Souls series (DS, Bloodborne) discussion thread

So, I just got my hands on a PS3 a few months ago and finally have the opportunity to play (most of) these great games. Currently only on Dark Souls but am loving the shit out of it. It's pretty fucking cheesy more than hard or anything but I'm still loving the combat system. It feels like a battle-heavy 3D Zelda if Zelda was gory as shit.

Also, I looked up Lautrec's story involvement and everything and feel like killing him before the firekeeper dies. I'd rather get the earlygame reward and not mess with the damned invasion.

Not sure what else to say, but I'd love to co-op with anyone if they're in level range (I'm 40ish iirc
and just killed the Gaping Dragon.) My PSN is minwu325.
 
Ring of Favor and Protection is amazing so that's what I did in all my playthroughs aside from my first.

Dark Souls 3 is looking great, it's good to know that Miyazaki is back at the helm and I think the idea of a magic bar with that you can refill a limited number of times without going to a bonfire is ultimately a better implementation of the # of casts system that Dark Souls/2 used since you're free to use your magic how you want instead of being limited by however many copies of a spell you can find. Weapon arts sound fun too.
 

Matthew

I love weather; Sun for days
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
I don't understand the negative feedback about Bloodborne honestly. It's, in my mind, just as rich in lore and story as DS1. I'm probably a minority but I preferred it to the other two.

Edit:
I suppose three of you count BB to be the spiritual successor of Demon Souls
 
Last edited:

vonFiedler

I Like Chopin
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
I don't really know what negative feedback it has outside of Fishin, who doesn't seem to hate it (but then calling it worse than DS2 is really harsh). Demons and Dark Souls were both honestly bad games but with a lot of artistry and heart to them, and they were well received in a generation where those things didn't exist in AAA much anymore. Bloodborne is a GOOD game. The combat rivals Platinum games work and the world building is more cohesive than ever. Maybe it didn't have quite the level design highs of Demon's, but it was certainly better than Dark Souls 1 or 2 (and especially 2).
 

jacob

the obstacle is the only way
is a Top Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Past WCoP Champion
Dark Souls 1 is one of if not my favorite game of all time. The combat is great and rewarding of skill (expect like backstab chains), the story is deep taking even though on the surface it seems shallow. The online play is incredibly fun and makes the game have a near endless replay ability, you can still find online matches on dark souls 1 in high pvp areas pretty quickly for a 4 year old game.

Dark Souls 2 is thought of as a drop off from dark souls 1 and its still one of the best games of the late generation of previous consoles. Its story isnt as good or interesting, but the combat got better for the most part (the parry window is way to long). DS2 also implemented a arena for dualing which makes finding equal matches between players that actually want to dual much much easier.

I never bought a PS4 to play bloodborne but from what ive seen it looks great, the art style and setting is gorgeous. The story seems interesting, chalice dungeons where a good idea but from what ive heard weren't done very well. The only really big problem ive heard with it is PVP takes to long to find matches and is confusing on who you can invade.

Also all 3 games have great DLC's that are long and well made. My favorite dlc of any is Artorias Of The Abyss, it added on to the overall story of ds1 nicely and gave cool new weapons and bosses. The 3 crowns dlc set of ds2 were mostly enjoyable even though most of the enemies were just reskins in all 3 and the 3rd optional boss were bad fights. From watching play troughs of The Old Hunter's dlc is it adds about as much as Artoiras did and added a bunch of new weapons with the ending boss fight being one of the best in the series just from watching
 
Bought DS2 on sale just a few days ago - only played DS1 so far. Are there any big changes I should be aware about going into DS2? Changes to weight thresholds, for example. Is a Faith build viable from the start or would that not be a good idea?
 

jacob

the obstacle is the only way
is a Top Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Past WCoP Champion
Bought DS2 on sale just a few days ago - only played DS1 so far. Are there any big changes I should be aware about going into DS2? Changes to weight thresholds, for example. Is a Faith build viable from the start or would that not be a good idea?
you can get some fairly decent faith spells a couple bosses in so its not a bad idea. the way rolling works is different the gap between light rolling and medium rolling isnt nearly as large as ds1 meaning you dont have to worry as much about your weight, poise is pretty no existent in ds2 from what i can tell so need high poise isnt to necessary and leveling up adaptability is nice as it increases your agility which makes most things you do faster
 
adaptability and agility are totally new stats to me - I only did two playthroughs of DS1 and went for dex-based builds both times so i'm assuming agility is something like dex?

