Dark Souls 3!

#11da_StoOgePosted 8/23/2014 3:59:21 AM
nableet posted...
They shouldn't make sequels.

They should just keep making spiritual successors and changing it up a bit.


Had I not seen Bloodborne I might have disagreed with this. But damn...I might even prefer the gothic theme.

It sucks Xbox only players won't get to play it though. Now I'm worried MS might lock down a Dark Souls 3 and no one will win.
---
"It was the patient, cut-flower sound of a man who is waiting to die."
#12astutecolliePosted 8/23/2014 3:59:21 AM
Lmao AA franchise. The games dont sell much, the look like poop visually, and the games feel so stiff and underdeveloped. Many sequels i would rather have than a DS game. The games dont even get total sales that match halo's preorders. Irrelevant franchise is irrelevant.
#13Engineer-samaPosted 8/23/2014 4:05:09 AM
astutecollie posted...
Lmao AA franchise. The games dont sell much, the look like poop visually, and the games feel so stiff and underdeveloped. Many sequels i would rather have than a DS game. The games dont even get total sales that match halo's preorders. Irrelevant franchise is irrelevant.


Are you talking about Titanfall?
#14chris0009Posted 8/23/2014 4:15:50 AM
A)I wasnt debating of whats a franchise or not
B)k
C)Tr is a third party timed exclusive but its a big issue with alot of people
D)clearly you are upset I didnt use the word timed lmao

People just jump at the chance to bash ms even if it doesnt make much sense.

Ms gets hate for drm but sony is charging 5$ to rent a game for 4 hours(these games cost less used in most cases)

Ms gets hate for tomb raider but its pretty much no different than any other exclusive deal ever. Sony would have from software make dark souls 3 exclusive, why wouldnt they franchises sell better than new ips, but obviously sony cant afford the ip. The difference is ms can help fund and advertise a game and allow the devs to ratain the rights to the ip, and sony cant they have to own the ip not the devs. If it wasnt for ms bioshock and masseffect wouldnt be as popular as they are today. They would probably be dead series like haze, resistence, blinx, syphon filter, or mechassault.(All these games may of been more successful if multiplat)
#15kyncaniPosted 8/23/2014 4:19:35 AM
Brunozayn posted...
Bloodborne is gonna be awesome


Hell yeah :)

It's a PS4 exclusive though so it has no place on the Xbox One, board.
#16InterzoneMantraPosted 8/23/2014 4:22:24 AM
Engineer-sama posted...
astutecollie posted...
Lmao AA franchise. The games dont sell much, the look like poop visually, and the games feel so stiff and underdeveloped. Many sequels i would rather have than a DS game. The games dont even get total sales that match halo's preorders. Irrelevant franchise is irrelevant.


Are you talking about Titanfall?


lol
#17Matt_256Posted 8/23/2014 4:26:29 AM
Bloodborne looks visually stunning IMO but I wish they would have touched up the animations and even sound effects. The game feels like Dark Souls with a new coat of paint, which isn't a bad thing but I was hoping they would have sharpened the combat and animations a little. It's a little jarring considering it "looks" next gen but the gameplay just looks soooo dated. Still has that stiff/awkward Dark Souls feel but it almost seems more apparent in this game for some reason. I think it stands out even more because the contrast between visuals and gameplay is so apparent.

I'll have my eye on this game either way..
#18astutecolliePosted 8/23/2014 4:29:53 AM
Engineer-sama posted...
astutecollie posted...
Lmao AA franchise. The games dont sell much, the look like poop visually, and the games feel so stiff and underdeveloped. Many sequels i would rather have than a DS game. The games dont even get total sales that match halo's preorders. Irrelevant franchise is irrelevant.


Are you talking about Titanfall?


That was hilarious.
#19nableetPosted 8/23/2014 4:44:19 AM
chris0009 posted...
A)I wasnt debating of whats a franchise or not
B)k
C)Tr is a third party timed exclusive but its a big issue with alot of people
D)clearly you are upset I didnt use the word timed lmao

People just jump at the chance to bash ms even if it doesnt make much sense.

Ms gets hate for drm but sony is charging 5$ to rent a game for 4 hours(these games cost less used in most cases)

Ms gets hate for tomb raider but its pretty much no different than any other exclusive deal ever. Sony would have from software make dark souls 3 exclusive, why wouldnt they franchises sell better than new ips, but obviously sony cant afford the ip. The difference is ms can help fund and advertise a game and allow the devs to ratain the rights to the ip, and sony cant they have to own the ip not the devs. If it wasnt for ms bioshock and masseffect wouldnt be as popular as they are today. They would probably be dead series like haze, resistence, blinx, syphon filter, or mechassault.(All these games may of been more successful if multiplat)


A) Tomb Raider is a franchise which is a big reason people got annoyed. That was my point.
C) People were annoyed when they thought it was an actual exclusive, also see A).
D) I'm not upset, how you got any emotion from my initial post is beyond me. It is a fact that it isn't an exclusive though, clearly that upsets you.

People were bashing MS for buying exclusivity in a sequel to a multiplatform game, denying a large part of the original fanbase's (PC/PS) from getting it on their gaming device of choice.

People then bashed MS as the way they delivered the announcement was ambiguous and was clearly meant to deceive. It was a bad move.

DRM for the whole console is in no way comparable to PSNow which, incidentally, most people have a problem with the pricing of as it stands. Stop comparing them. It is dumb.

If Dark Souls 3 (which will not exist, guaranteed) is an exclusive then you have every right to complain. Buying exclusivity in an existing franchise is not a good thing. I'd complain right along side you.

Bioshock and Mass effect were good.. That is the difference. Sony don't have to own the rights to exclusive games (metal gear solid 4 says "Hi") but wanting to own the IP makes business sense..
---
GT: Tyfighta23. PSN: Tee_Doff
#20Engineer-samaPosted 8/23/2014 5:35:45 AM
astutecollie posted...
Engineer-sama posted...
astutecollie posted...
Lmao AA franchise. The games dont sell much, the look like poop visually, and the games feel so stiff and underdeveloped. Many sequels i would rather have than a DS game. The games dont even get total sales that match halo's preorders. Irrelevant franchise is irrelevant.


Are you talking about Titanfall?


That was hilarious.


Thank you, thank you. I'll be here all week.