5 Reasons Battlefield 1 Will Be Better Than Dark Souls 3

With this weekend’s announcement of Battlefield 1 dominating the newsosphere, it put us to considering whether this could be the game to finally topple Dark Souls 3 from the top of things people will click on if we write a headline like that. It’s okay, people don’t read this bit – they start at 1) below.

1) Dark Souls 3 leans more heavily on allegories to do with the Vietnam War

World War One is a surprisingly under-explored topic for video games, with the much more arcade-friendly World War Two: Axis Vs Allies proving the most fertile ground for gaming experiences. FromSoftware took a rather naive step in their attempt to explore elsewhere, picking very obvious allegories with the Americano-Vietnam war as its central theme, presumably in the belief that this would have it stand out from the conflict history crowd.

However, Battlefield 1’s move in the opposite direction could well prove to be the winning stroke, seeing Dark Souls 3 removed from its mantle in the process. More primitive weapons, rather than swords acting as metaphorical helicopters, will likely see the player given a far more gritty and realistic experience.

2) Demons don’t actually exist but World War One likely did

A criticism that most of the games media has hushed up is that Dark Souls 3 falls pretty short when it comes to realism. There’s no strong evidence for the existence of the Ashen One, and Lothric is still primarily considered to be mythical, with a huge lack of contemporaneous documentation.

However, The First World War is now widely accepted by most historians as likely to have occurred, making Battlefield 1 offer significantly more realism and authentic vehicles.

3) Dark Souls 3 isn’t first-person

Battlefield 1 will very probably have first-person combat, while the Dark Souls 3 developers were only able to get as far as third.

4) Dice have had more goes at making Battlefield games

Battlefield 1 will be the 15th game in the Battlefield series, the first – Battlefield 1942 – released in 2002. (Some have previously been confused believing the first game to in fact be the one-thousand-nine-hundred-and-forty-second game in the series, but this title was of course due to an infamous labelling error at the games factory. Hence the new name still being free for this game.) Whereas Dark Souls 3 is only the fourth game in its run, not including the Saturn’s The Mansion Of Hidden Souls. That means Dice have had nearly five times as many goes at practising making Battlefield games, and so are almost five times better at it. Sorry FromSoftware, get back to us in eleven Dark Souls time!

5) Dark Souls 3 is actually too hard

While FromSoftware have yet to release an official statement on the matter, it’s now widely recognised that the Dark Souls games are really, properly tricky. It’s jolly hard to kill even the early baddies, which is offputting to most gamers. No such mistake is likely from Dice, cleverly using human opponents instead of AI in order to prevent things from getting too tough. We also expect Dice to remember to keep opponents to the correct size, rather than the mismatched mess of scale discrepancies the entire Dark Souls series has featured. While the latter is likely to eventually be patched out of Dark Souls 3, it’s likely too late for the game’s reputation.

Let us know why you agree, below!

From this site

200 Comments

  1. The_Player says:

    The hell is this clickbait article? The game isn’t out yet, how can you make such a ridiculous statement?

    • Junkmail says:

      The pure force of objectivity in video games journalism

      • SaintAn says:

        They’re bloggers, not journalists. Though lately this site has been getting even more bloggy than usual. Hope it’s not turning into an IGN, PC Gamer or a Kotaku.

    • Zallgrin says:

      I admire your skill for ignoring satire. Where do you buy your blindfolds? I need some of those for ignoring stupid flamewars

      • Freud says:

        What happens when satire over clickbait become what it’s mocking?

        Clickbaitception.

        • gunny1993 says:

          What happens when the internalized regression of clickbaitception becomes so much that all titles are in fact, clickbait?

          I demand all titles be numerical listed as such (amount of words).(amount of characters).(Amount of images)

          So this article is now 566.2788.3

          Ofc the next world war will be fought over whether or not spaces count as charcters.

      • Smoky_the_Bear says:

        Satire is supposed to be funny……..

