursive
series of shortcuts and hidden alcoves.
The game doesn’t try
too hard to make much geographical sense; I’m reminded often of the absurdity
of taking an elevator upwards while on top of a mountain and finding myself in
a firey lava temple, or taking an elevator while on top of Aldia’s Keep and
reaching the floating spires lived in by dragons. Indeed, Dark Souls II’s world is one of fantasy, but in the past, Miyazaki
tried to make the world seem logical, and thus relatable in a weird way. This
one feels mangled together without much forethought.
I’d like to highlight
one particularly absurd and egregious example of a navigational goof that seems
absolutely absurd in hindsight, but I didn’t think much of when first encountered.
One of the paths in the Shaded Woods leads us to a pile of chest-high ruined
structures blocking our way, but there is an elevated path up the side of a
mountain to our side. Going up it, we find the Shrine of Winter, which is
basically a door that won’t open until we have the required Great Souls. When
we can enter it, we basically just end up going down the same mountain and end
up on the other side of the rubble. I can’t stress how ridiculously patronizing
this feels; surely my character could walk up and over some trash? It’s the
kind of world-building that Miyazaki would not have allowed, an obviously
rushed workaround, but a workaround for a problem that they themselves
introduced. After all, could not the door have been placed where the broken
pillars currently are instead? That seems like it would have been less work and
would have made way more sense in the grand scheme of things.
The mostly linear
pathways offered by Dark Souls II
worked much better in Demon’s Souls,
its different worlds like the Boletarian Palace or the Valley of Defilement
acting more as vignettes that are unified by the portal that is the Nexus than
the pseudo-connected land that is Drangleic. If you’ve played the original Dark Souls, this might immediately sound
like a bad idea; if all areas are linear, doesn’t that mean that you’ll end up
having to do a lot more backtracking when done with certain locations due to
the game’s lack of branching shortcuts?
The answer is no, as
you’re given the ability to teleport from bonfires right from the beginning. In
the previous game, you had to earn this ability by conquering Ornstein and
Smough at Anor Londo, one of the game’s most often maligned boss encounters
(possibly one of the hardest in all of the Souls
franchise). Without it, you felt trapped; being stuck in the Depths or in
the swamps of Blighttown, too afraid to try and reverse your progress for the
sake of light and freedom felt straining, but in a way that contributes a lot
to the original Dark Souls being a
fully-realized experience. Dark Souls II
undoes this extraordinary pressure in progression by increasing the amount of
bonfires one finds exponentially and giving you the teleport immediately, which
you’ll need to do often as you can’t level up from any bonfire now. It robs Dark Souls II of the original’s sense of
place; the game’s different locations feel more like levels that can be quit
out of now, even though they were built with the original conceit of emulating
the first game’s open world nature. By the time you had the teleport from the
Lordvessel in the first Dark Souls,
it didn’t matter, as the last few locations in the game, arguably
unfortunately, were built linearly (though personally I liked this approach as
it made those particular sections of the game feel like extended dungeons to
conquer; you’re not trying to explore, merely trying to reach the end of all of
them, and it follows your pace in that way).
The new game has a lot
more areas than the original did, but again, they lack that connectedness that
makes having an open world worthwhile in the first place. The original game’s
world-building felt so integral to the experience of playing the game, so
wholly woven into the game’s design that the new game’s had a lot to live up
to, and I think that by not going that extra mile the game sorely misses out. I
remember finding the elevator in the Undead Church that took us back to the
Firelink Shrine; this was an almost revelatory experience for me. I loved
thinking of the ways that the game linked together, wondering about the directions
one would have to go through the game’s world in order to have the optimally
short trip; in that Metroid way, you’d
eventually have the entire world internalized, as if solving some sort of grand
puzzle. It was stimulating in a way that Dark
Souls II’s Drangleic simply isn’t; it feels sterile in comparison.
This lack of “newness”
in Dark Souls II permeates the
entirety of the experience; a lot of things found in this game are basically
ripped out of the first two Souls
games. There’s a lot of the same armor and weapons, with only a handful of new
ones. It’s a shame; I don’t really like the idea that I can exactly rebuild my
character from the original game, with next to no distinctions. Dark Souls II tries so hard to emulate,
yet tries so little to innovate.
