Well, people older than 18 shouldnt be allowed to post reviews, people who are like close to their 30 and older are too much judgemental and they look for dumb things.
Still think she's the worst horsemen. I mean strife was a top down shooter which is not remotely my style but at least he's kinda funny, Hella has no redeeming qualities or path really. I would have preferred all the games to be like the 1st and 2nd because they where the best games in the franchise and what helped the games stand out and be fun. Nothing is better than cleaving waves of enemies with War or changing between a handful of weapons with Death. Doing dainty dodges and using a whip sword was kinda lame. Also, simply put, the game isn't as edgy as the first two which makes it feel bland
Quick comment on two of the sins' designs: I personally felt that pride and lust's designs should've been swapped. Am I alone with this or have I been spoiled too much with depictions of lust being sexier?
Gameplay aspects aside, what disapointed me the most was the characterisation of Fury. From childishly angry all the time, to insecure and somewhat whiny. Fuck man, she is a horseman with zero badassery compared to War and Death.
Darksiders III reminded me more of the first Soul Reaver, e.g. level design, atmosphere and approach to combat, than Darksouls or its predecessors. I liked it and hope if there will ever be a Darksiders IV they go change things up again. Strife would lend himself to a play style akin to Gun Grave.
Actually it is bad. It tries to copy the Dark Souls formula while not being a Dark Souls like action rpg. Not an rpg. That is the problem. In DS I get rewarded with tons of souls to level up after a boss fight. Darksiders III gives me shit during boss encounters already with the first boss. For a typical action hack % slay this is just too much. I will not pretend this game to be like Dark Souls. It is not. In Darksiders III the focus of the gameplay itself is different. And yet it has the Dark Souls stamp on its forehead. Why are developers selling us gamers short? Back then as they do today? Why?
Game 1 Heavy hack and slash Game 2 Semi open world fast paced platformer Game 3 Open world Souls like Game 4 Isometric ARPG Not 1 of the 4 games have played the same and in my opinion plays the way that horsemen would likely fight. War- heavy hitting and slow, Death- Nimble and precise, Fury- Glass cannon equally punishing and punished.
Game 1: Like a Legend of Zelda game just darker Game 2: Like game 1 + Diablo-esque weapon drops and armor buffs with that flow of randomness Game 3: developers thought they knew the Dark Souls formula when their game is something else and why the Dark Souls formula does not work Game 4: never mind.
@niemand7811 I try to avoid comparing the games to other games, but 2 I would say is a combination of Prince of Persia and Zelda with RPG elements rather than diablo-esque, "4" is the diablo clone imo.
@@niemand7811 Darksiders Genesis was a fine adventure for me. Sorry it wasn't as fun for you. If anyone comes across this comment thread: Would recommend to look into all of them regardless.
i do enjoy the story and gameplay of DS3, sadly its a bit stale when you compare to 1 and 2, DS 1 or war, can only equip his trusty greatsword, and his way of combat is too brutal and slow, you can really feel the heavy hits, DS 2, follows death, his attacks are quick and versatile, and can even equip different weapons, DS3 is just like a mix of both 1 and 2, fury can only use her whip, while having this multiple form or sub ability....her kit really is swift but clunky, the puzzles so straight forward, its like this game was just release just so for a sequel sake, tho i do wish theres a part 2 of these where fury same as death can equip a 2ndary weapon, i do believe she might be more proficient than death when it comes to weapons, and last problem i see on DS3 is the generic and limited combo, like dashing or evading followed by an attack makes fury a ship shot, or her general 123 basic attack, if she got like a bit of delays and more combos then it might be a hit, like mix some DMC on DS3 and it might be perfect
I mean, it kinda retconned the series. Spoilers: Humanity wiped out? D1 and D2 say yes. D3: nope. And it kinda makes D2 completely pointless. Are the Charred Council corrupt? D1 and D2, they certainly use shady methods, but nothing was depicting them as against the Balance, or even humanity, which they had originally decided would be integral to the balance, and the seals formed, to protect humanity, until it was ready to stand in the end war. D2 even claims the Council ordered the protection of humanity, from the Nephilim, using the Horseman. D3: oh they are definitely corrupt, trying to destroy humanity, have no actual alliance to the Balance, whatever that even is now. D1 the Council didn't know how the seals were broken, then reforged, or who was helping the Destroyer in it, and was pretty pissed about humanity being gone. D3 the Destroyer is being manipulated by the Council to specifically destroy humanity, because reasons. I could go on, as there's quite a bit, but this kind of retcon is why I didn't like 3 nearly as much as 1 & 2.
