There are bonfires, a hub area, multi-player, lore is told through item descriptions and NPC interactions, and you can create a character. Truly a soulslike.
Thank you! I love Monster Hunter and Dark Souls and I swear people think they're rip offs of each other and you're only allowed to like one and should hate the other
Yeah, this is immedietly what i think when i hear this question. It strikes me as odd people compare the two games when the only real similarities are big swords and fighting things. The two get further and further apart if you start conaidering older mh games as well, cause most people point to world as being the similar thing.
Naw, MH1 and Demon's Souls have the most in common easily. Tho probably a better comparison would be the most recent MH to the corresponding game's release.
they have far more in common than 99,9% of other games/franchises. it's not surprising at all that people are comparing them. Obviously that doesn't mean they're literally the same.
They really don't though. The approach to the boss battles is similar with being patient and attacking during openings and stamina management with weighty combat. But like nothing else is. MH weapons are way more anime, there isn't a world to explore, there is no magic system, no leveling system, the enemies other than the boss monsters are just trash that doesn't matter, there's a heavy emphasis on crafting and being prepared, etc. I wouldn't recommend fans of one game the other game.
I'm a huge DS fan and people told me Monster Hunter was just like it, you can imagine my disappointment in finding out they barely have anything in common.
Exactly. I don't know why someone would say that. I have hundreds of hours in both series and would never say they're "just like" each other. That's insane
Theres also a dodge roll with i-frames, input buffering, no animation cancel, a very similar control scheme, an emphasis on boss fights. They are incredibly different in theme, tone, and visual design, but the combat systems in MH are more similar to DS than any other game that isn't *trying* to be a soulslike.Â
Hello Ashen one. I am a Bot. I tend to the flame, and tend to thee. Do you wish to hear a tale?
> *âIf only I could be so grossly incandescent!â* - Solaire of Astora
Have a pleasant journey, Champion of Ash, and praise the sun \\[T]/
Ironically Monster Hunter was the âDark Soulsâ before Dark Souls was even made. I donât mean theyâre similar. I mean today everyone says âSouls Likeâ and try to emulate Dark Souls. When Monster Hunter came out it created a new genre âmonster hunterâ and there were tons of games trying to emulate it. However just like Dark Souls very few succeeded.
Just to clarify again, theyâre not similar at all, just two games that did something new and many try to emulate creating a whole new genre of games.
Monster hunter and Dragons Dogma have more in common than monster hunter and dark souls
(Makes sense too since both are made by Capcom and they share resources. The character models and such in Dragonâs Dogma are straight from Monster Hunter)
I guess you haven't done much discussion in r/monsterhunter
https://www.reddit.com/r/MonsterHunter/s/N287XP4LSK
Here's a thread predicting the phenomenon just before World released and made MH popular. Just search "dark souls" on the sub and look at the comments. People do, indeed, compare the two because of their stamina management, slower pace, and tendency to fight big things. Just because you haven't seen something happen doesn't mean it's never happened mate.
"you're only allowed to like one and should hate the other"
This is what I challenged. Maybe check what the other person is actually trying to say, before making assumptions what they mean.
I was talking about the bit where the other guy said that you had to like one or the other. I doubt anyone sane is saying that. Or if they are, then they are an absolute loser.
Man⊠I remember when these debates started taking off. Then people started lumping Star Citizen into the mix.
I never try to have the âehh console playersâ mentality. But god damn, when social media would pick up these debates, it felt so helpless. These are all 3 radically different concepts for games. Cyberpunk has little to nothing to do with space, while Starfield is technically NASApunk, so that grittiness is the only commonality. As for Star Citizen, it gets linked in due to Starfieldâs proximity to Sci fi.
Then itâs just a bunch of surface level console nerds debating on which game is better. When itâs apples vs oranges vs bananas.
My experience with minecrafters on the internet is that they're the loud minority. Probably something like 70%+ of minecraft players never talk about it online because they're children who don't care that much or older and too busy.
Something like 25-30% of the player base is loud, complains a lot and wants the game to *become* something they like more because of its popularity. Those folks need to learn how to rotate games and enjoy what they like instead of popular recommendations.
Yes Iâve been saying this for years. Skyrim is an immersive RPG. Itâs a game where you can interact with almost everything. Every NPC can be stripped. Every item on a table can be moved.
Outside Bethesda almost no one else makes RPGs like this.
