What went wrong ?
working as intended
>>339142539
>>339142451
Too much bonfires.
Besides that it was alright.
>>339142451
Dark Souls 3>Bloodborne
Commence the angry replies
>>339142451
It has a few flaws but so does every game. I enjoyed it.
nothing
Less replayability. No real build variety or a good reason to go NG+.
they called it dark souls 3 instead of bloodbourne 2
Too easy, too short, abandoned the spell slot system for mememanabar, not enough weapons, not enough movesets, not enough armor sets.
>>339142451
Nothing, can't wait for DLCs.
>>339142451
Strictly worst combat then the game preceding it, and strictly less captivating than almost all the other titles.
Mechanics that were only partially removed.
Unmemorable and generic, by-the-books sequel bogged down with universe references.
Good game overall, but nothing special. Sort of like a Japanese Witcher 3.
>>339145025
That would imply it was good.
Dark Souls 3 fits in with the other two ho-hum titles that it shares a name with.
>>339145201
no because bloodborne is bad. as a standalone game its fine, but it shouldnt of become the standard for the series
and it really doesnt fit, the enviroments are drab and samey (like bloodborne) and the gameplay is totaly different compared to 1 and 2. its a completely different game.
>>339144880
no-one's gonna get angry, ya dingus
they'll just call you stupid, which you are
>>339145025
>bourne
you mean like the moviesI can't believe this is such a common spelling error, I just don't get it... is it meta trolling?
>>339145405
Bloodborne was better than Dark Souls 3.
>>339146172
it's like rogue and rouge
99% of anglophones are dyslexic
>>339146172
no im just an idiot/never cared to learn its real spelling
>>339146253
i actually agree with you
I'd never thought anything would ever make me say this, but I want vancian magic back. The fp bar somehow ended up worse than the worst spell system I've ever known.