Enemies and bosses get
reused from the last game, some reskinned, while others are direct rips. Ornstein
returns, without his Smough compatriot; this is justified through some lore
reason, but likely moreso because, hey, you all liked Ornstein right? Smough
sort of returns in the form of a common enemy found atop the Dragon Shrine, who
pretty much uses all of the boss’s animations. Great Grey Wolf Sif, one of the
most staggeringly beautiful battles from the original game, was reskinned as
the Royal Rat Authority, complete with miniature rats diluting what made the
original fight so special, that intimate one-on-one experience. The Belfry Gargoyles
are here (they were the Maneaters in Demon’s Souls and the Bell Gargoyles in Dark Souls), but you now fight several
more of them at a time, and again on a rooftop. The Scorpioness Najka closely emulates
Dark Souls’ Chaos Witch Quelaag.
Even the game’s own
bosses get reused throughout the game’s runtime. You’ll meet the Pursuer early
on, and find several more of them later. The Dragonrider gets used again later
(you’ll fight two of them at once at Drangleic Castle). The second DLC expansion,
Crown of the Old Iron King, reuses
the Smelter Demon, with simply a different-colored aura permeating its body. The
Ancient Dragon is a larger version of the Guardian Dragon, who is a stone’s
throw away. Elana, the Squalid Queen from the Crown of the Sunken King expansion emulates Nashandra, the final
boss of the core game and can even summon an enemy to assist her who wears
Velstadt, the Royal Aegis’s armor.
I wouldn’t chastise anyone
for thinking some of the game’s other bosses are all copies of each other;
almost every boss encounter in this game has a sword or some equivalent. It
makes many of these encounters feel samey and boring. I started to actually
loathe new boss encounters because almost every time they just ended up being
another swordsman. For emphasis, I will list every boss in the game that is
primarily a swordsman, or rather, who wields some sort of a weapon as their
primary means of attack: The Last Giant uses its own arm as a sword halfway through
the fight; the Pursuer; the Looking Glass Knight; the Skeleton Lords; the Flexile
Sentry; the Lost Sinner; Belfry Gargoyles; the Ruin Sentinels; the Rotten; the
Old Dragonslayer; the Smelter Demon; the Old Iron King; Velstadt; King
Vendrick; the Darklurker; the Dragonrider(s); the Giant Lord; the Throne
Watcher and Throne Defender; Nashandra. From the downloadable expansions:
Elana, the Squalid Queen; the Afflicted Graverobber, Ancient Soldier Varg, and
Cerah the Old Explorer fight, two of which have swords; the Smelter Demon
redux; the Fume Knight; Sir Alonne; and the Burnt Ivory King. Perhaps I’ve made
my point clear enough? To put this into perspective, Dark Souls II has (including the expansions) 38 unique bosses and I
just named 24 of them (I don’t count the Twin Dragonriders, nor do I count the
second Smelter Demon).
I’ve had a hard time
articulating one of my other problems with the game, which is about the core
combat system. To put it simply, it just doesn’t feel as satisfying as the
previous game’s does at all. I always feel as if I’m just hitting rocks or a
stone wall when I attack enemies, instead of piercing actual flesh. I’ve not
done much research in this regard, but I suspect that it may have to do with
the game’s weaker sound effects, or perhaps just a general disdain for the game
that developed after a lengthy amount of time spent with it. Again, I don’t
know exactly what it is, but I’ve read other opinions similar to mine, so I
thought it worth mentioning.
There are really only a
couple meaningful changes to the gameplay to be found here. In Demon’s Souls, if you were a human and
died, you would turn into a soul form, which cut your health bar in half. This health
bar cut was removed in Dark Souls,
though you would still turn into a hollow form, which was always a little bit
strange, as it was one of the biggest drawbacks to dying (you still couldn’t
summon others or be invaded as a hollow). Dark
Souls II makes a bit of a concession between the two; when you die, you
lose a bit of your overall health bar every time you die until your health bar
is cut in half. As well, the previous game gave you an Estus Flask with five
uses, an amount which could be upgraded later in increments in five; it would
replenish upon death. Demon’s Souls
gave you non-replenishable health items, which I never liked and was happy Dark Souls decided to do away with. Dark Souls II gives you both; you are
given one Estus Flask usage (which can be added upon with upgrades) by the
Emerald Herald, and can also find non-replenishable items; both methods
replenish your health way slower than the items in the past games ever did.
The aforementioned
health changes as well as the fact that there are often way more enemies fighting
you at once feels like From Software bought too much into Bandai Namco’s “This
game is really fucking hard!” marketing campaign. Many of the boss encounters
add a bunch of extra enemies to distract you, or simply are just a bunch of
enemies trying to fight you at once. It ends up feeling like the game is simply
difficult more because the combat system is not really built to fight more than
a few enemies at once, instead of the enemies actually being challenging, interesting
encounters. I managed to finish both Demon’s
and Dark Souls completely by
myself, but felt that there were encounters in this game that were designed
around having more than one person fighting at once (luckily they fixed most of
the previous game’s online problems here!).