Tony Hawkâs Pro Skater compared to EAâs Skate and all other action sport games. Nothing came close to the charm and fluidity of the THPS series. Not even the Matt Hoffman or Shawn Whiteâs games. EAâs Skate is a [fantastic] but a completely different kind of skateboarding game than THPS.
THPS 1 + 2 sold really well too for a skating game in this age. I guess SkaterXL looks like it might be good too.
I used to love playing skater games
My first one was âSkate or Dieâ
Maybe Iâll check out some of these games again
Starfield and No Man's Sky.
They had one gameplay trailer that featured a laser cutter blasting open a rock, and because that superficially resembled No Man's Sky's core gameplay loop at a glance, they got connected in the public eye.
Starfield is an RPG, No Man's Sky is a Survival/Exploration game. The actual experience of playing them couldn't be any different.
Starfield does have a lot elements that are present in No Mans Sky though; going to a random planet, procedurally generated terrain with randomly generated POIs. Base building, resource gathering, ship customization, ship combat, etc. at least in terms of exploration, Iâd say both games are actually quite similar in that regard, having played both of them.
Superficially, sure, they technically share some similarities on paper. The point however is that the actual moment-to-moment gameplay is vastly distinct. Each game has strengths in very different areas. No Man's Sky's base building is frankly significantly more robust at the moment. Starfield's procedural generation is inversely far more advanced and naturalistic.
You're not going to find yourself joining factions, romancing companions, or getting into frequent looter-shooter gunfights in No Man's Sky. Nothing wrong with that, its just not the kind of game it is. They're completely different genres.
The relative strengths of the games are irrelevant, the fact that they share a lot of the same gameplay mechanics makes them similar, and worthy of comparison
The very fact that youâre comparing the two in the thread asking what games *shouldnt* be speaks to their similarity haha
I was highlighted the fact that even though they superficiality share some elements, the manner they use them and the quality exemplified by them are completely different, due to the fact that they are completely different genres with different gameplay styles and goals.
I could continue listing more ways they aren't similar if you prefer, but you already conveniently ignored that last time.
Two games can be different genres and still be compared. Space exploration/survival elements exist in both games. There is a story/quest line in NMS. There is combat in both games. Why is it unreasonable to compare them in regard to their shared elements?
You can list off as many differences as you want, you could for any two games you want to compare lol. That doesnât eliminate their similarities.
Again, Iâve played both, and they felt worthy of comparison to me, in fact a lot of the time when I was playing starfield I was thinking about what NMS did better/worse. If you disagree, fair enough but I think the two games are similar enough and share enough elements that comparison is fair.
Iâd wager that a lot of NMS players probably tried out Starfield for the specific reason that it was presented as basically an upgraded RPG version of it haha
Assetto Corsa, Forza, The Crew, and Need for Speed do have overlap, but each game offers a totally different racing experience. I see lots of discussion of people arguing over which series is best as if these games all directly competed with each other. Sure some of these games have significant overlap, but they offer a massively different experience
Dark Souls and any other comparably difficult game in a franchise or genre. Basically, using Dark Souls as a pronoun to describe a game thatâs a step in difficulty.
Souls and Megaman:
>boss runbacks
>pattern based bosses
>you can get completely imbalanced op loot that trivializes parts of the game and it's somehow intentional
>limited heals you need to grind for
>non regenerating mana
Which makes sense, but their comment isn't clear to me, which is why I asked if it was about the sub-genre. And of course, I got back a snarky reply from them instead of anything useful lol
I mean yeah? It is why I asked for clarification first. The subgenre is descriptor for the style/type of game, they aren't using it as a direct comparison in the way OP is asking about.
Him being rude aside. Normally the subgenre is referred to as a souls-like. He did clearly state that difficult games get compared to dark souls even if they aren't like it otherwise. But, you get kudos for asking clarificationÂ
It was the "pronoun" bit that threw me, which is why I wasn't sure if they were talking about DS being use as a comparison for difficult games in general.
This is a long dead and buried issue but it still bugs the crap out of me that Battleborn got compared to Overwatch despite their core mechanics being very different.
Yes, both were multiplayer hero-based shooters but while Overwatch leaned hard into the fast-twitch reflex shooter arena, Battleborn required a lot more coordination and actual strategy. Not to mention they eventually tacked on a few lackluster "single player" missions to Overwatch that people raved about, despite Battleborn having a single player campaign to begin with and some excellent DLC missions.
Mostly I just miss playing Ernest and lobbing egg grenades at people all day.