      • SaintAn says:

        Is that your excuse for every dumb article? This isn’t a satire site.

    • padger says:

      He’s so cute!

    • Phasma Felis says:

      There’s always one.

      …But there’s like four in these comments so far, and there’s not all that many comments. Could one of you guys explain, please? Are you trolling? Did you ignore the article and skip straight to the comment box? Or do you actually, honestly believe that John thinks Dark Souls is a transparent allegory for the Vietnam War?

    • Imbecile says:

      Heh, always worth reading the articles here. I think Jon missed a trick.
      He could have spread it over several pages.
      For extra clicks.
      Maybe one sentence.
      On each page.

    • Viral Frog says:

      My guess is that his sense of humor doesn’t quite shine through to everyone.

      • Kala says:

        That was diplomatic :p

        My guess would’ve been some people are dumber than a box of rocks…

        • Darth Gangrel says:

          Seeing what some people write on the internet (though rarely on RPS), I’d say that’s an insult to the box of rocks. They’re now quite sad and angry to be associated with such people. You should feel ashamed of yourself and apologize to the box of rocks.

    • Evenmagic says:

      These are 2 games you can’t really compare….

    • hamilcarp says:

      Good lord man, get with the program. If you confused this article for anything other than a silly joke, you must be confused very often.

    • WeeMadAndo says:

      And it’s not even high level game related comedic click bait.

      Try Point and Clickbait instead:
      link to pointandclickbait.com

  2. klops says:

    !!!

  3. Dingbatwhirr says:

    Whilst I agree with most of the above, I’d like to take issue with point number 3, regarding first and third persons. I would contend that third person is more difficult to pull off as it requires the developers to complete the first and second persons on the way to the third. First person requires making only one person and so is easier.

    Other than this, I think you’re right, and Battlefield one will surely be awarded the Game of the Year™ prize by the Gaming Council (thus being permitted to release the vaunted ‘GotY edition’), if not the ‘Objectively the Best Game of All Time™’ award (which as we all know is still currently possessed by the 12-year-old Half Life 2). Of course, the jury will, as always, be wearing their patented Nostalgia Goggles™ this year, so nothing is certain.

    • John Walker says:

      Oh dear, yet another person who has fallen for the strawman argument that perspectives go up instead of down. Typical ad hominem.

      • lglethal says:

        Oh come now, we all know that the ‘Objectively the Best Game of All Time™’ award goes to Half Life 3. It’s so nebulous and amazing, that it means something fabulously different to every gamer…

        • Dingbatwhirr says:

          Iglethal – you’re right of course. I totally forgot that it changed hands last year. If I recall correctly, the jury was particularly impressed by HL3’s innovative inclusion of a ‘scratch ‘n’ sniff’ card’ with each copy of the game which, whilst unconventional, really added another layer of depth to the five-hour sewer section.

          Though, as you say, the fact that each judge experienced a different, nebulously perfect game based on nostalgically idealised gaming experiences from their childhoods probably secured the win. Well done Gabe. You did it again.

          • zarthrag says:

            From Software vs EA….FIGHT!

            Winner: ….Valve?

            -that’s what I just got from all that.

      • Dingbatwhirr says:

        Is this the point where I’m supposed to bring up the Nazis, or do I need to accuse you of being in the pocket of the developers first? Or should I jump straight into the page-long ‘typical liberal media’ rant?

        Sorry, my ‘arguing on the internet’ is a bit rusty – it’s been a while since I took the course.

        • klops says:

          Straight into the page-long “typical liberal media” rant.

      • iainl says:

        This is all ludicrous. Of course First Person is the best. Third Person only earns you a bronze.

      • ImperiumLibriumEphemeral says:

        All the high class english guys major in humanities or something.

    • Horg says:

      Frankly, i’m disappointed that EA aren’t taking this opportunity to embrace the future of gaming narrative: 3rd person plural perspective.