Aside from that, the
most I can say about it is, well, it’s a Souls
game. You explore places, kill enemies, find treasure, fight some bosses,
and repeat until you’re done. I don’t know that much needs to be done to this
general formula, though I can’t help but wish something were added or changed
to the blueprint to spice it up a bit. Of course, I want the games to remain in
the same general spirit of each other, but I do wonder what some
experimentation at the base level of the games’ core designs could do for the
future of the franchise.
Visually, Dark Souls II just doesn’t look as good
as the previous game. The sequel received a lot of flak during the lead-up to
its release when news came out that the game would no longer feature the
lighting system that was heavily advertised as being the core aesthetic push
forward; this graphical upgrade was to be the entire basis behind the now-useless
torch system, wherein you can replace an arm’s weapon or shield with a torch
which barely lights up anything. But worse, the game’s art direction just is
not as good as the original. The colors all look muted and lacking in diverse
visual designs for individual locations. The textures are much worse, and the
enemy designs aren’t anything to write home about. The original Dark Souls had some beautiful-looking
areas, but the sequel didn’t really have any standout visual moments to me.
Still, I can’t deny
that during my initial run through the game, I definitely had a lot of fun and
was engaged for most of it. There was something there inside me that Dark Souls II was able to tap into,
forcing me through its several hours worth of playtime in an embarrassingly
short span of time. But I don’t know that From Software would be able to do
that again for me; I definitely felt soured on the future of the Souls franchise by the end of the game.
It’s a shame, because
now Hidetaka Miyazaki himself is helming a new game that is Souls in all but the name, rebranded as Bloodborne. It’s a PlayStation 4
exclusive, just as Demon’s Souls was
a PlayStation 3 exclusive, and it’s a huge part of the reason that I’ll be
buying a PS4 this holiday season. Still, Dark
Souls II left me feeling a bit worn out, which sucks because Bloodborne looks immeasurably more
impressive in terms of visual splendor.
So what does Bloodborne need to do to leave its mark
on me? It’s simple really: try new things. Experiment with the Souls franchise again, a la Dark Souls. There are likely some
brilliant ideas that can be applied to the franchise to keep it fresh, but they
need to be tried and built upon throughout the duration of the game, even if
these ideas end up failures. One of my biggest aspirations was to see some
aspect of randomness/procedural generation in the series, which Bloodborne seems to be going for in a
few ways; according to what I’ve read in interviews and articles, enemies will
move through the city of Yharnam as if they actually live there, and aren’t
simply relegated to standing in one spot, waiting for the player so they can
strike. As well, though as of this writing there aren’t much details about it,
information has surfaced that Bloodborne
will apparently feature, “an expansive network of multi-leveled ruins,” which
will, “appear differently to each hunter brave enough to enter.” The prospect
of this sounds extremely exciting; it’s potentially the next big step this
franchise could take to feel incredibly unique and interesting again, not
treading water in the way I imagine a theoretical Dark Souls III would (and, sigh, probably will). It also has a new
aesthetic and some changes to the combat system which sound interesting, but
alas, only time will tell.
Most of all, I just want a Souls game to make me feel
something genuinely deep again. Dark
Souls II did not; it simply retraced the last game’s steps and wasn’t a
strong enough experience on its own to stand out much in my mind. Of course, I
do fear that genuinely new and frighteningly mysterious emotions could never be
generated in me from a Souls game ever
again, but still, Dark Souls was not
my first Souls experience; I merely
finished it first (and then Demon’s Souls
a few hours later). It still managed to leave an indelible mark upon me. The
quiet, contemplative, almost zen-like quality of the game was brilliant,
because these moments later accentuated points of deep existential fear and
anxiety within my psyche. I don’t want them to try to recreate these feelings
though; like I said, Dark Souls II tried
and failed. What I want is for these things to recur through happy accidents as
a result of venturing new ground.
Maybe one day I’ll be afraid of a new Souls game. Maybe one day I’ll dread playing
it again, not out of disdain for the work itself but for my inability to play
it well. Maybe one day I’ll be confounded by its bosses, its wayward new systems,
its abilities to affect my cognitive well-being, its ideas of progression.
Maybe someday. But maybe Dark Souls has
permanently left me immune; perhaps that, in fact, is the toughest part of the
game.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
No comments:
Post a Comment