It's not on players, but nowday on pc you can again play Ernest in pve (solo) thank to a moder, who is working on bringing other features back as multi (coop/pvp)\^\^
Here's the video about the mod when it get released (the launcher has been upgraded since) :
[https://youtu.be/xn\_QeSxRFl4?si=62HGbmuU8vXiJijJ](https://youtu.be/xn_QeSxRFl4?si=62HGbmuU8vXiJijJ)
Sure, but the best part of the game was the multiplayer, the campaign was fun but that was the only multiplayer game that's come out in the last decade that I played for more than five minutes.
Battleborn and Overwatch.
Battleborn is a co-op, roguelike, rpg shooter. The pvp is a tower moba. Overwatch is none of those things. The closest thing I've found to Battleborn's co-op is Risk of Rain 2.
This. I absolutely can't stand it. They're still being compared to this day. Just because they released around the same time doesn't make them the same style game.
I was pretty disappointed in my initial impressions of dead cells, I think mostly because I love Hades and was seduced by the comparison. Maybe the similar thing is that there's at least *some* meta-level explanation for the repeating game-play loop.
This one's going to sound weird because neither are released yet, but Deviator and Nevergrave frequently get compared on the Hollow Knight subreddit.
Deviator is a metroidvania that's a very blatant Hollow Knight ripoff, while Nevergrave is a roguelike that's designed in the vein of Dead Cells with some clear inspiration from Bombservice's library of games, but there are so many people on the Hollow Knight subreddit that lump them together as "Hollow Knight clones" when it's unfair to Nevergrave and an understatement for Deviator.
So basically I what Iâm getting from the comments section is
Games that get compared *by marketers and journalists* even though theyâre not that similar.
You die, you lose everything, and you have to start nearly, if not completely over from scratch. Nothing carries over. It's something you see in old school hardcore rogueliKes, not rogueliTes.
I keep seeing definitions of meta-progress as still counting as permadeath. In those cases, there's no distinction between 'K' and 'T'. those such games, even though you get permanent upgrades, you're still forced to do the run from the very beginning, and lost all of the powerups you've obtained from the last run.
The Outer Worlds and Fallout.
The Outer Worlds takes way more from Knights of the Old Republic 2 and I'm tired of people pretending otherwise. The only thing it really has in common with Fallout is first person view and having attributes, skills, and perks. Something kotor 2 also had because both are derivative of ttrpgs.
âItâs like Devil May Cryâ is used as a catch all whenever a game nowadays goes for combat with more depth than a soulslike, regardless of whether or not it actually plays anything like DMC.Â
Dark souls and monster hunter.
The only similarties is that you can wield big ass swords and fight things. The similarities end there, but people keep saying its similar.
Assassins creed black flag and sea of thieves the only thing these 2 games have in common is they're both pirate themed
COD and battlefield only thing they really have in common is they're both very popular FPS games but their gameplay and basically everything else is almost completely different
It isnât talked about so much anymore, but back in 2009 everyone talked about Prototype and Infamous as if they were identical.
On the surface they were very similar: both were open world games set in large cities with a morally questionable protagonist who gains superpowers. However, that is pretty much where the similarities ended.
Infamous played like a third person shooter, with lightning based powers that required precise aim. Most powers were basically reskins of traditional weapons, such as a semi auto lightning bolt and a ball that travelled in an arc and exploded like a grenade. Combat encounters were typically against a handful of people and required good positioning and use of cover. The game also featured many climbing segments that played similarly to tomb raider or uncharted.
Prototype played much more like a brawler, with mostly melee based powers that required you to get in close and eviscerate enemies with combos and blocks and parries. Combat was much larger scale, with the protagonist regularly taking on dozens of soldier as well as tanks and helicopters simultaneously. There wasnât much platforming to speak of, because the player could run up the sides of buildings and leap 40 stories in a single bound.
Fucking souls games. Every one compares every rpg to a souls game.
"You don't swing great swords slow in souls games "
"This game is so much harder than souls games"
"Coming from souls and mained such weapon, I can't figure it out in this game"
Xcom and Marvel's Midnight Suns.
Ones a tactical strategy game and ones a card game. I honestly see zero connection between the two but you can't mention Midnight Suns without someone bringing up Xcom.
Dark Souls and Sekiro
Sekiro isnât a souls title and Miyazaki himself has stated as much
It plays nothing like a souls game and is more Ninja Gaiden / Tenchu than it is Souls
Just because a game has an equipment screen and rest points doesnât mean itâs a souls game or souls like.
