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
DonFerrari on 13 November 2020
Loneken 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 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 . 

That is the idea of making good exclusives, to try and get a customer that could otherwise buy elsewhere.



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."

Around the Network
eva01beserk on 13 November 2020
Chrkeller said:
eva01beserk said:
Chrkeller said:

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.

Thats fine. Just add that to the statement or be ready for opposition and thread derailment as I was about to do had your response not clarified. 

P.S breath of the wild and god of war are my only 2 options for game of this genration. 



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

DonFerrari on 13 November 2020

Soulike fans rejoicehttps://www.dualshockers.com/nioh-and-nioh-2-coming-to-ps5-4k-120fps/



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."

Runa216 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 mean, Demon's Souls is an exclusive so of course they'd say that. However, there is some truth to it. Demon's Souls was a sort of prototype, Dark Souls was where they really started refining the formula. Both are great, and I'm not sure if I prefer the relative linearity of Demon's Souls or the pseudo-open-world of Dark Souls. Both gameplay styles have their place in gaming, so it's hard to chose one over the other. 



My Console Library:

PS5, Switch, XSX

PS4, PS3, PS2, PS1, WiiU, Wii, GCN, N64 SNES, XBO, 360

3DS, DS, GBA, Vita, PSP, Android

DonFerrari on 13 November 2020
Runa216 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 mean, Demon's Souls is an exclusive so of course they'd say that. However, there is some truth to it. Demon's Souls was a sort of prototype, Dark Souls was where they really started refining the formula. Both are great, and I'm not sure if I prefer the relative linearity of Demon's Souls or the pseudo-open-world of Dark Souls. Both gameplay styles have their place in gaming, so it's hard to chose one over the other. 

That is where the caveat of respecting the original game comes in. Since they preserved the code and all to keep the gameplay the same they can't really put the improvements in game design and others into the remaster.



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."

Around the Network
Imaginedvl on 13 November 2020

wow... I miss-clicked before to click submit and did not mean that 51-55 score. Not sure if this is fixable but anyway my vote was 81-85.



DonFerrari on 13 November 2020
Imaginedvl said:
wow... I miss-clicked before to click submit and did not mean that 51-55 score. Not sure if this is fixable but anyway my vote was 81-85.

the add banner can play tricks on us.



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."

Runa216 on 13 November 2020
DonFerrari said:
Runa216 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 mean, Demon's Souls is an exclusive so of course they'd say that. However, there is some truth to it. Demon's Souls was a sort of prototype, Dark Souls was where they really started refining the formula. Both are great, and I'm not sure if I prefer the relative linearity of Demon's Souls or the pseudo-open-world of Dark Souls. Both gameplay styles have their place in gaming, so it's hard to chose one over the other. 

That is where the caveat of respecting the original game comes in. Since they preserved the code and all to keep the gameplay the same they can't really put the improvements in game design and others into the remaster.

I know it's a huge stretch, but how cool would it be if they added the 6th archstone back into the game? The original was supposed to do that, but it got cut for time constraints. A whole new snowy land, retails for 25 bucks? yeah, I'd do that. Hoo boy would I ever do that. I can respect their decision to not mess with the integrity of the original, but I'd be down for DLC if they wanted to give it a shot. 



My Console Library:

PS5, Switch, XSX

PS4, PS3, PS2, PS1, WiiU, Wii, GCN, N64 SNES, XBO, 360

3DS, DS, GBA, Vita, PSP, Android

DonFerrari on 13 November 2020
Runa216 said:
DonFerrari said:
Runa216 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 mean, Demon's Souls is an exclusive so of course they'd say that. However, there is some truth to it. Demon's Souls was a sort of prototype, Dark Souls was where they really started refining the formula. Both are great, and I'm not sure if I prefer the relative linearity of Demon's Souls or the pseudo-open-world of Dark Souls. Both gameplay styles have their place in gaming, so it's hard to chose one over the other. 

That is where the caveat of respecting the original game comes in. Since they preserved the code and all to keep the gameplay the same they can't really put the improvements in game design and others into the remaster.

I know it's a huge stretch, but how cool would it be if they added the 6th archstone back into the game? The original was supposed to do that, but it got cut for time constraints. A whole new snowy land, retails for 25 bucks? yeah, I'd do that. Hoo boy would I ever do that. I can respect their decision to not mess with the integrity of the original, but I'd be down for DLC if they wanted to give it a shot. 

Have the sixth archstone been used in any game at all?

I know that on Souls Reaper there were a lot of areas and powers that were cut from the original due to time constraints, and were to be moved to the sequel but I think never got used. I for sure would like a remake to include those areas



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."

Hynad on 13 November 2020

I haven’t played all of them, but (anecdotal) I know quite a few who did, and the titles that come up the most when discussing which one is the best in the series/genre are Demon’s Souls, the first Dark Souls, and Bloodborne.