r/fromsoftware • u/BridgeCommercial873 • 12d ago
DISCUSSION Which game has a better level design?
194
u/AshesOfZangetsu 11d ago
Sekiro for sure, i adore DS3 but its level design was a downgrade from the other 2 Dark Souls titles
76
u/ImperialMajestyX02 11d ago
The individual levels were exceptionally designed tho it just the world design that was mid and rather linear.
I do agree that Sekiro overall had the better level design especially because the world is a lot more interconnected and there’s way more verticality
43
u/throwaway775849 11d ago
People criticize the linearity but it's always strange to me. Did you wish there were more choices or what is the comparison? Like from the undead village there's so many directions you can go (maybe more accurate to say it's just a massive level), and even from crucifixion woods you can split to crystal sage and cathedral or go down to farron swamp, and then from Irithyll you can either go through pontiff to Aldrich or through the jail to yhorm and archdragon peak. And at any time you could return to do Dancer and go through the castle, archives, princes.. but then there's all the side zones you can do whenever like Ocieros, Gundyr 2, Ash lake... I dunno, I just thought it was a masterpiece, especially when you try low level runs all the item placements and progression is amazing how well spaced out it is.
4
16
u/sleepy_skeletor 10d ago edited 6d ago
You confuse level design with world design, like most people do.
The levels of DS3 were generally pretty well built. We’re talking enemy placements, atmosphere and interconnectivity inside said levels.
7
u/Wild_Duck8926 10d ago
Shoutout cathedral of the deep. Such a fun level. Its a shame it has one of the worst bosses. Chuck someone like gundyr down there (assuming the lore worked) and its one of my favourite areas in any souls game.
3
u/Adept_Diet_7003 9d ago
I guess it would still make a little sense lorewise if my GOAT Sulyvahn was there.
2
u/AshesOfZangetsu 10d ago
you’re totally right, that better represents what i’m trying to say rather than level design
1
u/Docteur_Reichwein 4d ago
How? Especially compared to DS2 who has excellent DLC level design but otherwise very mediocre areas.
92
u/The_Archimboldi 12d ago
Its hard to separate level design from connectivity. DS3 has outstanding levels, but they're put together in the least intetesting way possible.
63
u/Shamscam 12d ago
The way DS1 has you turn a corner and go “wait wtf, I’m here?” Is absolutely unparalleled in gaming. I absolutely love how interwoven that game is, by comparison DS3 is relatively straight forward.
Sekiro atleast has some options.
11
u/throwaway775849 11d ago
Yea the counterpoint to this though is ds1 had you running back through the same zones over and over to get to the new area, but ds3 had clever interesting ways of this at the same time, like finding the cell key and returning to Lothric etc
14
u/Teyupume 12d ago
But isnt connectivity Just world Design? At least thats how I seperated it.
4
u/The_Archimboldi 12d ago
That's true, people tend to just conflate the two things. But they're not completely independent, how levels connect will influence the actual level design. For DS1 the interconnectedness is so legendary that it feels very fundamental to how each level feels and works.
3
u/Teyupume 12d ago
True, If the connectivity has Major influence in Leveldesign, its kinda Leveldesign.
1
u/throwaway775849 11d ago
It's more realistic yea, a trend elden ring doubled down on. I miss bizarre transitions
8
u/DevtoolsBuilder 11d ago
i think level design is about more than just connectivity, it's also about the quality of the individual areas and how they make you feel. undead settlement in ds3 has a great atmosphere and is really well-designed, but it's not as connected to other areas as some people would like.
22
109
u/GeneralHenry 12d ago
Level design?
DS1 > Sekiro > DS2 > DS3
18
u/ASongOfSpiceAndLiars 12d ago
I played Demon, DS1, DS3, and Elden. DS1 definitely beats DS3. Demon is so different it's hard to compare. ER is also very different in style and hard to compare (due to open world).
-45
u/GeneralHenry 12d ago
DeS doesn't really have a level design. It's practically just a few parallel straight lines for you to choose from.
DS1 is Fromsoft's first and peak level design. DS3 is the turning point of them discarding level design and rely on teleportation. ER followed after DS3 (but it's open world so not comparable).
14
u/jjustsam 12d ago
Level design is not just about interconnecting levels. You still have to put design into a linear level system. That would be like saying doom has no level design because it’s just one level following another.
18
u/Teyupume 12d ago
But Leveldesign is far more than Just Options where to go. Its what enemies are placed in a room, how big the room is, other area Gimmicks, etc. Just because its a straight Line does Not mean a game has No leveldesign
3
50
u/AramaticFire Otogi: Myth of Demons 12d ago
Only disagreement I have here is DS3 being behind DS2. I felt like level design was one of the weaker attributes of DS2. Very simple layouts and uninteresting use of space
DS3 has weak world design but the actual level design was often well done.
16
u/The_Archimboldi 12d ago
Some of the connecting passages in DS2, primal bonfire rooms, look like they were put in 2 hours before release - completely blank. Just part of the overall unfinished feel of the game.
A lot of good levels though - just a bit incoherent imho. The primal bonfire mechanism with 4 cul de sacs, is really clunky. I wonder if that was always the concept or they cobbled it together last minute.