      What could be more immersive than observing the narration of your characters story? A strong script filled with vivid descriptions of your bravery and valor would allow the player / observer (or plobserver as we shall be known henceforth) to paint a tapestry of imagination no developer could ever hope to compete with in mediums as primitive as 3rd person.

      Additionally, plobserving is a prime candidate for embracing modern VR technology. Imagine sitting in a comfy chair, relaxed and ready to observe yourself through VR sitting in a comfy chair, relaxed and ready to listen to your story unfold. The accuracy of the simulation, the realism, could never be equaled.

      • Premium User Badge

        particlese says:

        Why do you think most HMDs come with cameras? The Rift has a leg up over the Vive and smartphone HMDs in this department with its external camera, but rumor has it that HTC is preparing to surprise-ship full-length mirrors to stay non-infringingly competitive during the upcoming wave of plobservation simulators.

      • REBORN71 says:

        Horrg – I get from your comment you have not played The Order 1886. The masterpiece that put you the gamer into the 4th person perspective where rather than just merely controlling an 3th person avatar on the screen you were presented with new revolutionary view catered to the eyes of the wide screen cinemaphobes. The view in which you do fk all for 5hours in traditional sense of gaming but the view that so accurately and mesmerizingly transforms you into believing you are actually wearing VR goggles as you pick up meaningless objects and turn them around in your hands admiring the detail and the craftsmanship of the 3D modelling artists from Ready at dawn.

    • BlackMageMario says:

      My heart, this is too hilarious. Thank you for this.

    • REBORN71 says:

      BS – I’m skipping this shit – I’m waiting for Battlefield 0.
      anything with 1 is just a test, just something to gauge the market and prepare for release of 2 which is always going to be better, bigger, more in tune with the audience – 2 is where EA and the like go “we listened to you, we made changes, you are not going to believe what we have created, you are going to love it…”
      3 – tree is shit – tree is like well we gave them what market researchers have proven over and over that target audience wants and our spreadsheets need. Fk it lets do another market research. Yep as we thought the results are the same alright lets reskin 2.
      And so on

      But 0
      zero is where the creativity is – can you see this with me
      Battlefield 0
      The most realistic visual and narrative experience catered TO YOU. You don’t like OP weapons? no problem
      You don’t like destruction? no problem
      You don’t like soldier skins? no problem
      You don’t like the maps? Not enough maps? mAP TOO SMALL?
      tOO MANY CHOKE POINTS? NO FKN PROBLEM.
      Embrace
      Battlefield 0
      78GB download of 1 massive white pixel. For 120$ you can sit in front of the white screen close ur eyes and embrace the new 0-VR technology. Let your imagination run wild as your muscles relax and shit like fire breathing dinosaurs with prosthetic legs attack you while you have only banana peels to defend yourself.
      Battlefield 0
      not 1st perspective
      not 3rd perspective
      BE THE PERSPECTIVE

  4. ramirezfm says:

    I agree below!

  5. JakeOfRavenclaw says:

    3 is more than 1, but being 1st is better than being 3rd, so I’d say it’s a dead heat so far.

    (An actual question: has there ever been another game, or movie for that matter, with a “1” at the end like this? Rouge One and Ready Player One don’t count as they’re not using the numeral to indicate a sequel. Truly, DICE is at the forefront of innovation once again).

    • lglethal says:

      F1 2011 has two 1’s at the end, so its doubly as good as Battlefield 1! And whilst not quite matching up to that level of awesomeness H1Z1 also features two 1’s although it has to intersperse them with a Z.

      Innovation – bah! I think not… ;)

    • dahools says:

      Star wars Episode 1?

    • Hidden_7 says:

      Loaded Weapon 1

      But it was parody of action series, so the fact that it had a superfluous number at the end was part of the joke. I’m not sure if that counts, then.

      • Evil Pancakes says:

        There’s also a History of the World: Part 1 film. There is no part 2.

  6. RaunakS says:

    Can I send a glitter bomb to castle RPS? Or will I have to resort writing angry letters to the Editor?

