By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - Demon's Souls Remake Review Thread - Metacritic started at 92

 

What Score do you think DS will get?

96-100 0 0%
 
91-95 25 44.64%
 
86-90 23 41.07%
 
81-85 6 10.71%
 
76-80 1 1.79%
 
71-75 0 0%
 
66-70 0 0%
 
61-65 0 0%
 
56-60 0 0%
 
51-55 1 1.79%
 
Total:56
Vodacixi on 13 November 2020

87. If it was executed perfectly, I would say 90. But I have the feeling there's gonna be some degree of disapointment...



Around the Network
Chrkeller on 13 November 2020
DonFerrari said:
Runa216 said:

Just played as far as the phalanx boss and loved every second of it. Despite it being old and even the devs admitting to making it remain clunky (they wanted to preserve as much of the feel of the game as possible), it actually feels sleek as hell. I thought that might be because it's 60 FPS, but nope! Scholar of the first sin was also 60 FPS and that game felt bad.

So far I think it balances the feeling of familiarity with being new and exciting all over again. I voted 86-90 because most remakes go down a notch or two (so my official prediction is 87), but hot damn this is a good game. I could see it doing 90+, just like Bloodborne.

I still think Dark Souls 1 and 3 are better games, but I won't hold that against it. This is still an absolute winner. Now if only I could get the remote play functionality to work.

Don't take it seriously, but on youtube review of this game a lot of xbox fans were saying "everybody knows Dark Souls is much better than Demon's Souls".

I don't believe xbox has anything to do with that.  Dark Souls is better than Demon Souls, which makes sense given Demon was first.  Of course From Software got better with experience.  The bosses, specifically in Dark 1 & 2, are just better designed than most of the bosses in Demon Souls.  Don't get me wrong Demon is really quite excellent, but it isn't Dark 1 nor Dark 3.  It is better than Dark 2. 

On a side note, Demon is far easier than Dark Souls, for those worried about difficulty.    



DonFerrari on 13 November 2020
Chrkeller said:
DonFerrari said:
Runa216 said:

Just played as far as the phalanx boss and loved every second of it. Despite it being old and even the devs admitting to making it remain clunky (they wanted to preserve as much of the feel of the game as possible), it actually feels sleek as hell. I thought that might be because it's 60 FPS, but nope! Scholar of the first sin was also 60 FPS and that game felt bad.

So far I think it balances the feeling of familiarity with being new and exciting all over again. I voted 86-90 because most remakes go down a notch or two (so my official prediction is 87), but hot damn this is a good game. I could see it doing 90+, just like Bloodborne.

I still think Dark Souls 1 and 3 are better games, but I won't hold that against it. This is still an absolute winner. Now if only I could get the remote play functionality to work.

Don't take it seriously, but on youtube review of this game a lot of xbox fans were saying "everybody knows Dark Souls is much better than Demon's Souls".

I don't believe xbox has anything to do with that.  Dark Souls is better than Demon Souls, which makes sense given Demon was first.  Of course From Software got better with experience.  The bosses, specifically in Dark 1 & 2, are just better designed than most of the bosses in Demon Souls.  Don't get me wrong Demon is really quite excellent, but it isn't Dark 1 nor Dark 3.  It is better than Dark 2. 

On a side note, Demon is far easier than Dark Souls, for those worried about difficulty.    

In his case certainly not and perhaps not in yours. But to enter the YT video of the technical review of Demon's Souls to say Dragon Souls is better you can bet a good amount of them were just having a case of sour grapes. Even more when they didn't had a single good word for the Demon's Souls being reviewed with all the improvements.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Chrkeller on 13 November 2020
DonFerrari said:
Chrkeller said:
DonFerrari said:
Runa216 said:

Just played as far as the phalanx boss and loved every second of it. Despite it being old and even the devs admitting to making it remain clunky (they wanted to preserve as much of the feel of the game as possible), it actually feels sleek as hell. I thought that might be because it's 60 FPS, but nope! Scholar of the first sin was also 60 FPS and that game felt bad.

So far I think it balances the feeling of familiarity with being new and exciting all over again. I voted 86-90 because most remakes go down a notch or two (so my official prediction is 87), but hot damn this is a good game. I could see it doing 90+, just like Bloodborne.

I still think Dark Souls 1 and 3 are better games, but I won't hold that against it. This is still an absolute winner. Now if only I could get the remote play functionality to work.

Don't take it seriously, but on youtube review of this game a lot of xbox fans were saying "everybody knows Dark Souls is much better than Demon's Souls".