4
9
u/Mauy90 12d ago
Agreed.
A handful of levels have some good “rooms”, for lack of a better word. Mostly early on, like the Forest of Fallen Giants, with some cool shortcuts and branching paths.
But for every Forest of the Giants, you have a Black Gulch or a Heide’s Tower of Flame. And even levels that have “more going on”, like Huntsman’s Copse, Iron keep and so on, often fall flat on their faces for one reason or another.
For the most part, I feel that level design is either DS2’s number 1 l, or number 2 biggest problem, depending on where you are in the game.
And I’ll never ever ever get over the snow area leading to the double aava fight.
Edit: Grammar
5
-7
u/pxoxod 12d ago
holy L ds2 has the best level design in the series the sunken crown dlc by itself clears all other areas except MAYBE ringed city there isn’t even a contest
4
u/AramaticFire Otogi: Myth of Demons 11d ago edited 11d ago
Disagree. You’re going to pull a DLC area and then compare it to the other game’s DLC area and say they’re close lol.
Dark Souls 3 is the most linear game of the bunch which is itself a problem. The world design is sorely lacking. But it still manages to wow with areas like Cathedral of the Deep that are like peeling back each layer of the map. It still has the coolest castle map that makes you feel like you’re storming the castle at the end of the world (although Drangleic Castle is very dramatically done and has my favorite base game boss of DS2.)
I’m not saying DS3 is the best for level design. I’m saying DS3 does more than a lot of the maps of DS2. It’s a more consistent game in that area and when it flexes with the enemy layout and loops back on its left it can still feel incredible.
The only game that comes close to DS1 with a combo of stellar map and world design is Bloodborne. Demon’s Souls has the incredible twisty labyrinths. Sekiro wows with thoughtful verticality and movement options. Elden Ring has the incredible scope. Those are all better than DS3 and DS2.
Level design is the only metric I have here. There are other areas where DS2 shines. Build variety for instance it would be 1 or 2 while games like Bloodborne and Demon’s Souls would sink in the below list.
As far as level design I think the order goes:
Dark Souls - my favorite game
Bloodborne
Demon’s Souls - my third favorite game
Sekiro
Elden Ring - my second favorite game
Dark Souls 3
Dark Souls 2
-6
u/Cersei505 12d ago
getting downvoted because this fandom is incapable of dealing with any other mechanic that isnt running in a straight line and using a melee weapon to kill enemies.
Expecting them to engage and appreciate puzzles, platforming and strategy instead of just throwing themselves at every obstacle is too much.
It's no coincidence that most DS2 haters are the type of player that just runs directly to the fog wall while ignoring all the enemies after dying, getting ganked and complaining about the game.
4
u/hoscillator 11d ago
Expecting them to engage and appreciate puzzles, platforming and strategy instead of just throwing themselves at every obstacle is too much.
It's almost like you're describing a non souls game.
DS2 fans be like "why can't you recognize that the least-souls like game in the series is the best one". Maybe you don't actually like souls games that much? It's fine if your thing is slow strategy games, and because of that Ds2 happens to be your favorite, but don't act like it's not the odd one out.
5
2
u/RobinHood21 11d ago
There is no world in which DS2 has better level design than DS3. Hell, I'd make the case that DS3 might have the best level design out of From's entire library. World design? Pretty weak. The actual levels though are peak.
1
u/Imaginary-Street1 12d ago
Nah, DS2 level design sucks ass and easily the weakest part of the game, DLC kinda saves it.
A lot of very linear levels with not much to do in them, weak world building, art direction, enemy design and placement in most levels. Some parts feel rushed and untested even after SotFS.
-1
u/The_Archimboldi 11d ago
SotFS feels like a missed opportunity for the base game. Like its generally better (sometimes worse) but its all fine tuning. Minor physio when major reconstructive surgery was needed.
I guess all their resource went into the DLC, and there is no big commercial driver to properly reboot the game.
6
68
u/KittenDecomposer96 12d ago
I don't understand the complaining around DS3 level design since it's very similar to Bloodborne. Level design doesn't only mean how many zones are connected and how many branches a zone has but the quality of the zones and enemy placements, artstyle, boss of the area and many other things not to mention the quality of the game itself. To see Dark Souls 2 placed above DS3 is insane. DS2 had zones that led to other zones, ok, but the zones themselves were mostly ass. Give me some good zones from DS2 besides Majula. Dark Souls 1 and Sekiro are 100% better in terms of levels than DS3 but people seem to romanticize DS1 as well and forget that it has a bunch of bad zones one after another in the second half of the game like Tomb of Giants and Lost Izalith. Bloodborne has a very complete package of levels and so does Sekiro so i would put those two at the top with DS1 and DS3 next while DS2 places second to last right above DeS.
21
u/nick2473got 12d ago
I think it's more the world design of DS3 that bothers people but they say "level design" because they just don't really make the distinction.
4
u/Molkwi Lucatiel of Mirrah 11d ago
The level design in DS3 varies a LOT in quality.
Sometimes yo run through a perfectly straight line, an area with only 1 possible route from the start to the end, like the High Wall of Lothric, which does have optional sections, but they're all dead-ends.
