Dark Souls III
Now obvioulsy I'm not just starting this game now, I got it back when it came out in April 2016 and played it pretty hard, but never seemed to get that far. I figured as I was already familiar enough with the games tropes that starting out as a knight or warrior was beneath me and instead opted to play the new Assassin class. It did not go well, but additional attempts at playing other classes didn't seem to feel good either and eventually I came to realize I had 50+ hours and I had only done the first couple of zones and kind of lost interest.
The game does certain things right that I think
Dark Souls II failed in. I like how the level design has gone back to the verticality of the original game, instead of the flat plane. The bosses feel a lot more interesting too and don't rely solely on enemies in armor that feel a little unspectacular. I also like how it's taken some of the gameplay changes from
Dark Souls II like the limited estus uses which you incrementally increase as you find estus shards and even the weapon degredation that resets at bonfines, but this time feels like it's a little less brutal.
That that being said, I think
Dark Souls II the better sequel to the series, in the sense that it uses the original as a jumping off point to try new and different things.
Dark Souls III just feels like the typical sequel to the original that it would have received if the game was published by EA or Activision. So much of the game feels like it's trying too hard to cram in callbacks to
Dark Souls that the game kind of lacks an identity of its own. I also have a sneaking suspicion that they were using art assets and redesigned levels from
Bloodborne because areas like the Undead Settlement and Ithyll of the Boreal Valley looked like they came right out of
Bloodborne. I'm also not as keen on the linear nature of the game, but that was a problem I had with
Dark Souls II after you got to Dranglaic Castle. There's nothing quite like it in
Dark Souls when you arrive at Firelink Shrine and can look around to the world in which you'll be exploring. They kind of did this in
Dark Souls III after you beat the first boss, as you can stand on the outside of the castle and look around, but it's just not quite the same.
Whinging aside, the game is still great. Combat feels just as visceral as ever, and seems to have gone for more of the frantic speed focused combat from
Bloodborne rather than the strength focused, as evidenced by them nerfing the poise system. I've heard people complain that FromSoftware have buggered up the game's lore, but I've taken that to mean that some of what people like VaatiVidya have claimed to be the story may not be the case. Either way, I don't generally play the Souls games for their stories, so I'm not too miffed by that.
If I had to rate the series I'd say it would go like this,
1)
Dark Souls
2)
Bloodborne
3)
Dark Souls II: Scholar of the First Sin
4)
Dark Souls III