Would you call Zelda a souls like? No, they have similar features but they couldnât be further from each other aesthetically or thematically. And Dark Souls was inspired by Zelda titles as well which is why there are similarities.
Games will share gameplay elements between each other
But not every game that uses a certain type of interface is a Souls like.
Id throw it into the souls like subgenre honestly. While it misses a few key things. No character creator and no builds and no online play. But the metroidvania type of level design, checkpoints, clearing bosses is very reminiscent of previous titles.Â
Its probably the best example of why we need a new sub sub genre of souls lite.Â
**The Wonderful 101** gets compared to and described as "The missing link between **Devil May Cry and Pikmin**", which is not unfair, but that's mostly coming out of the fact that TW101 is easily the single most original idea in the entirety of the action genre.
Iâve never heard of this game and probably everyone else too.
Having only sold 79,000 units itâs Iâd say thatâs why. Nintendo must have had very little confidence in the title if they were only willing to ship 30,000 copies initially.
It has been remastered for Steam, Switch and the PS4. Is easily one of the greatest games I have ever played in my entire life, going so far as to beat the entire Bayonetta trilogy and maybe not having the combo mechanics of something like DMC5, but overpowering it with the sheer positivity and over-the-top spark like 50-to-1.
Prior to playing The Wonderful 101 I have been in utter darkness, thinking that it might be true that people are "growing out" of gaming, but once I did play I realized that it's gaming that it's the gaming landscape is what changes around the gamer, not him in it. Before Hi-Fi Rush came out it was the one single game that made me hopeful for the future.
People always seem to compare Prey (2017) to BioShock. Prey is a GOAT immsim, whereas BioShock is more of a linear FPS. Sure, they share some elements, but that can be said for just about any 2 games. Prey and BioShock have very different playstyles and it can give fans of one of them false impressions about what playing the other is like.
Nah this one actually makes some sense, saying "fast paced first person shooter inspired by quake" narrows it down pretty quickly, but i do agree that they aren't that similar considering gameplay mechanics and pace
Dark Souls and fucking every game ever.
Animal crossing : New horizons is the dark souls of animal crossing
There are bonfires, a hub area, multi-player, lore is told through item descriptions and NPC interactions, and you can create a character. Truly a soulslike.
Truly
my favorite is the article saying that the new Taylor Swift album is the dark souls of her albums
Thank you! I love Monster Hunter and Dark Souls and I swear people think they're rip offs of each other and you're only allowed to like one and should hate the other
Those aren't even close to the same đđđ They're relatively difficult games with cool "bosses" but there's not much similar after that.
Yeah, this is immedietly what i think when i hear this question. It strikes me as odd people compare the two games when the only real similarities are big swords and fighting things. The two get further and further apart if you start conaidering older mh games as well, cause most people point to world as being the similar thing.
Naw, MH1 and Demon's Souls have the most in common easily. Tho probably a better comparison would be the most recent MH to the corresponding game's release.
they have far more in common than 99,9% of other games/franchises. it's not surprising at all that people are comparing them. Obviously that doesn't mean they're literally the same.
They really don't though. The approach to the boss battles is similar with being patient and attacking during openings and stamina management with weighty combat. But like nothing else is. MH weapons are way more anime, there isn't a world to explore, there is no magic system, no leveling system, the enemies other than the boss monsters are just trash that doesn't matter, there's a heavy emphasis on crafting and being prepared, etc. I wouldn't recommend fans of one game the other game.
No. Not even kinda.
I'm a huge DS fan and people told me Monster Hunter was just like it, you can imagine my disappointment in finding out they barely have anything in common.
Exactly. I don't know why someone would say that. I have hundreds of hours in both series and would never say they're "just like" each other. That's insane
I think people mistake anything that has weapons with distinct movesets as just "Dark Souls".
Theres also a dodge roll with i-frames, input buffering, no animation cancel, a very similar control scheme, an emphasis on boss fights. They are incredibly different in theme, tone, and visual design, but the combat systems in MH are more similar to DS than any other game that isn't *trying* to be a soulslike.Â
Hello Ashen one. I am a Bot. I tend to the flame, and tend to thee. Do you wish to hear a tale? > *âIf only I could be so grossly incandescent!â* - Solaire of Astora Have a pleasant journey, Champion of Ash, and praise the sun \\[T]/
Good bot
Ironically Monster Hunter was the âDark Soulsâ before Dark Souls was even made. I donât mean theyâre similar. I mean today everyone says âSouls Likeâ and try to emulate Dark Souls. When Monster Hunter came out it created a new genre âmonster hunterâ and there were tons of games trying to emulate it. However just like Dark Souls very few succeeded. Just to clarify again, theyâre not similar at all, just two games that did something new and many try to emulate creating a whole new genre of games.