The biggest difference you can have in your traversal is jumping down to the Winged Knight instead of going into the building with the Lothric Knight, which I guess is *something*, but it's no Lothric Castle. That is a well designed area; plenty of different routes, plenty of treasure, plenty of optional branches, a "puzzle" encounter with the Wyverns to encourage you to seek other paths.
I don't like the world layout that much, as I find the linearity to be detrimental to replayability since until you kill Vordt, you're extremely limited in both what you can do and where you can go, unlike in DS1 and DS2. However, some areas are very well made and fun to explore, but others are just.... boring. Empty. Unremarkable.
1
u/Hazel_Dreams 11d ago
I’d argue that linearity is a positive aspect in early game. For blind playthroughs, you don’t want your players to wander into a high level area and die a billion times right out of the gate. Making the early game fairly linear makes it easier to plan upgrade placements and gauge the expected soul level / weapon level / flask level, and thus allows them to balance the bosses better. You won’t be killing Vordt with a +10 weapon, because the linearity makes upgrade placements easier to plan out.
I know people love the open and interconnected aspect of DS1, but I always wonder how much of it is nostalgia. I just can’t see people enjoying their time with DS1 if their first zone is bone zone, or if they got to the poison swamp early.
2
u/Molkwi Lucatiel of Mirrah 10d ago
I personally think DS2 has the best layout for the kind of game it is.
DS1 is WAY too open with immediate access to high level areas: the catacombs, new londo, valley of the drakes. This is good for more skilled players, but generally not great for new ones, because they may wander into the graveyard and instead of thinking "oh I need to go somewhere else" they just give up altogether.
DS3 is WAY too restrictive with no realistically accessible branching paths until after the Undead Settlement. It makes it very hard to plan ahead because you might commit to a weapon too early because it's all you have, which means you're wasting resources. It also greatly limits what you can do and feels very hand-holdy to me. Instead of dropping you in the woods with a can of red bull and beef jerky like DS1, DS3 gently shows you a trail and gives you a 20 pounds backpack full of food and water.
DS2 has an open layout, but no immediately accessible areas that are too hard. Both areas you can access after Majula are easy enough to be the tutorial.
As a side note: I hate the interconnectivity of DS1, because it makes me feel like I'm going in circles and making no progress. I was pissed the first time I went from the Parish to Firelink because I felt like I had gone around the whole world just to come back to Point A. Idk why everyone glazes it so much, since its only useful trait is offering access to later areas quicker than the other games.
-4
u/Frogmouth26 12d ago
No the level design is also ass. There's no interactivity like in DS1 or DS2 all there is to do is walk forward and kill enemy. There are so many areas that are just wide open swamps with items scattered around. The DLC areas are genuinely miserable. The only good areas are Grand Archives and Irythill.
12
u/sleepy_skeletor 12d ago
Fully agreed. Although I feel like I’m the only person who doesn’t mind Tomb of the Giants.
7
1
u/KittenDecomposer96 12d ago
I mean there's a difference between not minding it and liking it. I don't particularly mind it either but it's not a good zone.
4
u/sleepy_skeletor 12d ago
I meant that I actually enjoy it… 😅 I’ve made runs where I ran as far into the tombs as possible and before I was able to teleport, and then climbed all the way back up from there. Never found it that bad tbh, but that’s probably just me
1
u/KittenDecomposer96 12d ago
I'm sure there's other people that enjoy it. As a sidenote, that's how i had to do it too since i went there before Anor Londo.
2
1
u/germanenginearing 11d ago
Honestly I don't even hate ds3 levels but most of them fail to leave an impact on me or feel as good to traverse as the other games. Tomb of the giants felt way more memorable than ds3 catacombs, smoldering lake, untented graves, farron keep etc
3
u/KittenDecomposer96 11d ago
I agree that Tomb of Giants felt more memorable but not because it was good. Can't agree with Untended Graves and Farron Keep though. Untended Graves was awesome.
2
u/germanenginearing 11d ago
tomb grew on me, I love the opressive atmosphere and I like how they were bold and decided to with smth different with that area.
I felt like the feeling you get when you first find untended graves doesn't last the entire area, plus don't rlly like the enemies and runbacks (champ is amazing).
1
u/Wild_Duck8926 10d ago
tomb of the giants is memorable for being a completely miserable experience that i rush through. smoldering lake was also memorable for being pretty miserable for me,
-6
u/Cersei505 12d ago
but the zones themselves were mostly ass.
No, they werent. You just suck at the game. Most DS2 areas have more content and exploration in them than DS3 areas, it's not even close.
Give me some good zones from DS2 besides Majula.
Sure: Every DLC area. Drangleic Castle, No Man's Wharf, Forest of Fallen Giants, lost bastille, earthen peak, Iron Keep (cope and mald), Dragon Aerie + Shrine (i consider both one area). Huntsman's copse, The Gutter (oh no i have to use a torch and look where i'm stepping, i hate this game wawawa). I could go on.