also a friend of mine tells me that there's no fatrolling in DS2 but there's still 3 different kinds of roll, and that the lightest roll requires a light weapon and basically no armor so it isn't a necessity (compared to DS1 where being able to fastroll is massively beneficial). i'm going to look up these thresholds myself, but i'm assuming that he's right in that going for the fastest roll possible is overkill?

thanks!
 

vonFiedler

I Like Chopin
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
One of the things to DS2's credit (it does have better system design, just doesn't make up for the poor level design imo) is that almost anything is viable. Play 2h, play with 2 weapons, play faith or magic, etc. I don't remember any major trap stats.
 
I don't really know what negative feedback it has outside of Fishin, who doesn't seem to hate it (but then calling it worse than DS2 is really harsh). Demons and Dark Souls were both honestly bad games but with a lot of artistry and heart to them, and they were well received in a generation where those things didn't exist in AAA much anymore. Bloodborne is a GOOD game. The combat rivals Platinum games work and the world building is more cohesive than ever. Maybe it didn't have quite the level design highs of Demon's, but it was certainly better than Dark Souls 1 or 2 (and especially 2).
my main complaints with Bloodborne would be
-smaller, it feels like probably around 70% as big as other Souls games
-less stuff; with no shields, only one magic type (which still probably has less options than any single magic type from the other games), and a lot less weapons and armor, the game doesn't have much to reward you with so exploration is less exciting than it should be and most of the items you find end up being the same boring consumables
-since most of the lore in Souls games is delivered passively through item descriptions, the world and areas ended up feeling poorly fleshed out as a result.
-mechanically it's a step backwards in several ways; Blood Vials are dumb after Estus, inability to teleport between Lanterns is just a waste of time (as is forcing you to return to the hub area to level up, though Dark 2 did the same thing), and just makes the load times more painful, no ability to respec
-it's locked to a console that requires you to pay extra for online
-more subjectively, I preferred the weightier, shielded combat of the previous games and I don't like victorian gothic horror as much as european medieval fantasy, though the latter is admittedly getting a bit tired after 3 games. It'd be nice to see them go for something more Eastern or Arabic or whatever. Also, really minor but there were a whole lot of areas that were completely disconnected from the main world, leading to it feeling a bit less cohesive as a whole.

All said I don't think it's a bad game, there are certainly plenty of things it does well (and I would say it's better than Dark Souls 2 in a couple areas, like level design) and the DLC was good and helped with the weapon variety, but in the end it's definitely the weakest of the series so far in my eyes.
 

vonFiedler

I Like Chopin
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
-smaller, it feels like probably around 70% as big as other Souls games
Than DS2 definitely. The others, I don't know the specifics but it feels about the same. Close at least.

-less stuff; with no shields, only one magic type (which still probably has less options than any single magic type from the other games), and a lot less weapons and armor, the game doesn't have much to reward you with so exploration is less exciting than it should be and most of the items you find end up being the same boring consumables
What it lacks in breadth it more than makes up with depth. Weapons having multiple modes and uses was awesome, and its a souls game where I actually regularly have two swappable weapons in both my right and left hand. I also just plain liked playing with more weapons, which incentive me to replay the game more. Nothing is really bad or uncool. Souls was all about finding the right weapon. Once I found something I wanted for one playthrough, I never gave a second thought to shit like the mail breaker.

Items were always "the same boring consumables", but the fact there are less frivolous ones clogging up my inventory is a boon to me. How much did the text on divine blessing REALLY add to the lore of the game? Most items had some sort of use, and the added button for quick items really expanded the kind of items I'd actually use (such as pebbles). Even the lantern mechanics work very well, with multiple options that each have specific niches.

-since most of the lore in Souls games is delivered passively through item descriptions, the world and areas ended up feeling poorly fleshed out as a result.
I, I think like a lot of people, was primarily filled in on the stories after the fact by watching stuff like VaatiVidya. BB is a little harder to follow than DS1, but I think it's also a lot more fascinating in how the various characters impacted the world, and I think your ultimate goal is very neat. Nothing has yet had the gravity of killing Maiden Astraea and realizing that you are a greedy soul hording bastard, but I still liked this story a lot more than DS1.