    And mind you me, they will be *very* angry letters.

  7. DCEnygma says:

    I do personally wish DICE would at least speak into the variety of weapons that will be available. All of my history books led me to believe that soldiers of World War One utilized a variety of weaponry ranging from dual katanas up to the dreaded Iron-Maiden-On-A-Pole-Attached-To-An-Axe-For-Some-God-Forsaken-Reason and I sincerely hope this is accurately represented here.

    • Premium User Badge

      particlese says:

      I think there was a Battle Beast with one of those puppies. Those sneaky edutainment proponents!

  8. onomatomania says:

    wait

    wait why did vietnam fight a whole war against weak espresso

    why is dark souls a metaphor for southeast asia’s hatred of crap coffee

    i have so many quesions

  9. Bull0 says:

    Guess this seemed funnier in your head.

    • pennywyz says:

      I thought it was pretty funny. So there.

    • suibhne says:

      Oh the irony.

    • Koozer says:

      Yeah John, your attempt to bring a little lightness to the world and lift the heavy weight upon our souls has failed, despite the fleeting joy you have brought to many others who have foolishly gazed upon this article. We must point this out to you in the snarkiest way imaginable or else you will never learn.

  10. Author X says:

    I won’t stand for this patent buzzword nonsense. 3rd-person perspective is clearly 3 times as immersive as 1st-person.

    • Zorganist says:

      You’ve got it all wrong. Third person is so-called because it’s three degrees of removal from the action. First person is only one degree removed, and so is the more immersive.

  11. Drhank says:

    How and why are they naming it “Battlefield 1”? There’s already a first battlefield game, stupid developers with their stupid game titles.

    But even worse, how does this article even compare these two completely different games? Is this site even taking itself seriously?

    • Snowskeeper says:

      I don’t know about the site, but they’re certainly not taking the article seriously.

    • Unclepauly says:

      Disagree to agree.

    • Okami says:

      They’re calling it Battlefield 1 because it takes place during World War 1. Of course they could have called it Battlefield 1916, but long numbers are confusing. Also 1 is the new X or the new “3 used in place of an E”.

      Also this article is satire and the people who run this site take it and themselves as seriously as you can, when you’re a grown up person earning tour living by writing about video games with guns and soldiers and monsters and big swords in them.

  12. mrmistermeakin says:

    Nice try, not even close to Jim Sterling level of jokey\ironic article

    • John Walker says:

      I can only dream of such an accomplishment.

    • Sic says:

      I… I don’t know how to tell you this, but I think your line is backwards.

      • gunny1993 says:

        elcitra cinori\yekoj fo level gnilretS miJ ot esolc neve ton ,yrt eciN?

        You’re crazy

        • LennyLeonardo says:

          Great, now you’ve awoken the Great Despoiler. Nice going.

      • Koozer says:

        I don’t understand why people feel the need to point out exactly how much they don’t like innocuous things that other people enjoy.

    • Snowskeeper says:

      I think Jim Sterling lost the right to claim that prize when he started filling every video to the brim with bad sex jokes.

  13. Al__S says:

    Where are all the 2nd person games, that’s what I want to know.

    • Dingbatwhirr says:

      A very good question. I’ve always thought of ‘choose your own adventure’ books as being 2nd person games (e.g. ‘you do x’), so perhaps the recent adaptation of Sorcery! would qualify, or maybe some Interactive Fiction.

      The real question, though, is when developers will finally manage to create a fourth-person game. I can only dream of the possibilities.

    • Phasma Felis says:

      I always thought the chase sequences in Crash Bandicoot, where he’s running into the camera, would qualify.

    • Rumpelstiltskin says:

      I think I figured out how a hypothetical 2nd-person game would look like recently. It’s basically you control a character while seeing him in front of you, facing you (as if you were looking in the mirror). I guess that also explains why there isn’t a whole lot of such games.