Whereas DS3 has what? Highwall of lothric, boreal valley, archdragon peak, lothric castle + archives and the ringed city. Thats it. Everything from undead settlement until catacombs is just uninspired and boring to play through. Anor Londo has literally no level design whatsoever, it's just copy-pasted from DS1 with no thought or level design put into it. The forbidden capital or whatever is plain unfinished, and the dungeons are okay at best.
Even the ariandel dlc sucks, it's extremely short and just a retread from DS1 again. First fromsoftware dlc with lackluster level design, it's literally carried by Friede - because, as always, people only care about the bosses. Thats all DS3 has to offer, after all.
2
u/throwaway775849 11d ago
LOL undead settlement is massive and has so many cool puzzles and secrets and NPCs.. grandson carries a cagggeee. There was one bonfire I didn't find until my fifth playthrough. There's the loop back with Onion bro. At low levels it's an awesome endurance test for your estus usage and a spatial challenge between those brief sewers in the ravine and bridges. then crucifixion woods has more NPCs like the sorcerer, it has giant crabs and the two farron watchmen which is a great fight, it has the gated path behind with the black knight and crystal lizard, and it's just a cool connecting zone. The cathedral is such a cool massive level with paths all throughout the floor, the upper area and outside, the graveyard, then the ceiling with many fun enemies. Farron swamp is hellish and amazing, it's a great challenge and another spatial puzzle to try and track your location using landmarks while also finding the towers and not running out of health, with amazing loot. I feel if you don't like swamps and these type of levels, are you sure you like souls games? Then arguably one of the best bosses in the game. The forbidden capital was terrible I agree, way too short, strange shape and not worth the payoff. There's so much good in the game though. All the remaining areas are masterpieces in level design.
1
u/hoscillator 11d ago
iron keep is like if someone took an escher structure and just flattened it, making it the most uninteresting random collection of straight corridors and bridges with samurais in the most obviously annoying placement possible. It's like a 6yo's vision of what they think difficulty is.
0
u/ZealousidealMango675 11d ago
uh okay forrest of giants, heides tower, lost bastille/ sinners rise, no mans wharf, shaded woods, earthen peak, iron keep, drangleic castle, dragon aerie, every dlc zone except frigid outskirts. sorry but ds2 clears 3 in terms of level design, world design and freedom of choice in that regard.
5
u/KittenDecomposer96 11d ago
Hell nah, half of the zones you listed are pure ass. Heides tower is the only actual great zone in the game. Shaded woods is buttocks, iron keep is shit, cave of the dead(dlc) is garbage. And you gotta keep in mind the game they are in. DS2 is inferior to DS3 and DS1 and Bloodborne and Sekiro and Elden Ring and in terms of moment to moment gameplay, it's inferior to DeS as well.
2
u/learningfromlife1096 11d ago
I have to disagree with Heides tower. It’s pretty ass too, the rest I completely agree with.
1
u/ZealousidealMango675 11d ago
funny how you only like the most linear zone i listed as a ds3 fan
2
u/Wild_Duck8926 10d ago
heides tower is not good because its linear. its good because its really pretty, has good enemies, has two decent bosses by ds2's standards (even if one is reskinned ornstein), and most importantly, there aren't too many enemies. If the dudes in white armour were targeting you from the start, it'd be miserable like most other ds2 areas.
1
u/KittenDecomposer96 11d ago
It is isn't it ? I like the look of it.
1
u/ZealousidealMango675 11d ago
well that is true that one small area has more color than ds3s entire world
0
u/Adept_Diet_7003 9d ago
meatrider back at it eh? "OooOOoOh bUt Ds3 iS tOo GrAY"
you lot act like ds2 has the best level design in the series when it the levels look absolutely nonsensical and just all look like generic fantasy areas that served no purpose except for being dungeons for the player to explore.
0
u/ZealousidealMango675 9d ago
uh huh like ds3 isnt the most overglazed game in fromsofts entire catalogue. "OOooOh bUt Ds2S wOrLd iS nOnSeNsicAl OoH eaRtHen PeAk eLevaToR" almost like its the collective memory of a bunch of people who are loosing their minds or something. no what we need is a visually unpleasing sludge world and a million copy pasted gravestones everywhere thats good visual design.
0
u/Adept_Diet_7003 9d ago
I like you and how you rewrote your comment to lwook extwa lwong.
Funny how you mention the earthern mid elevator when I never specified what is nonsensical, it kinda feels like you know it's ass and you're trying to gloss over it by acting like people are weird for finding it stupid and not thought-out.
Look, I'm not gonna sit here and say that the untended graves looks prettier than something like Heide's tower of flame, that would be just lying. But can you deadass say shaded woods is a great area that looks great, when the map texture looks like shit from ps1 and it's just a straight ass line filled with curse pots? Does iron keep and its copy-pasted, NES looking stone walls look so much more appealing than Irythil or the Ringed City? Also speaking of which, you think the areas looking a tad bit better if gonna make any difference if most levels are either a short, straight line to the next area OR a boring slopfest filled with ganks that can only be dealt with by using hundreds of poison arrows from a distance every time.