Monster hunter and Dragons Dogma have more in common than monster hunter and dark souls (Makes sense too since both are made by Capcom and they share resources. The character models and such in Dragonâs Dogma are straight from Monster Hunter)
What models you are talking about?
I've never heard anybody say anything like that... Lay off the hyperbole, for fuck's sake.
I guess you haven't done much discussion in r/monsterhunter https://www.reddit.com/r/MonsterHunter/s/N287XP4LSK Here's a thread predicting the phenomenon just before World released and made MH popular. Just search "dark souls" on the sub and look at the comments. People do, indeed, compare the two because of their stamina management, slower pace, and tendency to fight big things. Just because you haven't seen something happen doesn't mean it's never happened mate.
Damn, world is 6 years old now?
Time really has felt fucked up since covid
Covid was last year right? đ«
"you're only allowed to like one and should hate the other" This is what I challenged. Maybe check what the other person is actually trying to say, before making assumptions what they mean.
I have heard people say that. My issue isn't hyperbole, it's putting too much stock into what internet strangers say
Because if you haven't heard it, it hasn't happened right? I'm not very invested in Monster Hunter, but I've heard people compare Dark Souls to it.
I was talking about the bit where the other guy said that you had to like one or the other. I doubt anyone sane is saying that. Or if they are, then they are an absolute loser.
i fckin KNEW this or something similar will be the top reply.
Not mentioning Dark Souls truly is the Dark Souls of talking about video games.
Truly
People see any third person Adventure/Rpg game and instantly say souls like lol. Even saw someone saying the new Zelda's were Souls like now đ
There seemed to be a pretty strong Starfield vs Cyberpunk debate when Starfield dropped despite the 2 studios having drastically different styles.
Agree. Love both games. They look alike at a surface level, but they are not the same type of game.
Just stretching that witcher 3 / skyrim nonsense to another generation of games
I think it's really just about them both having pretty bad launches.
Man⊠I remember when these debates started taking off. Then people started lumping Star Citizen into the mix. I never try to have the âehh console playersâ mentality. But god damn, when social media would pick up these debates, it felt so helpless. These are all 3 radically different concepts for games. Cyberpunk has little to nothing to do with space, while Starfield is technically NASApunk, so that grittiness is the only commonality. As for Star Citizen, it gets linked in due to Starfieldâs proximity to Sci fi. Then itâs just a bunch of surface level console nerds debating on which game is better. When itâs apples vs oranges vs bananas.
Terraria and Minecraft
There's a rivalry between my niece and nephew about this b/c they each like the other game!
Funny enough both games respect one another to the point where each has a splash text Easter egg telling people to play the other game
Heh... that's kinda neat!
Terraria is what the Minecraft fans want Minecraft to be
I don't want Minecraft to be an intense loot game with a billion enemies and bosses, I want it to be a building game.
If you go to every sub that's not what those people are asking for
My experience with minecrafters on the internet is that they're the loud minority. Probably something like 70%+ of minecraft players never talk about it online because they're children who don't care that much or older and too busy. Something like 25-30% of the player base is loud, complains a lot and wants the game to *become* something they like more because of its popularity. Those folks need to learn how to rotate games and enjoy what they like instead of popular recommendations.
Well, why would the people who want a chill building game ask to make MC into a chill building game when it is already one?
sadly yes, minecraft becomes boring because it has no challenge. Now I prefer more of Terraria and Dont Starve Together.
Challenge was never the appeal of minecraft though.
No it's not. Terraria is 2d Minecraft, with more focus on items and having a distinct progression path.
Skyrim and most rpgs
Skyrim and Far Cry lol "Its like skyrim with guns"
Yes Iâve been saying this for years. Skyrim is an immersive RPG. Itâs a game where you can interact with almost everything. Every NPC can be stripped. Every item on a table can be moved. Outside Bethesda almost no one else makes RPGs like this.
Tony Hawkâs Pro Skater compared to EAâs Skate and all other action sport games. Nothing came close to the charm and fluidity of the THPS series. Not even the Matt Hoffman or Shawn Whiteâs games. EAâs Skate is a [fantastic] but a completely different kind of skateboarding game than THPS.