basically everything you said is so wrong to the point i don't think you've played the games. The council knew about abandons plans from the jump, they hijacked his plan to kill the leadership of both heaven and hell along with humanity and the horsemen. they wanted to be the only force in charge in the absence of the creator. The darksider 2 dlc says that there were at least a few surviving groups of humans, and 3 says probably the largest group left earth entirely. The council didn't protect humanity, they protected eden. humanity didn't exist at the time, and they only did it because the creator ordered eden be kept for humans before it left.
@IskandarTheConqueror No, everything I said was true. The council didn't know about abaddon's plans until after the war had begun, otherwise they could have just sent the horsemen anyway, with no justification required. They even explicitly say the horsemen won't get involved without some form of evidence, and that they don't know who was helping abaddon. Lucifer and Lilith hijacked the plan, not the Council. In 2, it's outright said that humanity is gone, the dlc showing Death killing the last one, but even if it hadn't, 1 outright says Humanity no longer exists, making 3 contradictory to the others. Uh, yes the Council did protect humanity, not only being the ones who decided humanity were critical to the Balance in the first place, but empowering the Horseman, to fight the Nephilim, who were attacking Eden, because it was for humans, who were then moved to earth, because Eden was effectively ruined for them. That's protecting humans, because otherwise, why bother with the Horseman at all, or name humanity as critical to the Balance?
@FBI-ju5no the whole sequence with the tree of knowledge informs both the player and war that the council knew what the deal was from the start, they let it slip to hell and let the apocalypse happen to wipe the board clean. they sent war in so he could be a weapon to kill the leadership on both sides and then have the watcher kill him. the nephilim stormed eden because there was this perfect uninhabited world meant for something that doesn't exist yet and they didn'thave a homeworld, this is stated explicitly in the grand abomination book. as far as the humans are concerned, humanity is basically dead. i doubt the numbers are high enough by the time 2 rolls around for it to be called a race in a cosmic sense, even with the survivors from 3.
also the nephilim never actually made it into the garden, they were stopped before they could, so as far as we're aware genisis played out like in the bible. the council didn't name humanity balance critical. the creator did that by naming them the third kingdom, whatever beings currently making up the council feared the potential of man. hence darksiders 1.
@IskandarTheConqueror But the scene from the tree shows the Council DIDN'T know what was up from the start. It makes no mention of either Lilith or Lucifer, and they explicitly state to not know who was helping Abaddon. They used War in the role they always used the Horseman for, just in a shady way, as typically they have justification of why they are doing something. Indeed, the Watcher even says War was going to be put back in his cage, so it didn't even intend to actually kill him upon success. And you still haven't shown anywhere that humanity didn't exist at the time the Nephilim attacked Eden, when everything else says they did. And if the numbers are not high enough with Fury's survivors, which is unlikely, given the direction of the story, it renders her decision of protecting them, pointless. And, again, this would still make Death's sacrifice, null and void.
I should mention why the Dark Souls formula doesn't work in more detail. In Darksiders III you do not level up your character as you do in Dark Souls. The way you customize in Dark Souls, the way you put your souls, what stats to raise, how you forge your weapons to match your build. Darksiders III has nothing on that. Nothing. The character development is rather stiff and not as flexible as a Dark Souls like game needs it to be. There you have it.