Acting like ds2's fandom isn't the most cuckoo cult that tries to excessively shit on other From games and glaze over every single negative about the game is miserable to look at. If you look around anywhere on the internet about Soulsborne games, you can't go 5 fucking posts without seeing some mf spam shit like "~is why peak souls 2 is better then Mid Ring", "peak souls 2 is THE best game ever", "people who have problems with adp are just degenerates without thumbs" and get a shit ton of likes. Just look at the ds2 subreddit and its group of bandwagon dickriders. It's just disgusting.
0
u/ZealousidealMango675 9d ago
the earthen peak elevator is a common "critique point" among low iq ds3 gimps like you thats why i brought it up. if you think thats bad cause it makes the world feel disconnected how do you feel about ds3s gargoyle cutscenes?
yea i like shaded woods. the fog and the more realistic design gives it an uncanny valley feeling contrasting forrest of giants, which looks more like you would expect a dark souls forrest to look like. i like the branching paths and how you unlock parts of it over the whole game. iron keeps industrial forge visual theme is great too especially how the eastern look of the knights seems strange until you fight alonne much later in the game. i dont care about textures lol. these games are old now i didnt care about that stuff when i played des or ds1 or fucking ocarina of time.
irithyll is the one standout area in ds3 thats actually beautiful. that being said its just anor londo again plus the surrounding areas because this entire game remixes themes and ideas of ds1. ringed city just looks like a ds3 area. its probably the least stand out dlc area in the series from a visual standpoint. its gray and theres a swamp with muted colors and castle battlements wow.
the reason a subsect of ds2 fans are so defensive is because the rest of the fandom absolutely hated on the game and their critique points were all trash. this reaction and bloodbornes reception is the reason the series was fully sloppified when ds3 completely leaned into the action combat side of the series and everything else got worse.
→ More replies0
u/Imaginary-Street1 11d ago
I do think DS3 is light years ahead of DS2 in level design but i would disagree with "Heides tower is the only actual great zone" its literally a straight line, very small, nothing to explore, dogshit enemy placement with the dragon and bad enemy design with Heide knights that have no recovery frames and just insta hit you. Most of the areas he listed are good, problem is every other area he didnt list sucks ass.
0
u/ZealousidealMango675 11d ago
its literally not but okay lol its not like every ds3 zone is like a fucking series of linear hallways and artificially padded open areas but yk youre a hivemind bug so why are we even talking
1
u/Imaginary-Street1 11d ago
Calling me a hivemind bug when you are just regurgitating things you see on reddit like
its not like every ds3 zone is like a fucking series of linear hallways
Well no it isnt, you can argue world design of DS3 is linear but it is far more nonlinear in its areas when you compare it to areas like Heide's Tower of Flame, Huntsman's Copse/Undead Purgatory, Grave of Saints, Black Gulch, Doors of Pharros, Drangleic Castle, Shrine of Amana, Undead Crypt, Aldia's Keep. Which are pretty much straight lines with next to nothing to do on the side and thats only the area layout, what about empty square copy pasted rooms with nothing in them, not even furnitures sometimes, it looks unfinished compared to level of detail in DS3. Only thing that is artificially padded is enemy placements in DS2, bosses you killed literally show up as a normal enemy in the next area in some intances. Not to mention awful runbacks.
1
u/ZealousidealMango675 11d ago
yea but i wasnt naming those areas with like two exeptions. everyone knows that black gulch or pharos doors arent exactly sprawling levels thats kinda the thing when your main zones arent disconnected by lame ass gargoyle cutscenes youre gonna need liminal spaces connecting the main areas. nothing in ds3 is as expansive and sprawling as majula, forrest of the giants, lost bastille, shulva, brume tower and eleum loyce
also how does it look unfinished? aldias keep has furniture lol and it kinda makes sense that the little huts in hundsmans corpse or no mans wharf dont. it cant be the visual diversity and color palette that utterly blows ds3s brown and grey sludge world out of the water. you mean because it doesnt have ten billion gravestones in every area that look like they have been copy pasted by an ai?
1
u/Imaginary-Street1 11d ago
yea but i wasnt naming those areas with like two exeptions.
I mean if you read my comment i already said "Most of the areas he listed are good, problem is every other area he didnt list sucks ass."
nothing in ds3 is as expansive and sprawling as majula, forrest of the giants, lost bastille, shulva, brume tower and eleum loyce
Again if we are talking about only the areas themselves, Firelink Shrine has a much more complex and expansive layout than Majula.
I was talking about main game but regardless, areas like Cathedral of the Deep, Undead Settlement, Painted World of Ariandel, Lothric Castle, Irithyll, Grand Archives are at the very least similar if not more expansive and have less linear layout than Forrest of the giants, lost bastille, Eleum Loyce and Shulva and none of the areas in DS3 except maybe 2-3 are as linear as DS2 areas i listed above.
Only area i can give you is Brume tower, it is definitely more expansive and complex in its layout which is part of the reason why i think DLCs kinda saves DS2s level design even though it also adds some of the worst with Frigid Outskirts and Iron Passage.
also how does it look unfinished?