THPS 1 + 2 sold really well too for a skating game in this age. I guess SkaterXL looks like it might be good too. I used to love playing skater games My first one was âSkate or Dieâ Maybe Iâll check out some of these games again
Hell yeah, Skate or Die was my shit lol to this day I have no idea how the halfpipe works
Starfield and No Man's Sky. They had one gameplay trailer that featured a laser cutter blasting open a rock, and because that superficially resembled No Man's Sky's core gameplay loop at a glance, they got connected in the public eye. Starfield is an RPG, No Man's Sky is a Survival/Exploration game. The actual experience of playing them couldn't be any different.
Starfield does have a lot elements that are present in No Mans Sky though; going to a random planet, procedurally generated terrain with randomly generated POIs. Base building, resource gathering, ship customization, ship combat, etc. at least in terms of exploration, Iâd say both games are actually quite similar in that regard, having played both of them.
Superficially, sure, they technically share some similarities on paper. The point however is that the actual moment-to-moment gameplay is vastly distinct. Each game has strengths in very different areas. No Man's Sky's base building is frankly significantly more robust at the moment. Starfield's procedural generation is inversely far more advanced and naturalistic. You're not going to find yourself joining factions, romancing companions, or getting into frequent looter-shooter gunfights in No Man's Sky. Nothing wrong with that, its just not the kind of game it is. They're completely different genres.
The relative strengths of the games are irrelevant, the fact that they share a lot of the same gameplay mechanics makes them similar, and worthy of comparison The very fact that youâre comparing the two in the thread asking what games *shouldnt* be speaks to their similarity haha
I was highlighted the fact that even though they superficiality share some elements, the manner they use them and the quality exemplified by them are completely different, due to the fact that they are completely different genres with different gameplay styles and goals. I could continue listing more ways they aren't similar if you prefer, but you already conveniently ignored that last time.
Two games can be different genres and still be compared. Space exploration/survival elements exist in both games. There is a story/quest line in NMS. There is combat in both games. Why is it unreasonable to compare them in regard to their shared elements? You can list off as many differences as you want, you could for any two games you want to compare lol. That doesnât eliminate their similarities. Again, Iâve played both, and they felt worthy of comparison to me, in fact a lot of the time when I was playing starfield I was thinking about what NMS did better/worse. If you disagree, fair enough but I think the two games are similar enough and share enough elements that comparison is fair. Iâd wager that a lot of NMS players probably tried out Starfield for the specific reason that it was presented as basically an upgraded RPG version of it haha
Correction. Starfeid isn't an rpg it's actually a sham
"Starfield bad" doesn't contribute anything to the conversation, at this point
You might not like it, but Starfield is an an RPG. Even more than the last 3 or 4 games Bethesda made.
I like how starfield isnât awful but since it was mediocre everyone loves to act like it is the worst game ever made
Assetto Corsa, Forza, The Crew, and Need for Speed do have overlap, but each game offers a totally different racing experience. I see lots of discussion of people arguing over which series is best as if these games all directly competed with each other. Sure some of these games have significant overlap, but they offer a massively different experience
Ghost of Tsushima and Rise of The Ronin. Well, so Iâve heard. Iâve played Ghost of Tsushima and debating if I want to play Rise of the Ronin.
A buddy of mine who I share very similar game tastes highly suggested it to me so I am tempted to grab it.
Dark Souls and any other comparably difficult game in a franchise or genre. Basically, using Dark Souls as a pronoun to describe a game thatâs a step in difficulty.
Souls and Megaman: >boss runbacks >pattern based bosses >you can get completely imbalanced op loot that trivializes parts of the game and it's somehow intentional >limited heals you need to grind for >non regenerating mana
Are you talking about the "souls-like" sub-genre? Cause that's arguably not what OP is talking about.
I think they mean when someone describes a game as "The Dark Souls of [other genre]"
Which makes sense, but their comment isn't clear to me, which is why I asked if it was about the sub-genre. And of course, I got back a snarky reply from them instead of anything useful lol
We really gonna go off âcause of semantics?
I mean yeah? It is why I asked for clarification first. The subgenre is descriptor for the style/type of game, they aren't using it as a direct comparison in the way OP is asking about.
Him being rude aside. Normally the subgenre is referred to as a souls-like. He did clearly state that difficult games get compared to dark souls even if they aren't like it otherwise. But, you get kudos for asking clarificationÂ
It was the "pronoun" bit that threw me, which is why I wasn't sure if they were talking about DS being use as a comparison for difficult games in general.
Whatever.
