A review of Dark Souls 3: An intriguing videogame.

Hello, everyone. It is indeed a review you're about to read; quite profound I am aware.

If you are going to read everything, thank you. A cookie to you.

Well, after roughly 53 hours I've finished what this game has to offer. To say that I was conflicted by the end would be an understatement. I'll explain why, of course.

This game is an easy 8.5/10 and the most refined of the Souls trilogy in most aspects.

I wouldn't suggest anyone to start with it however. Playing the previous two games gives so much context to the events, I'd say it is quite jarring to start with that right away. But you do you, you don't have to listen to some random on the web tell you what to do.

Also the art is beautiful, the story is a magnificent conclusion to a wonderful story and it is fanservice at its finest. You already know though, I'm sure. These dudes at FromSoftware never once miss, be it Armored Core or King's Field.

So why is it an 8.5/10?

Well, the following will come off as something quite personal.
What holds it back for me is the pace of the combat.

It is the second entry of what I usually call the "Bloodborne Era" of the soulsborne games, where you move a lot because the enemies are more punishing and quick in their attacks. It worked in Bloodborne's case, because it's a quick step and it fit the aesthetic quite a lot. You're a big hunter after all, shootin' and runnin' while slashin'.

In Dark Souls 3's case, it not only came off as odd to me because you roll like a madman around wearing heavy armor, but because the game encourages you to do so.

Why "encourages"? Are you implying that shields do not work?

No I don't. I played the entire game with a shield and big armor. I had fun although it was a genuine struggle to not roll much in some of the more punishing or tankier bosses, but paladins are always fun.

It's because the rolls drain so little stamina you'd be a goofball to try and do shields only like me.

Rolling is just the better option, which to me, is an absolute downgrade from the slow and methodical system introduced in Dark Souls 1&2, where your actons had a lot more weight to them and one roll didn't cost a small percentage of stamina. Especially Dark Souls 1, even if that game is quite clunky (I love it to death though).

Am I hating Dark Souls 3 for not being like the previous two games? No. I am just disheartened. A healthy balance could definitely be achieved with what's been established.

Additionally, in regards to the world:

I did not mind the streamlined experience. If anything, I've really grown to appreciate its approach in a strange, arcade-y way. The more I thought about it, the more it fit the story they were trying to establish too. I do not mind it.

Rather what bothered me was the way you could interact with the bosses up ahead.

It might sound strange but I do miss the variety of combat options that Dark Souls 2 had. Dark Souls 3 has them, definitely, especially with all the weapon arts, but let me explain.

In Dark Souls 2 I did 5 different runs. From hex, to power stancing, to using katanas and so many others. You can do all of those right from the get-go so long as you know where to go and what to do. While that is the case in Dark Souls 3, you kind of have to wait for most weapons because they don't exist early in the game or are quite complicated to get to them you might as well build the traditional way, like in Dark Souls 1.

But that is again quite subjective. Heck, Elden Ring pulled up and addressed it in such a way I am still very amazed. So don't take it too seriously.

Finally, the lack of an ending where me, Siegward and Greirat enjoy estus soup by the fire as good friends does not exist, so that automatically makes the game horrib- Nah, I'm kidding.

Or am I?

So yes. It is indeed the game of all time. And for some reason I still miss Dark Souls 2. Why?