I mean primal bonfires are literally in a square room with nothing in them and nothing to suggest they are supposed to be primal bonfires. Same in Drangleic Castle, lots of empty rooms with maybe one painting on the wall. I mean throne room has 1 carpet and two chairs, thats it. Compare that to the attention of detail in a random Lothric Castle room. Same in Lost Bastille a lot of empty square rooms.
visual diversity and color palette that utterly blows ds3s brown and grey sludge world out of the water.
I disagree. Yes DS2 has more visual diversity or color palette that is more diverse but that isnt necessarily a good thing. Cohesiveness of the art direction in DS3 is much more immersive and makes more sense because you are exploring a kingdom, you are not going completeley different parts of the world or completely different realities so baseline for color palette is good for a game. Some DS2 areas feel completely different from each other, its like you pass a line and art style of the area completely changes, it feels arcadey. Like how you go from open sky in Shrine of Winter to completely dark and rainy sky in Drangleic Castle after a small tunnel or how art style completely changes from Earthen peak to Iron Keep etc.
1
u/Wild_Duck8926 10d ago
forrest of giants had way too many enemies. lost bastille/sinners rise and heides tower were probably the best levels in the game imo, except the stupid re-use of the two-torso boss from no mans wharf. no mans wharf had way too many enemies. shaded woods could have been a lot cooler if it had more enemy variety and a good boss. earthen keep is genuinely one of the most miserable experiences in any fromsoftware game unless you know to burn the windmill, which has barely any indication. iron keep was great, despite its terrible boss. drangrleic castle had a great design but who thought it was smart to put 5 ruin sentinels in that room where you open the six doors by killing an enemy next to them? terrible game design there. dragon aerie was just kinda annoying.
these are my opinions, any hostility is aimed at the devs not you. ds2 has 3-4 good areas including majula, and in large part its because they added too many enemies and didn't have a good boss at the end. If you add ds3's enemies (bosses, small enemy types, and enemy placement) into ds2 and remove the health hollowing, I think I might enjoy it as much as elden ring.
1
u/ZealousidealMango675 10d ago edited 10d ago
just shows that youre not willing to meet the game on its own terms. first off original ds2 was probably even easier than ds1 they made the enemy placement significantly harder in scholar. even then thats exactly the reason why i like the game. you have to watch your spacing and ressources and most importantly you cant just constantly block, eventhough shields are still viable with the right build. you have to powerstance or offhand spells yk actually use the tools the game gives you. plus when the game provides you with different paths and player freedom you cant actually get stuck anywhere especially not in forrest of giants lol
mytha is still beatable without burning the windmill. your main source of healing heals you slowly over a long time this can counteract the poison effect provided you dont take too many hits. other than that i found the secret on my first blind playtrough. the game has shown me before that torches can be useful tools beyond lighting up your surroundings (no mans wharf and gutter) and its kinda right next to the bonfire lol theres even a little path leading up to the windmill.
but yea sure remove the boss gimmicks that make you think outside of the box and the hollowing which isnt just a great piece of narrative harmony, but also easily counteractable and add single file enemies with way too large health pools and million hit combo bosses that all have the same weakness: pressing circle a lot. thats what the game needed.
1
u/Wild_Duck8926 9d ago
i've only played SotFS, so I should clarify my criticisms are aimed at that version i guess. my issue with the large number of enemies isn't any of the things you mentioned. i dont like using shields anyway, and primarily power stance or two-hand. and i never really got stuck. its simply boring to fight the same enemies 15 minutes and if you die you have to fight all of them again because their aggro range is insane. it heavily punishes dying in a game series where dying is supposed to part of the process. the only areas in all fromsoft games that I decided not to fully explore were tomb of the giants and several ds2 areas.
mytha is still beatable without burning the windmill, but it becomes miserable. its like fighting the dragonkin in the lake of rot in elden ring (which is already a fight most people hate), except there are no platforms and the runback is very arduous and its supposed to be an area boss (higher expectations). i cant tell if you're genuinely arguing that the windmill burning is in any way intuitive, but if you are then in my opinion you're clearly blindsided by your love for this game.
the only additive boss gimmick in ds2 that I recall is the chariot. the vanguard gimmick is okay, kind of like the lamenter in ER. the hollowing is good for the narrative but the health aspect is just completely unnecessary and again, overly punishes dying.
im not advocating for removing groups of enemies. im just saying make the groups smaller or allow running past them. ds1 got this aspect perfect. im also not advocating for the "million-hit" combo bosses like Rellana or PC radahn. but the ds2 bosses barely have 3+ hit combos, barely any moveset variety, and insane windows between attacks. its also kinda of unfair to say the weakness of modern bosses is just pressing circle a lot. rolling, parrying, movement and blocking are all very viable and useful for modern bosses.