Did you play it?? There is enhancements that literally change playstyle You can mix and match 8 different types of wepeons And armors that give a buff to specific types of play styles My first play through i focused on dodging My invicibility window was like 3 seconds Second play through i went arcane danage And spammed havoc form 3rd playthrough i went for tank build with damage reflection and hp focus
Nah, this was a bad game. Making excuses for it wont change that. Quality games will overcome criticism becaywhile no hame is perfect the good have to outweight the bad. Its just like food. If its good, then it will sell. Darksiders 3 was not a good game and didn't sell well at all. If it did we wouldn't even be having conversations like this.
there's the thing, it did sell well. not by aaa standards mind you, but the game was profitable inside a month. it is a good game, not great or amazing, but good enough.
it is bad, poorly optimized, poorly designed, control is a mess...... can't play over 5 minutes and get annoyed with the weird buttons control......... only Darksiders 1 is great!
@@Agencyagent34 you gotta remember that Fury's horse was killed by what seemed like the angels. The demons target anything that isn't a demon. And the kingdom of man is the chosen kingdom while the Nephilim are tasked with serving the will of not just the council, but of heaven as well. I feel snubbed as well. Fury has a right to be pissed all around.
My g makes the best retrospectives and reviews on RUclips and im tired of being quiet bout it!!
Thanks for the kind words. Hope one day they’ll bless me lol
I wasn't expecting this level of quality content cuz this channel popped up on my feed just now but it was great. Well done.
It was not bad, actually. People just had different expectations for the game style.
Im not a fan of the souls-like approach but it's till a solid game.
Yeah. I expected it to be a good game. It wasn't.
Well, people older than 18 shouldnt be allowed to post reviews, people who are like close to their 30 and older are too much judgemental and they look for dumb things.
I love one and two. 3 kind of let me down. Her combat too me felt interrupted didn’t seem seamless as the systems in the first two games
Wait, years? Plural?
*sees the release date*
JESUS
Still think she's the worst horsemen. I mean strife was a top down shooter which is not remotely my style but at least he's kinda funny, Hella has no redeeming qualities or path really. I would have preferred all the games to be like the 1st and 2nd because they where the best games in the franchise and what helped the games stand out and be fun. Nothing is better than cleaving waves of enemies with War or changing between a handful of weapons with Death. Doing dainty dodges and using a whip sword was kinda lame.
Also, simply put, the game isn't as edgy as the first two which makes it feel bland
Quick comment on two of the sins' designs: I personally felt that pride and lust's designs should've been swapped. Am I alone with this or have I been spoiled too much with depictions of lust being sexier?
Gameplay aspects aside, what disapointed me the most was the characterisation of Fury. From childishly angry all the time, to insecure and somewhat whiny. Fuck man, she is a horseman with zero badassery compared to War and Death.
i just finish it like 20 minutes ago and its was no bad at all the dialogue was cheesy but the conceptualization and the gameplay was very enyoable.
Darksiders III reminded me more of the first Soul Reaver, e.g. level design, atmosphere and approach to combat, than Darksouls or its predecessors.
I liked it and hope if there will ever be a Darksiders IV they go change things up again.
Strife would lend himself to a play style akin to Gun Grave.
Oh hell no. The first Soul Reaver is totally different from this lame excuse of a game.
Actually it is bad. It tries to copy the Dark Souls formula while not being a Dark Souls like action rpg. Not an rpg. That is the problem. In DS I get rewarded with tons of souls to level up after a boss fight. Darksiders III gives me shit during boss encounters already with the first boss. For a typical action hack % slay this is just too much. I will not pretend this game to be like Dark Souls. It is not. In Darksiders III the focus of the gameplay itself is different. And yet it has the Dark Souls stamp on its forehead. Why are developers selling us gamers short? Back then as they do today? Why?
