Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Lords of the Fallen, Dark Souls or Bloodhound first?

Options
  • 19-06-2016 12:32am
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,029 ✭✭✭


    Don't laugh but I happen to own Dark Souls, Dark Souls 2, Bloodbourne and Lords of the Fallen and haven't played any of them!

    In order to get me into the swing of things which game should i play first?

    I know Lords of the Fallen is the only game not by From Software and it's sort of a DS Lite so maybe I should play that first?

    I want to give myself a decent shot of finishing all these.


Comments

  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I liked lords of the fallen but they talked the game up to a point where it failed to deliver. It's not even dark souls lite. Forget it , play the original dark souls and never look back. It'll be one of the most unique game experiences you ever have.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,944 ✭✭✭✭Links234


    Yeah, just pop straight into Dark Souls. It's a fairly iconic game, and really influencial, so I'd kinda think that if you don't play Dark Souls first it might be a bit of a "Seinfeld isn't funny" thing if you get around to playing it having played a load of other games it inspired.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,397 ✭✭✭✭Digital Solitude


    You could play LoTF first, it's the only hope you have of enjoying it. I'm a huge Dark Souls fan and I'm fairly good at it, but I had to force myself to play LoTF until I just gave up in the second area.

    Straight for Dark Souls is the actual recommendation.


  • Registered Users Posts: 20,830 ✭✭✭✭Taltos


    Same as everyone else, I tried LoTF after the rest and wish I'd tried it first. Interesting but would have been better if my expectations had not been as high as they were.

    Don't think Dark Souls at all, just go and enjoy it, try not to expect too much and hope you deal with the spikes at the bosses, in Dark Souls I always thought there was a reason, here not so much


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,644 ✭✭✭Glebee


    I finished Lords of the Fallen but Dark Souls just drives me insane with rage.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,909 ✭✭✭nix


    is Lords of the Fallen good?


  • Registered Users Posts: 20,830 ✭✭✭✭Taltos


    It is. Definitely. But just don't go in thinking you're going to play a clone, it takes elements, like recovering your experience and tough bosses, but it's a different beast and one that I think suffered from the comparisons. Had it stood on it's own I think it might have done better...


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,397 ✭✭✭✭Digital Solitude


    Deserves a whack of you're a fan anyways


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,644 ✭✭✭Glebee


    nix wrote: »
    is Lords of the Fallen good?


    Defo worth a go. Dont know why it does not rate higher. Forget about Dark Souls games when playing.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,944 ✭✭✭✭Links234


    I kinda want to get Lords of the Fallen at some point, just so I can cheese through it with the shield bash :pac:



  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,944 ✭✭✭✭Links234


    By the way, if anyone's looking for something that's closer to Dark Souls, then Salt & Sanctuary is absolutely amazing.



    Definitely one of the games that impressed me most this year.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 34,605 CMod ✭✭✭✭CiDeRmAn


    Dark Souls is utterly fantastic.
    Well worth starting there.
    Amazing level design.
    But....
    Dark Souls 2 is probably more accessible, though the levels don't stack up geographically.
    But....
    Bloodborne is probably the one to go for, it has a more familiar foot forward, attacking mode of play but retains much of the structure of the Souls series.
    You'll still have to relearn much afterwards, when you play the Souls games, but at least you won't be starting from scratch.
    From what I can see Lords of Fallen is little more than a Souls clone.
    With the Souls and Bloodborne containing months of play, why bother playing a watered down imitation at all?


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,000 ✭✭✭Stone Deaf 4evr


    CiDeRmAn wrote: »
    Dark Souls is utterly fantastic.
    Well worth starting there.
    Amazing level design.
    But....
    Dark Souls 2 is probably more accessible, though the levels don't stack up geographically.
    But....
    Bloodborne is probably the one to go for, it has a more familiar foot forward, attacking mode of play but retains much of the structure of the Souls series.
    You'll still have to relearn much afterwards, when you play the Souls games, but at least you won't be starting from scratch.
    From what I can see Lords of Fallen is little more than a Souls clone.
    With the Souls and Bloodborne containing months of play, why bother playing a watered down imitation at all?


    I think you'd only find dark souls 2 more accessible if you've already gone through DS1, its certainly as difficult, scholar of the first sin even more so.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 34,605 CMod ✭✭✭✭CiDeRmAn


    Maybe, I found the second one a little more friendly, important given how much I typically suck at these games.
    But I'd start with Bloodborne.
    Also, pick up a cheap copy of Demon's Souls too, just so you have the set.
    Then forget about buying another game for 2016, that lot should keep you going OP!


Advertisement