I don't believe xbox has anything to do with that.  Dark Souls is better than Demon Souls, which makes sense given Demon was first.  Of course From Software got better with experience.  The bosses, specifically in Dark 1 & 2, are just better designed than most of the bosses in Demon Souls.  Don't get me wrong Demon is really quite excellent, but it isn't Dark 1 nor Dark 3.  It is better than Dark 2. 

On a side note, Demon is far easier than Dark Souls, for those worried about difficulty.    

In his case certainly not and perhaps not in yours. But to enter the YT video of the technical review of Demon's Souls to say Dragon Souls is better you can bet a good amount of them were just having a case of sour grapes. Even more when they didn't had a single good word for the Demon's Souls being reviewed with all the improvements.

Perhaps.  As somebody who has beaten Demon, Dark (1-3) and Blood at least 5 times each, and is part of the community, it is widely accepted that Demon is weaker than Souls.  It is a very common position, that was my only point.  But being the weakest title in the second best franchise in gaming isn't a ding.  



eva01beserk on 13 November 2020
Chrkeller said:
DonFerrari said:
Chrkeller said:
DonFerrari said:
Runa216 said:

Just played as far as the phalanx boss and loved every second of it. Despite it being old and even the devs admitting to making it remain clunky (they wanted to preserve as much of the feel of the game as possible), it actually feels sleek as hell. I thought that might be because it's 60 FPS, but nope! Scholar of the first sin was also 60 FPS and that game felt bad.

So far I think it balances the feeling of familiarity with being new and exciting all over again. I voted 86-90 because most remakes go down a notch or two (so my official prediction is 87), but hot damn this is a good game. I could see it doing 90+, just like Bloodborne.

I still think Dark Souls 1 and 3 are better games, but I won't hold that against it. This is still an absolute winner. Now if only I could get the remote play functionality to work.

Don't take it seriously, but on youtube review of this game a lot of xbox fans were saying "everybody knows Dark Souls is much better than Demon's Souls".

I don't believe xbox has anything to do with that.  Dark Souls is better than Demon Souls, which makes sense given Demon was first.  Of course From Software got better with experience.  The bosses, specifically in Dark 1 & 2, are just better designed than most of the bosses in Demon Souls.  Don't get me wrong Demon is really quite excellent, but it isn't Dark 1 nor Dark 3.  It is better than Dark 2. 

On a side note, Demon is far easier than Dark Souls, for those worried about difficulty.    

In his case certainly not and perhaps not in yours. But to enter the YT video of the technical review of Demon's Souls to say Dragon Souls is better you can bet a good amount of them were just having a case of sour grapes. Even more when they didn't had a single good word for the Demon's Souls being reviewed with all the improvements.

Perhaps.  As somebody who has beaten Demon, Dark (1-3) and Blood at least 5 times each, and is part of the community, it is widely accepted that Demon is weaker than Souls.  It is a very common position, that was my only point.  But being the weakest title in the second best franchise in gaming isn't a ding.  

What? 



It takes genuine talent to see greatness in yourself despite your absence of genuine talent.

Around the Network
DonFerrari on 13 November 2020
Chrkeller said:
DonFerrari said:
Chrkeller said:
DonFerrari said:
Runa216 said:

Just played as far as the phalanx boss and loved every second of it. Despite it being old and even the devs admitting to making it remain clunky (they wanted to preserve as much of the feel of the game as possible), it actually feels sleek as hell. I thought that might be because it's 60 FPS, but nope! Scholar of the first sin was also 60 FPS and that game felt bad.

So far I think it balances the feeling of familiarity with being new and exciting all over again. I voted 86-90 because most remakes go down a notch or two (so my official prediction is 87), but hot damn this is a good game. I could see it doing 90+, just like Bloodborne.

I still think Dark Souls 1 and 3 are better games, but I won't hold that against it. This is still an absolute winner. Now if only I could get the remote play functionality to work.

Don't take it seriously, but on youtube review of this game a lot of xbox fans were saying "everybody knows Dark Souls is much better than Demon's Souls".

I don't believe xbox has anything to do with that.  Dark Souls is better than Demon Souls, which makes sense given Demon was first.  Of course From Software got better with experience.  The bosses, specifically in Dark 1 & 2, are just better designed than most of the bosses in Demon Souls.  Don't get me wrong Demon is really quite excellent, but it isn't Dark 1 nor Dark 3.  It is better than Dark 2. 

On a side note, Demon is far easier than Dark Souls, for those worried about difficulty.    

In his case certainly not and perhaps not in yours. But to enter the YT video of the technical review of Demon's Souls to say Dragon Souls is better you can bet a good amount of them were just having a case of sour grapes. Even more when they didn't had a single good word for the Demon's Souls being reviewed with all the improvements.