Game 1 Heavy hack and slash
Game 2 Semi open world fast paced platformer
Game 3 Open world Souls like
Game 4 Isometric ARPG
Not 1 of the 4 games have played the same and in my opinion plays the way that horsemen would likely fight. War- heavy hitting and slow, Death- Nimble and precise, Fury- Glass cannon equally punishing and punished.
Wait there's a 4 already
@@blasphemer_amon Genesis was a prequel.
Game 1: Like a Legend of Zelda game just darker
Game 2: Like game 1 + Diablo-esque weapon drops and armor buffs with that flow of randomness
Game 3: developers thought they knew the Dark Souls formula when their game is something else and why the Dark Souls formula does not work
Game 4: never mind.
@niemand7811 I try to avoid comparing the games to other games, but 2 I would say is a combination of Prince of Persia and Zelda with RPG elements rather than diablo-esque, "4" is the diablo clone imo.
@@niemand7811 Darksiders Genesis was a fine adventure for me. Sorry it wasn't as fun for you.
If anyone comes across this comment thread: Would recommend to look into all of them regardless.
Wait, there was Darksiders 3?
i do enjoy the story and gameplay of DS3, sadly its a bit stale when you compare to 1 and 2, DS 1 or war, can only equip his trusty greatsword, and his way of combat is too brutal and slow, you can really feel the heavy hits, DS 2, follows death, his attacks are quick and versatile, and can even equip different weapons, DS3 is just like a mix of both 1 and 2, fury can only use her whip, while having this multiple form or sub ability....her kit really is swift but clunky, the puzzles so straight forward, its like this game was just release just so for a sequel sake, tho i do wish theres a part 2 of these where fury same as death can equip a 2ndary weapon, i do believe she might be more proficient than death when it comes to weapons, and last problem i see on DS3 is the generic and limited combo, like dashing or evading followed by an attack makes fury a ship shot, or her general 123 basic attack, if she got like a bit of delays and more combos then it might be a hit, like mix some DMC on DS3 and it might be perfect
It was not bad?
the moment the algorithm finds this dude he is gonna take off. great retrospective
I mean, it kinda retconned the series.
Spoilers:
Humanity wiped out? D1 and D2 say yes.
D3: nope.
And it kinda makes D2 completely pointless.
Are the Charred Council corrupt?
D1 and D2, they certainly use shady methods, but nothing was depicting them as against the Balance, or even humanity, which they had originally decided would be integral to the balance, and the seals formed, to protect humanity, until it was ready to stand in the end war.
D2 even claims the Council ordered the protection of humanity, from the Nephilim, using the Horseman.
D3: oh they are definitely corrupt, trying to destroy humanity, have no actual alliance to the Balance, whatever that even is now.
D1 the Council didn't know how the seals were broken, then reforged, or who was helping the Destroyer in it, and was pretty pissed about humanity being gone.
D3 the Destroyer is being manipulated by the Council to specifically destroy humanity, because reasons.
I could go on, as there's quite a bit, but this kind of retcon is why I didn't like 3 nearly as much as 1 & 2.
basically everything you said is so wrong to the point i don't think you've played the games.
The council knew about abandons plans from the jump, they hijacked his plan to kill the leadership of both heaven and hell along with humanity and the horsemen. they wanted to be the only force in charge in the absence of the creator.
The darksider 2 dlc says that there were at least a few surviving groups of humans, and 3 says probably the largest group left earth entirely.
The council didn't protect humanity, they protected eden. humanity didn't exist at the time, and they only did it because the creator ordered eden be kept for humans before it left.
@IskandarTheConqueror
No, everything I said was true.
The council didn't know about abaddon's plans until after the war had begun, otherwise they could have just sent the horsemen anyway, with no justification required.
They even explicitly say the horsemen won't get involved without some form of evidence, and that they don't know who was helping abaddon. Lucifer and Lilith hijacked the plan, not the Council.