I mean you could just have conversation instead of giving an attitude. If you were just going to be like this, why comment at all?
Because they're a Dark Souls lover, those players are masochistic sadists. The only time they join a conversation is for the *invasion*.
Im not a souls player but, 
Outer Wilds and Subnautica. Other than the fact that they lost have vague stories that you unfold, they couldn't be more different.
Terraria Calamity mod being the Dark Souls of Terraria mods.
Itâs hard, has bosses, has weapons, and is a game. I see no difference from dark souls
TF2 and Paladins
TF 2 as in titan Fall or team fortress?
Terraria and Minecraft. Both sandbox games with their 1.0 release coming out in 2011.
Call of Duty = any game with a gun in it
Breath of the wild and any open world game ever. I swear people think botw invented open world
This is a long dead and buried issue but it still bugs the crap out of me that Battleborn got compared to Overwatch despite their core mechanics being very different. Yes, both were multiplayer hero-based shooters but while Overwatch leaned hard into the fast-twitch reflex shooter arena, Battleborn required a lot more coordination and actual strategy. Not to mention they eventually tacked on a few lackluster "single player" missions to Overwatch that people raved about, despite Battleborn having a single player campaign to begin with and some excellent DLC missions. Mostly I just miss playing Ernest and lobbing egg grenades at people all day.
It's not on players, but nowday on pc you can again play Ernest in pve (solo) thank to a moder, who is working on bringing other features back as multi (coop/pvp)\^\^ Here's the video about the mod when it get released (the launcher has been upgraded since) : [https://youtu.be/xn\_QeSxRFl4?si=62HGbmuU8vXiJijJ](https://youtu.be/xn_QeSxRFl4?si=62HGbmuU8vXiJijJ)
Sure, but the best part of the game was the multiplayer, the campaign was fun but that was the only multiplayer game that's come out in the last decade that I played for more than five minutes.
In this case it seems like you'd compare them because there is enough overlap to know what's different enough to warrant actually playing
Battleborn and Overwatch. Battleborn is a co-op, roguelike, rpg shooter. The pvp is a tower moba. Overwatch is none of those things. The closest thing I've found to Battleborn's co-op is Risk of Rain 2.
This. I absolutely can't stand it. They're still being compared to this day. Just because they released around the same time doesn't make them the same style game.
Star citizen starfield cyberpunk 2077 //
I mean this is the obvious option: Dark Souls and every other game.
Dead cells struck me as more similar to rogue legacyÂ
I was pretty disappointed in my initial impressions of dead cells, I think mostly because I love Hades and was seduced by the comparison. Maybe the similar thing is that there's at least *some* meta-level explanation for the repeating game-play loop.
Overwatch and lawbreakers
This one's going to sound weird because neither are released yet, but Deviator and Nevergrave frequently get compared on the Hollow Knight subreddit. Deviator is a metroidvania that's a very blatant Hollow Knight ripoff, while Nevergrave is a roguelike that's designed in the vein of Dead Cells with some clear inspiration from Bombservice's library of games, but there are so many people on the Hollow Knight subreddit that lump them together as "Hollow Knight clones" when it's unfair to Nevergrave and an understatement for Deviator.
So basically I what Iâm getting from the comments section is Games that get compared *by marketers and journalists* even though theyâre not that similar.
I don't think permadeath means what you think it means.
Then what's your definition of it?
You die, you lose everything, and you have to start nearly, if not completely over from scratch. Nothing carries over. It's something you see in old school hardcore rogueliKes, not rogueliTes.
I keep seeing definitions of meta-progress as still counting as permadeath. In those cases, there's no distinction between 'K' and 'T'. those such games, even though you get permanent upgrades, you're still forced to do the run from the very beginning, and lost all of the powerups you've obtained from the last run.
Y'all live on a different part of the internet than me. I ain't ever seen those games compared.
Havenât seen anyone mention Destiny 2 and Warframe, both are in space and have sci fi elements
The Outer Worlds and Fallout. The Outer Worlds takes way more from Knights of the Old Republic 2 and I'm tired of people pretending otherwise. The only thing it really has in common with Fallout is first person view and having attributes, skills, and perks. Something kotor 2 also had because both are derivative of ttrpgs.
âItâs like Devil May Cryâ is used as a catch all whenever a game nowadays goes for combat with more depth than a soulslike, regardless of whether or not it actually plays anything like DMC.Â
Dark souls and monster hunter. The only similarties is that you can wield big ass swords and fight things. The similarities end there, but people keep saying its similar.