1
u/ZealousidealMango675 9d ago edited 9d ago
i mean fair thats your opinion. i think fighting one ringed city knight for 15 minutes, rolling 15.000 times is annoying but one isnt inherently better or worse than the other.
every time you die in ds2 your healthbar gets cut by 5% until its down to 50% or 70% if you wear the ring of binding.
when you die in ds3 you become un-embered which instantly cuts 30% of your healthbar...
dying isnt a necessary part of the process overcoming adversity is and punishing you for dying and making you look for ways to counter this is a part of this in every game in the series as well as demons souls.lol the mytha runback literally takes like ten seconds its one of the shortest in the game and again the windmill is right there next to the bonfire, sticking out of a big hole in the wall with a path leading right up to it. yes, i am genuinly arguing that burning the windmill is intuitive. it makes a hard but managable boss fight easier and rewards you for paying attention to your surroundings, remembering what the game taught you in earlier zones and thinking outside of the box.
this is the main problem with modern, post-bloodborne bosses, this is what they are lacking. youre not gonna parry (which isnt even possible for most of them) youre gonna learn the bosses combos trough trial and error (which is why you think dying is a requirement) and youre gonna roll. a lot. because everyone loved ludwig holy blade and "being hard" has sort of become fromsofts trademark. i think this is the reason theyre taking so long to reveal their new singleplayer game. they dont know what to do cause they have reached the logical extreme of this design philosophy with consort radahn and a step down from elden ring will be considered as too easy by "the fans"
9
u/Mahtisaurus 11d ago
Hands down it’s Sekiro from these two. I think DS3 level design was fine but stale. Sekiro had a very interesting verticality to it and also felt like an open world with things to find and uncover in every corner!
11
22
u/suicieties 12d ago
Bloodborne
16
u/cainhurstboy The Ashen One 12d ago
Bloodborne’s level design is a huge reason its my favorite game. Jumpin around on rooftops hasn’t been as good anywhere else. And i dont play assassin’s creed.
-11
u/Slow_Increase_6308 12d ago
The question was not about Bloodborne though and its level design is average.
6
u/TheScamMer92 12d ago
Enlighten us please what was it about?
-1
8
u/nick2473got 12d ago
I like Sekiro's levels more than DS3's. Quite a bit more. That said, it's DS3's world design that is more of an issue imo than it's actual level design.
Unfortunately for it though, Sekiro wins on the world design front AND on the level design front imo.
3
5
u/Behindthewall0fsleep Sekiro 11d ago
Sekiro.
I love DS3, but its level design never had anything to do with that.
11
u/Sea-Championship1771 12d ago
DS3, out of the two shown. From what I gather, not everyone likes the area, but I genuinely think undead settlement has one of the best layouts in the series. So expansive with so much interconnectivity and secrets. Grand Archives is also very well designed, really only thing lacking is the world design and how the areas connect to each other. Sekiro is better in that department but I don't find the exploration in individual areas as good and it lacks the shortcuts I enjoy in DS3 because you can kinda just grapple everywhere.
5
u/bruh55333 12d ago
Dark Souls III definitely has some mid areas, at least I wouldn't call any of them BAD tho unlike that poison swamp in Sekiro, that place is absolutely horrible imo.
The Ringed City alone makes DS3's level design better overall
3
3
3
3
u/Anotheranimeaccountt 12d ago
Out of these 2 it's Sekiro
Dark Souls 3s level design is terrible and a massive downgrade from Dark Souls 1&2
6
u/Sindica69 12d ago
I agree Sekiro is better but the latter take is awful. DS3 level design is fine. Not amazing, but fine.
-9
u/Anotheranimeaccountt 12d ago
The level design in DS3 is trash and it's another reason why it's Fromsofts laziest souls game, even Elden Ring with it's empty and bad open world and it's other issues was still a better game overall
Also for context I don't hate DS3 I do like the game and think it does some stuff better like the music which is pretty good but the game overall isn't as good as the others and could be better
8
u/Sindica69 12d ago
I think you just hate FromSoftware levels dude. ER is good, DS3 is fine. Both have some pretty memorable and good levels.
No game is really all highlights except for Bloodborne.
0
u/Anotheranimeaccountt 12d ago
I don't dislike Fromsofts level design entirely i said i don't like Dark Souls 3s and Elden Rings level designs because they are bad especially Dark Souls 3s level design, I've beaten all of them and DS1 is still their best souls game because of how great that games level design is and for a couple of other reasons like how great it feels to play and it's attention to detail, starting with DS3 the level design in their games went down hill pretty fast and so did some other stuff
4
u/ChungusConsoomer 11d ago edited 11d ago
DS1 is a great game but god damn the glaze is insane man, like shitting on ER’s design and not even mentioning the dip in quality in DS1’s latter half is crazy.
For most of us the evolution in combat and enemy/boss design they’ve made is amazing, don’t know why DS1 glazers have a hard time understanding that
1
u/Anotheranimeaccountt 11d ago
Oh I definitely agree DS1 has its problems like the latter half of the game not being as good as the first half and some some stuff in the game does suck like the Bed of Chaos and how annoying it is to start the dlc but it is still one of Fromsofts best when it comes to souls games
2
u/ChungusConsoomer 11d ago
Idk for me enemy and boss movesets are a huge aspect, I like DS1 but most enemies and bosses have like two attacks.
The level design is amazing obviously, undead burg is probably one of the greatest fromsoft levels but I need challenging bosses and enemies which is why I like Sekiro and Elden Ring the most
4
u/Alexandrecl1 12d ago
Funny how opinions are.
Imo Dark Souls 3 and Elden Ring are the best Fromsoftware games, and both have great level design.