      • REBORN71 says:

        Well I have to disagree – the 2nd person perspective game requirement as the name state is 2nd person. So your buddy sits in front of the screen and you sit behind the screen facing him. You have the controls but you have to rely on his facial gestures to know what to do.
        If you really want to push yourself you could do it with a mirror positioned so that you can see your face but not the screen – And in the braking news speedrunner has completed Dark Souls in under 1hour playing by himself in 2nd person perspective.

        • Rumpelstiltskin says:

          I think the “personality” characteristic refers to how you view your avatar. 3rd person, for instance, doesn’t mean that you watch someone else entirely. You still fully control your character, it’s just that you see him as someone else, and, unlike the 2nd person mode, he seems to be unaware of you. Which suggests another way to approach it: in a 2nd person game you avatar acknowledges your pretense and communicates with you.

    • SanguineAngel says:

      I would say point and click adventures personally

      • phlebas says:

        Point&click adventures are generally first or third person. You need to go further back to find the second person:

        AT END OF ROAD
        You are standing at the end of a road before a small brick building. Around you is a forest. A small stream flows out of the building and down a gully.

        • Evil Pancakes says:

          I’d actually argue some of the Infinity Engine RPGs could count as second person. The game view may be isometric, but the narrative is heavily told from a second person perspective.
          “You” see x.
          “You” say y.
          Person z looks at “you”
          etc.

          I guess that comment isn’t really in the spirit of this article though, all serious like.
          So; Bums and Willies.

  14. horrorgasm says:

    Hey, Battlefield can be pretty challenging too. I mean it took almost a week to beat that “connecting to server” screen in the beginning of the last one.

    • iainl says:

      Even once I got past the numerous problems I had even getting Battlefield 3 running, it took me at least twenty lives to defeat my first enemy. So this stuff about Dark Souls being harder is clearly nonsense.

  15. vorador says:

    John, go home. You’re drunk

    If you’re home, nevermind. Still drunk.

    • CannedLizard says:

      I believe you meant to say: “If you’re home, disconnect the internet.”

    • Catterbatter says:

      I believe you meant to say: “If you’re John, you’re handsome.”

  16. Abacus says:

    Sorry, I didn’t get it

    Sorry

  17. ChrisGWaine says:

    “with a huge lack of contemporaneous documentation.”

    You’ll have egg on your face once archaeologists work out how to bring up item descriptions.

  18. Morcane says:

    Yes indeed.

  19. goldpaw121 says:

    funny joke

  20. SlimShanks says:

    I like clickbait way more when you guys are just straight up about it. :D
    Also ha.

  21. SlimShanks says:

    Ah ya and if there was one thing I didn’t like about Dark Souls 3 it was the amount of Veitcong geurillas.
    The giant archer was obviously a metaphor for calling in an airstrike.

    • Snowskeeper says:

      “I help anytime,” the giant said, loading another canister of Agent Orange into his bow.

    • SlimShanks says:

      So the Rotted Greatwood must be a metaphor for the devastation caused to the jungle by the US air force… And the Abyss is… US foreign policy? That’s deep.

  22. Jokerme says:

    How dare you! DEMONS DO EXIST!

  23. XxBrentos9xX says:

    I’m not sure if the article was more entertaining or the comment section was. John must’ve known people would raise their pitchforks

    • Premium User Badge

      particlese says:

      I think he knew the precise manner in which people would raise their pitchforks and have twisted-balloon pitchforks raised both against and alongside them. John is a flippin’ genius.

  24. Imbecile says:

    I dont know whether to feel smug because I figured out this was a joke quickly and chortled, or ashamed because I actually clicked on the article before I realised it was satire. Shameful smugness?

  25. Premium User Badge

    magogjack says:

    I think this is my favourite article of the month, this is usually reserved for a Pipwork, Cheers John !

  26. oravalag says:

    This is just amazing.

  27. Rogerio Martins says:

    CLIIIIIIICKKBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAIIIIIIII!!!!!