In 2, it's outright said that humanity is gone, the dlc showing Death killing the last one, but even if it hadn't, 1 outright says Humanity no longer exists, making 3 contradictory to the others.
Uh, yes the Council did protect humanity, not only being the ones who decided humanity were critical to the Balance in the first place, but empowering the Horseman, to fight the Nephilim, who were attacking Eden, because it was for humans, who were then moved to earth, because Eden was effectively ruined for them. That's protecting humans, because otherwise, why bother with the Horseman at all, or name humanity as critical to the Balance?
@FBI-ju5no the whole sequence with the tree of knowledge informs both the player and war that the council knew what the deal was from the start, they let it slip to hell and let the apocalypse happen to wipe the board clean. they sent war in so he could be a weapon to kill the leadership on both sides and then have the watcher kill him. the nephilim stormed eden because there was this perfect uninhabited world meant for something that doesn't exist yet and they didn'thave a homeworld, this is stated explicitly in the grand abomination book. as far as the humans are concerned, humanity is basically dead. i doubt the numbers are high enough by the time 2 rolls around for it to be called a race in a cosmic sense, even with the survivors from 3.
also the nephilim never actually made it into the garden, they were stopped before they could, so as far as we're aware genisis played out like in the bible. the council didn't name humanity balance critical. the creator did that by naming them the third kingdom, whatever beings currently making up the council feared the potential of man. hence darksiders 1.
@IskandarTheConqueror
But the scene from the tree shows the Council DIDN'T know what was up from the start.
It makes no mention of either Lilith or Lucifer, and they explicitly state to not know who was helping Abaddon.
They used War in the role they always used the Horseman for, just in a shady way, as typically they have justification of why they are doing something.
Indeed, the Watcher even says War was going to be put back in his cage, so it didn't even intend to actually kill him upon success.
And you still haven't shown anywhere that humanity didn't exist at the time the Nephilim attacked Eden, when everything else says they did.
And if the numbers are not high enough with Fury's survivors, which is unlikely, given the direction of the story, it renders her decision of protecting them, pointless.
And, again, this would still make Death's sacrifice, null and void.
I should mention why the Dark Souls formula doesn't work in more detail. In Darksiders III you do not level up your character as you do in Dark Souls. The way you customize in Dark Souls, the way you put your souls, what stats to raise, how you forge your weapons to match your build. Darksiders III has nothing on that. Nothing. The character development is rather stiff and not as flexible as a Dark Souls like game needs it to be. There you have it.
Did you play it??
There is enhancements that literally change playstyle
You can mix and match 8 different types of wepeons
And armors that give a buff to specific types of play styles
My first play through i focused on dodging
My invicibility window was like 3 seconds
Second play through i went arcane danage And spammed havoc form
3rd playthrough i went for tank build with damage reflection and hp focus
Nah, this was a bad game. Making excuses for it wont change that. Quality games will overcome criticism becaywhile no hame is perfect the good have to outweight the bad. Its just like food. If its good, then it will sell. Darksiders 3 was not a good game and didn't sell well at all. If it did we wouldn't even be having conversations like this.
there's the thing, it did sell well. not by aaa standards mind you, but the game was profitable inside a month. it is a good game, not great or amazing, but good enough.
it is bad, poorly optimized, poorly designed, control is a mess...... can't play over 5 minutes and get annoyed with the weird buttons control......... only Darksiders 1 is great!
You guys throw around the word racist too much.
😢 I'm sure you'll survive
@@Agencyagent34 and I'm sure you wouldn't be a smart-ass to my face.
@@Agencyagent34 you gotta remember that Fury's horse was killed by what seemed like the angels. The demons target anything that isn't a demon. And the kingdom of man is the chosen kingdom while the Nephilim are tasked with serving the will of not just the council, but of heaven as well. I feel snubbed as well. Fury has a right to be pissed all around.