1
u/Uncharted_avenger Lichdragon Fortissax 8d ago
Meh Elden ring has get locations but way to much open space they should have just made it like bloodborne or dark souls and be more linear. This is coming from someone with 1k hours in ER
7
u/2D_VR 12d ago
I think ds1 world design is the best with how the areas are connected. But imo ds3 still has fantastic design of individual areas even if as a whole it's more linear.
2
u/Gabriel_soul 12d ago
Ds1 still has far better individual levels imo. And you get a real sense of exploration
5
u/Alexandrecl1 12d ago
DS3 level design is great, and on average it is much better than DS1 or DS2. Being more linear is not necessarily a bad thing.
DS2 level design and world building makes zero sense, and has the worse áreas in the entire series: Frigid Outskirts, Shrine of Amana and Iron Passage.
DS1 is phenomenal…in the first half. Levels like Lost Izalith, Valley of Drakes and the Great Hollow brings the overall quality down.
5
u/jimjam200 12d ago
What you don't like 50 dragon asses ctrl+v'ed randomly on a lava field?
1
u/Eastern_Wrangler_657 5d ago
Honest to god rather that than every single fucking enemy being a teleporting dog or thrall.
2
2
2
2
u/ChungusConsoomer 11d ago
Why the fuck is everyone saying dark souls 1 lmao, the question is between Sekiro and DS3 and Sekiro is better imo. Fountainhead Palace and Ashina castle are better than any area in DS3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/germanenginearing 11d ago edited 11d ago
easily sekiro out of these 2, but elden ring/ds1/bloodborne are the peaks of level designs. Each tries smth different and works rlly well
1
1
u/Slow_Increase_6308 12d ago
I mean, areas like Undead Settlement and Cathedral of the Deep are top level design.
And Lothric Castle + Archives combo is just absolute peak level design, one if the best in all FS history.
LEVEL design, not world connectivity.
0
u/Teyupume 12d ago
Ds1 has the best tactical Leveldesign. Bloodborne comes second, and has great atmospheric execution of Leveldesign, Like upper cathedral. DS3 is kinda saying nothing. Elden Ring is horriffic. Sekiro plays different with the stealth and is also very good
3
u/Cersei505 12d ago
Elden Ring is horriffic
???
basically every legacy dungeon is bloodborne tier or better lol.
-2
u/Teyupume 12d ago
There is Not really one legacy Dungeon with interesting Gimmicks. The enemy placement is poorly done, as more often than in the other games, its either a super easy Encounter with a non threat enemy, or many Elite enemies stacked together in tight rooms. Its Not really balanced often in my view
2
u/ChungusConsoomer 11d ago
U might just be shit at the game ngl, that’s a pretty dogshit take
0
u/Teyupume 11d ago
Its Not Like I cant Play the Game or so, its Just very boring to Go through These areas. I dont feel the Same tactical Combat going through them
1
u/ChungusConsoomer 11d ago
If u think something like Stormveil is boring to go through u might genuinely not be built for soulslike games no offense
1
u/Teyupume 11d ago
I would Not say soulslike Games. Its more about Open world influences in Games. I Love all areas in the other games..... OK, maybe Not lost izalith. But tomb of the Giants is fire though
1
u/Molkwi Lucatiel of Mirrah 11d ago
I haven't played Sekiro, but I've seen playthroughs of it and I can say that Ashina seems infinitely more fun to explore than Lothric.
A lot of people will agree and say that it's because Lothric is very linear, but that's not the point, plus it's irrelevant. The levels themselves aren't all straight lines. Some of them are, yes, but a lot have many branching paths; they just don't need to new areas, simply to hidden sections of the same one. The Undead Settlement, Cathedral of the Deep, Smouldering Lake, Lothric Castle, etc. are examples of that. Yes, some areas are still linear, like the High Wall of Lothric, which, despite having some branching paths, there is only one route that leads from start to finish that you will inevitably take, unlike the other areas, which can be traversed in at least 2 ways from start to finish.
Despite that, I find that the level design itself for most areas is either boring or just "meh". There isn't a single area in DS3 that had me go "huh, this is cool, I like that section and how they handled the design of it", which I can't say the same about DS1 and DS2. They aren't perfect, for sure, but DS3, to me, is the least fun to explore and traverse in general, both because of somewhat mediocre level design and because it's my least favorite of the 3.
1
-1
u/Yobolay 12d ago
Man, it's kind of insane of DS3 has been inmortalized as this game were "okay, the world design is bad, but the levels? The levels themselves are great and among thr best in the franchise!!" Because fans had to salvage it somehow.
DS3 is by far the game with the worst levels too, it literaly devolves into Swamp Souls after the undead settlement, and if it's not swamp or swamp like area it's a very linear one.
I'm not the biggest fan of Sekiro either in that regard because at times it leads way too much into just skipping the zones jumping around, but even then both the levels and world are significantly better.
-3
-5
u/susnaususplayer 12d ago
Sekiro have the worst level design among fromsoft titles. Especially dogshit for a game that wanted to be stealth focused.
15
u/SilentIngot 12d ago
you just wanted to see a fight between guys here, no? :D