So I thought I had sold my copy of dark souls 3 to get a switch,

>>379349653
It's fantastic. Hardest bosses in all of DS3 and good to great level design. Good enemy variety but it does feel like a damned guantlet at times. Excellent PVP opportunities with a revivable boss and the weapon/armor additions are mostly good. Worse part about the whole thing is the ending depending on your interpretation. Well worth the money regardless.

>>379350086

i dont know what this guy is talking about, and the general overly-positive response to this dlc seems insane to me. it sucks - almost the worst level design in the entire game, the enemies range from obnoxious to more obnoxious, the bosses are unremarkable except for the last one (and that one is bordering on offensive, lore-wise). it makes the first dlc seem better in hindsight, that's how disappointed i was. stay away unless you're a braindead souls moron.

It's astounding
Go buy it

File: 1463872991117.jpg (87KB, 403x570px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 403x570px

>>379350496
i dont know what this guy is talking about, and the general overly-negative response to this dlc seems insane to me. it amazes - almost the best level design in the entire game, the enemies range from difficult to challenging, the bosses are remarkable except for the 2nd to last one (and that one is bordering pvp). it makes the 2nd dlc seem lackluster in hindsight, that's how amazed i was. stay away from braindead souls morons like >>379350496

>>379350086
>>379350947
>>379351062
all correct

>>379350496
despises fun

Get it OP, its by far better than anything in the base game at least. Doesn't do enough to redeem das3 as a whole, but some of the bosses are GOAT

>>379350496 here again.

let me elaborate:

the level design of the ringed city is largely vertical as opposed to the inward-turning,
largely horizontal (usually with one or two levels of verticality) level design you find in most souls areas. this sounds great, and has a lot of potential for the kind of satisfying level design moments souls games are known for -- except that the dlc contains no such moments. gone are the well-considered, spatially interesting areas. instead, you get to visit two separate open swamp-type areas separated by narrow, vertical hallways that you traverse by literally jumping off of ledges in the level and landing far below. oh, and the open swamp areas are both full of respawning machine gun surveillance camera equivalent enemies.

even visually, the dlc is a huge letdown. instead of exploring an interesting new area, you spend the entirety of the dlc in drab, gray mish-mashes of preexisting assets. the dreg heap (the first area of the dlc) is a great example of straight up lazy visual and level design. tons of potential, none of it realized. that's how i would summarize every aspect of this dlc. in terms of level design, visual design, lore, NPCs, enemies, everything. wasted potential.

for context, i love the souls series and was looking forward to this dlc. i liked ashes of ariandel despite its short length. i liked the base game enough to put 300+ hours into it. but the second dlc was enough to turn me off completely. it was an insulting way to say goodbye to the game and the series overall, and this laziness and lack of creativity should not be rewarded.

>>379352443

it's obvious that the team behind the souls games ran out of ideas a while ago, and even that the souls games were never meant to be an annualized series like this. and it finally caught up to them.

>>379352443
I can accept being disappointed with TRC, but saying that in any way Ashes is better is just a flat-out lie.

Ashes has 1 (one) boss, and its essentially ripped straight from bloodborne. I don't understand how you can call TRC lazy but say you enjoyed ashes.

Even if both are shitty, ashes loses by sheer numbers

>AoA
>~2 areas in size, being generous
>1 boss
>1 "boss"

>TRC
>~3-4 areas in size
>3 bosses
>1 "boss"

This isn't even accounting for all the weapons and armor that TRC added, which again, is staggering compared to AoA. TRC is simply more content, and if you are going to argue that its shitty based on the fact that its lazy, you have to accept that about AoA as well. In that case, TRC just has more bang for your buck.

It's aight.
Length wise it's slightly longer than snowman's land which was disappointing but the setting has more interconnectedness.
Okay amount of new enemies and equipment.
Boss fights are very good.

Overall it was fun but underwhelming and didn't meet my expectations
6/10

>>379353186

i'd never argue that ashes wasn't disappointing. in fact, i went out of my way to acknowledge that its lack of content was a problem. but putting size aside, what IS there in ashes is of higher quality than what is there in TRC. ashes may be small, with two disappointing boss fights (one that's just boring, one that would be excellent if not for having three phases that have to be repeated upon death), but the area is well designed - the snow fields are an interesting approach to a larger, wider horizontal play area in a souls game, the village below is one of the best examples of the kind of level design that really sets souls games apart. i can't say that i think anything in TRC compares.

don't get me wrong - both DLCs were disappointing and basically a slight to souls fans on the part of fromsoft. the old hunters is one of the best examples of post-game DLC, period, and DaS2 DLCs, while overrated, were vastly better than almost everything in the base game. DaS3 DLC was an embarrassment starting with ashes, but TRC was a last, stinging insult.