  28. Sarfrin says:

    I don’t come to Rock, Paper, Shotgun for “amusement”. I come for news about rocks, paper and shotguns, and am constantly disappointed by John Walker’s failure to deliver it.

    • liquidsoap89 says:

      I think all 3 were covered here… This article rocks. A webpage could be considered a digital form of paper. And Battlefield won could very well have a shotgun of some sorts (did they exist back then?).

      • Cooper says:

        Yes, they were called trenchguns, used by the US:
        link to en.wikipedia.org

        Apparently the Germans tried to get them banned as weapons of war…

      • consolitis says:

        Well, they were widely used in the American Civil War of course in the 1860’s, but then I remembered that smoothbore firearms used with pellet “grapeshot” (rather than a single ball – early “shotguns” if you will) have existed since the medieval era, e.g. The Arquebus. Long before rifles were invented. Probably most famously used as the Blunderbuss scattergun in the 1700’s.

  29. Javerlin says:

    Yes! This is what journalism is all about. Clickbait!

  30. Unsheep says:

    Of-course Battlefield will topple Dark Souls 3, multiplayer games will always win.

  31. Monggerel says:

    How quaint.

  32. fray_bentos says:

    Reason 1. You died.
    Reason 2. You died.
    Reason 3. You died.
    Reason 4. You died.
    Reason 5. You died.

  33. Howlitzer says:

    This whole statement is invalid seeing both games are different genre’s and the whole thing on dark souls being too hard? thats what makes the game if it was easy no one would want to play it, the aspect that makes the game fun is the challenge not a game that holds your hand and cradles you like a baby through the entirety of the play through. in the words of the great dark souls gods “Git Gud”

  34. Jovian09 says:

    It’s about time someone told the inconvenient truth about these competing heavyweights. Dark Souls’ lack of realism and guns is holding it back, and FromSoftware hasn’t realised it after 4 games. However, it was short-sighted of DICE to go for the WW1 setting instead of the objectively-superior sci-fi laser guns.

    • REBORN71 says:

      Wtf – no guns iv been busting my ass collecting every glowing orb I could see to get better weapon and you are telling me there is no gun. F this back to bloodborne – guns and realism tex mex style.

  35. Knufinke says:

    I thought Battlefield 4 was already better than Dark Souls 3 but then again I hate Jump and Runs.

  36. Premium User Badge

    Oakreef says:

    6) The souls in Dark Souls 3 are actually quite bright and glowy and there are more than three of them, making the entire game a horrible lie. Battlefield 1 contains one field and it does in fact a battled field.

  37. Unclepauly says:

    The part about swords being metaphorical helicopters.

  38. int says:

    Field Marshal Douglas Haig needs more souls. DIE FOR HIM!

  39. Viral Frog says:

    I’m with you on the visual perspective, John. Couldn;t even be bothered to try to scrape past third person? Pffffft. They could have at least gone for second person. Who chooses third over first or second? I mean really.

  40. Turkey says:

    This is the last straw, John Walker. I’m never ever ever never ever ever never ever never ever never everever ever ever never nevever nevevever coming back to RPS In a billion years forever!!

  41. asdfagf says:

    I made this account just to say this… This is an incredibly idiotic post. They are two completely different games, fitting two completely different playstyles and liked quite often by two completely different people. How is this in any way news for DS3?

    • Premium User Badge

      Nauallis says:

      Yes, I agree, your comment was idiotic.

    • klops says:

      The idea of the article was that the article was supposed to be idiotic. For starters, read the reasoning in part 1. After that read the reasoning in every other numbered part.
      It was a joke.

      But! Was your comment also a joke? Cant’ tell anymore. This level of absurdity, seriousness and absurd seriousness is too much for me!

    • GWOP says:

      You went through all that trouble to make an account to comment on an article that you clearly didn’t read. And you think John’s the idiot.

    • pennywyz says:

      “2) Demons don’t actually exist but World War One likely did”

      This statement didn’t bother you at all, but the outrage of comparing two games from different genres drove you to create an account?