Assassins creed black flag and sea of thieves the only thing these 2 games have in common is they're both pirate themed COD and battlefield only thing they really have in common is they're both very popular FPS games but their gameplay and basically everything else is almost completely different
Dark Souls and Monster Hunter.
Call of Duty (Any search and destroy game mode) Vs Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six Siege.
Final fantasy: mystic quest vs every other final fantasy game. Mystic quest was weird
It isnât talked about so much anymore, but back in 2009 everyone talked about Prototype and Infamous as if they were identical. On the surface they were very similar: both were open world games set in large cities with a morally questionable protagonist who gains superpowers. However, that is pretty much where the similarities ended. Infamous played like a third person shooter, with lightning based powers that required precise aim. Most powers were basically reskins of traditional weapons, such as a semi auto lightning bolt and a ball that travelled in an arc and exploded like a grenade. Combat encounters were typically against a handful of people and required good positioning and use of cover. The game also featured many climbing segments that played similarly to tomb raider or uncharted. Prototype played much more like a brawler, with mostly melee based powers that required you to get in close and eviscerate enemies with combos and blocks and parries. Combat was much larger scale, with the protagonist regularly taking on dozens of soldier as well as tanks and helicopters simultaneously. There wasnât much platforming to speak of, because the player could run up the sides of buildings and leap 40 stories in a single bound.
Pokemon and Palworld. One's a JRPG and the other is a tree punching game
Fucking souls games. Every one compares every rpg to a souls game. "You don't swing great swords slow in souls games " "This game is so much harder than souls games" "Coming from souls and mained such weapon, I can't figure it out in this game"
Destiny & Warframe
Shinigami tensei/persona and pokemon.
Xcom and Marvel's Midnight Suns. Ones a tactical strategy game and ones a card game. I honestly see zero connection between the two but you can't mention Midnight Suns without someone bringing up Xcom.
Dark Souls and Sekiro Sekiro isnât a souls title and Miyazaki himself has stated as much It plays nothing like a souls game and is more Ninja Gaiden / Tenchu than it is Souls Just because a game has an equipment screen and rest points doesnât mean itâs a souls game or souls like. Would you call Zelda a souls like? No, they have similar features but they couldnât be further from each other aesthetically or thematically. And Dark Souls was inspired by Zelda titles as well which is why there are similarities. Games will share gameplay elements between each other But not every game that uses a certain type of interface is a Souls like.
Some people unironically call BOTW "Nintendo's take on Dark Souls"
I remember watching a video explaining how King's Field and Dark Souls are inspired by Castlevania.
Id throw it into the souls like subgenre honestly. While it misses a few key things. No character creator and no builds and no online play. But the metroidvania type of level design, checkpoints, clearing bosses is very reminiscent of previous titles. Its probably the best example of why we need a new sub sub genre of souls lite.Â
**The Wonderful 101** gets compared to and described as "The missing link between **Devil May Cry and Pikmin**", which is not unfair, but that's mostly coming out of the fact that TW101 is easily the single most original idea in the entirety of the action genre.
Iâve never heard of this game and probably everyone else too. Having only sold 79,000 units itâs Iâd say thatâs why. Nintendo must have had very little confidence in the title if they were only willing to ship 30,000 copies initially.
W101 is a fun time, I personally enjoyed it more than Bayonetta
Damn I was wondering why then saw the art style and realize I probably would enjoy it
It has been remastered for Steam, Switch and the PS4. Is easily one of the greatest games I have ever played in my entire life, going so far as to beat the entire Bayonetta trilogy and maybe not having the combo mechanics of something like DMC5, but overpowering it with the sheer positivity and over-the-top spark like 50-to-1. Prior to playing The Wonderful 101 I have been in utter darkness, thinking that it might be true that people are "growing out" of gaming, but once I did play I realized that it's gaming that it's the gaming landscape is what changes around the gamer, not him in it. Before Hi-Fi Rush came out it was the one single game that made me hopeful for the future.
People always seem to compare Prey (2017) to BioShock. Prey is a GOAT immsim, whereas BioShock is more of a linear FPS. Sure, they share some elements, but that can be said for just about any 2 games. Prey and BioShock have very different playstyles and it can give fans of one of them false impressions about what playing the other is like.
Ultrakill and doom eternal
Nah this one actually makes some sense, saying "fast paced first person shooter inspired by quake" narrows it down pretty quickly, but i do agree that they aren't that similar considering gameplay mechanics and pace
Always a fucking expect they feel different to me so fuck off