Perhaps.  As somebody who has beaten Demon, Dark (1-3) and Blood at least 5 times each, and is part of the community, it is widely accepted that Demon is weaker than Souls.  It is a very common position, that was my only point.  But being the weakest title in the second best franchise in gaming isn't a ding.  

Yep I can agree with you, and that is why I said I don't think it was your case of her case, it was just something lightly related. But if it is a good game by itself them all is good. And who knows, with all the improvements this title may have increased in quality versus the others.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Chrkeller on 13 November 2020
eva01beserk said:
Chrkeller said:
DonFerrari said:
Chrkeller said:
DonFerrari said:
Runa216 said:

Just played as far as the phalanx boss and loved every second of it. Despite it being old and even the devs admitting to making it remain clunky (they wanted to preserve as much of the feel of the game as possible), it actually feels sleek as hell. I thought that might be because it's 60 FPS, but nope! Scholar of the first sin was also 60 FPS and that game felt bad.

So far I think it balances the feeling of familiarity with being new and exciting all over again. I voted 86-90 because most remakes go down a notch or two (so my official prediction is 87), but hot damn this is a good game. I could see it doing 90+, just like Bloodborne.

I still think Dark Souls 1 and 3 are better games, but I won't hold that against it. This is still an absolute winner. Now if only I could get the remote play functionality to work.

Don't take it seriously, but on youtube review of this game a lot of xbox fans were saying "everybody knows Dark Souls is much better than Demon's Souls".

I don't believe xbox has anything to do with that.  Dark Souls is better than Demon Souls, which makes sense given Demon was first.  Of course From Software got better with experience.  The bosses, specifically in Dark 1 & 2, are just better designed than most of the bosses in Demon Souls.  Don't get me wrong Demon is really quite excellent, but it isn't Dark 1 nor Dark 3.  It is better than Dark 2. 

On a side note, Demon is far easier than Dark Souls, for those worried about difficulty.    

In his case certainly not and perhaps not in yours. But to enter the YT video of the technical review of Demon's Souls to say Dragon Souls is better you can bet a good amount of them were just having a case of sour grapes. Even more when they didn't had a single good word for the Demon's Souls being reviewed with all the improvements.

Perhaps.  As somebody who has beaten Demon, Dark (1-3) and Blood at least 5 times each, and is part of the community, it is widely accepted that Demon is weaker than Souls.  It is a very common position, that was my only point.  But being the weakest title in the second best franchise in gaming isn't a ding.  

What? 

I personally consider SoulsBorne the second best franchise in gaming.  Just my opinion, I'm sure many disagree.  It is only edged out by Zelda, and mostly because Zelda has been around longer and thus has more titles.  I have nothing but great things to say about Dark Souls/Demon Souls.  Blood is amazing as well.  I didn't like Sekiro, but that is a different story for a different day.



hinch on 13 November 2020

I'm gonna say... 89. Matching the score of the original game.



Loneken on 13 November 2020
DonFerrari said:
Runa216 said:

Just played as far as the phalanx boss and loved every second of it. Despite it being old and even the devs admitting to making it remain clunky (they wanted to preserve as much of the feel of the game as possible), it actually feels sleek as hell. I thought that might be because it's 60 FPS, but nope! Scholar of the first sin was also 60 FPS and that game felt bad.

So far I think it balances the feeling of familiarity with being new and exciting all over again. I voted 86-90 because most remakes go down a notch or two (so my official prediction is 87), but hot damn this is a good game. I could see it doing 90+, just like Bloodborne.

I still think Dark Souls 1 and 3 are better games, but I won't hold that against it. This is still an absolute winner. Now if only I could get the remote play functionality to work.

Don't take it seriously, but on youtube review of this game a lot of xbox fans were saying "everybody knows Dark Souls is much better than Demon's Souls".

I am a Xbox fan, but Demon Souls is one of the reasons i am thinking of buying a PS 5 in the next 2 years. Love the Souls games and the original Kings Field saga en ps1 .

 


cura on 13 November 2020

I've played about fours of it (Despite saying it looked basic gameplay wise a month or two back and that I would wait to buy a ps5 lol). I reckon minimum score would be low 80s and can see the game getting high 80s/low 90s.Never played the ps3 version. I'm finding the game enjoyable.. frustrating but enjoyable. It is a lot of fun despite it's shortcomings... Graphics are nice and sound are nice too. I do think the main area of criticism will be that the game a 10 year old game with basically updated visuals sounds and animations... some reviewers might deduct points for not innovating..It's a fun game and would recommend checking it out but don't think there's any rush to do so.