    • SanguineAngel says:

      uberfact: this is my favourite comment here. Everyone else can pack up and go home.

  42. Pinga says:

    Was it worth it? The extra clicks you gained with this article?
    Because for me, the only thing this achieved is that I’ll be a hell lot more selective before clicking everything else on this site.

    • Kaeoschassis says:

      Well… the comments on this article are well into the triple-digits, and one of them is uh, yours. So.

      You tell me.

  43. CannedLizard says:

    Look…it’s not that I don’t get that it’s a joke (it’s painfully obvious that it’s a joke). It’s just that I don’t find it funny.

    It’s like satire against a target that doesn’t exist.

    • Premium User Badge

      Nauallis says:

      The fact that you are colorblind doesn’t mean the rest of us can’t enjoy the rainbows.

    • Enkidum says:

      Read the comments on this page. The fact that there are people who get shirty about this is justification for its existence.

    • John Walker says:

      You might want to take a look at the comments you posted under.

  44. Romeric says:

    Well, I thought this was hilarious. I’m finding myself disappointed by the comments on here more and more. I thought I was normal, once upon a time. It’s as if everyone else reading it is either a child or has no sense of humour whatsoever.

  45. Jerkzilla says:

    This reminds me of an old, now defunct, local gaming magazine where the writers (well, two or three of them mostly) would write amusing nonsense whenever they’d be handed a crappy game to review or write a preview about. My 13 year old self absolutely loved those. So, sincerely, thanks for the little nostalgia trip.

    • Hanban says:

      This reminds me of RPS from a couple of years ago. I feel like there’s less silly stuff on the page these days. Glad there’s still some!

  46. dethtoll says:

    Isn’t satire supposed to make a point?

    • eclipse mattaru says:

      Did you even read the article? He made FIVE.

    • Uninteresting Curse File Implement says:

      The point is that Battlefield 1 is going to be worse than Dark Souls 3.

      It’s even written in a silly manner so you can recognize that he actually thinks the opposite of what he writes!

  47. mrskwid says:

    “what stupid click bait is this!”
    i sed before clicking on the article and being pleasantry surprised.

  48. TR`Ben says:

    This article is ludicrous!
    How can you doubt the greatness of Dark souls?! It beats BF easily!
    Demons don’t exist? It’s called Sci-Fi, dummy! The game is too hard? Git gud!
    BF1 is a stillborn. I bet it won’t allow you to infuse you weapon with elements; or invade other peoples’ servers. Who would even want to play that nonsense?!

  49. bakaohki says:

    What’s all the fuss about DS3? Finished it, was okay, that’s all – we’ve seen all of this before. And now this silly article. Please don’t write silly articles. Write witty articles instead.

  50. Kala says:

    Enjoyed. This was (almost) Cunk worthy:

    “Battlefield 1 will very probably have first-person combat, while the Dark Souls 3 developers were only able to get as far as third.”

    (Well, I could imagine her voice saying it, anyways)

    • consolitis says:

      Cunk? Or did you mean “Culky”, i,e, Colin Culk? You know, the guy who launched an assault on the old EA Surrey HQ with a “rocket launcher” attached to the roof rack of his VW Beetle? The same guy who trolled the trade shows? “Old Culkers” was a legend! Whatever happened to him? BTW I found the old video of his “little visit” to EA: link to youtube.com

      • Premium User Badge

        Oakreef says:

        He’s talking about philomena cunk, a satirical character created by Charlie Brooker and played by Diane Morgan

        • Kala says:

          That’s wot I meant, ta ^^

          I furnish you with a very bad impression to prove it (no offence to Diane Morgan intended :X) link to clyp.it

        • Kala says:

          Further proof John Walker was channelling Philomena Cunk:

          Cunk: We used to think men were from Mars and women were from Venus, but scientists now believe they both hatched on earth

          Walker: However, The First World War is now widely accepted by most historians as likely to have occurred

          I like to imagine he typed it out in a ginger wig.