-mechanically it's a step backwards in several ways; Blood Vials are dumb after Estus, inability to teleport between Lanterns is just a waste of time (as is forcing you to return to the hub area to level up, though Dark 2 did the same thing), and just makes the load times more painful, no ability to respec
None of this is terribly untrue. The fact that you can store blood vials makes them fine, and in combat they feel better than Estus. I still might say it wasn't a needed change, but it's likely just a different mechanic for a different kind of game. BB is faster and characterized by beastly vigor. Consuming a lot of blood plays into this better than the slow and limited (but reliable) Estus, and mechanically it's backed up by the rally mechanic.

But that's a pretty nitpicky way to justify it being mechanically a step backward (and I've heard you say two steps in the past). Mechanically it's ambitious and successful in ways I never would have expected from Miyazaki. There are no trap stats, bad weapon specs, or even really bad weapons. But the gameplay - the gameplay, man. It's so much more fluid. Rolling might forever feel clunky now. The sidestep just works perfectly, and the general statistic tweaking of getting more out of your stamina but needing to hit an enemy more feels like Souls was always made to be like this. And it works whether you're fighting one or multiple enemies, something the souls games were always weak with. You may not have as many or as flashy moves as other character action games, but the fundamentals are stronger and that goes a long way. And for a series often overrated for its difficulty, I felt that the difference between me as a new player (even as souls veteran) and me having practiced way huge. Even boss fights are more than just learning tells and not losing stamina. With so many moves, learning when to sidestep is far more intuition than repetition. BB isn't just what I want future Souls games to be like, it's what I want future Platinum games to be like. And that's saying a LOT for a series that started with World Tendency as an actual mechanic.

-it's locked to a console that requires you to pay extra for online
Fun fact, I used BB and MGS5's online without paying for it. Still, that's a knock against the console itself, isn't it? (and the XBONE) I'm surprised you'd mention that and not the game's actual weaknesses as far as multiplayer goes. Me, I never cared that much about souls multiplayer. I got invaded a few times and got to read signs, so I'm happy. Judging this as a single player game, it's one of the best of all time imo.

-more subjectively, I preferred the weightier, shielded combat of the previous games and I don't like victorian gothic horror as much as european medieval fantasy, though the latter is admittedly getting a bit tired after 3 games. It'd be nice to see them go for something more Eastern or Arabic or whatever. Also, really minor but there were a whole lot of areas that were completely disconnected from the main world, leading to it feeling a bit less cohesive as a whole.
I don't really have a setting preference, but I thought this was wonderfully realized. I never would have guessed that werewolves and elder gods would be so natural together. But aside from oozing with style, the world actually feels lived in. Souls games were always disconcerting continuity-wise, with every plot hole explained away with "time is vague" like the universe equivalent of "a wizard did it". But in Bloodborne the apocalypse only just started; people are actually still behind their doors. You see shit going from bad to worse. And I assume the disconnected areas are the nightmare worlds, but as part of the story they make perfect sense and are awesome.

I admit that sword and board doesn't have a lot of representation in video games, and that Souls held a unique side of a coin with only Legend of Zelda really on the other side. And I liked holding up my shield when going around corners. But I want a compromise now, and it looks like we're getting that. Weapons arts are clearly meant to emulate weapon transformation. At the very least, while I look forward to Dark Souls 3, I also very much look forward to Bloodborne 2. Until we get either, I'm actually very confident in calling Bloodborne the best game ever made.

Or I was.
 
Last edited:

Matthew

I love weather; Sun for days
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
This doesn't relate to anything really at all but I'm friends with VaatiVidya on Hearthstone / Battle.net and he is, in fact, a very down to earth and cool guy who cares a lot about the work he produces.
 
I'm about 20 hours into a blind playthrough of DS2 so far, currently somewhere around Iron Keep and Tseldora with one Lord Soul obtained.
Positive thoughts:
  • I like the torch system, it adds a fun little minigame to areas with no real downside.
  • Regular mobs feel more engaging than DS1, though I'll have to see if they can keep this up through the whole game. I read that the AI was improved and made more aggressive.
  • I was originally annoyed at the whole "lose max health upon death" system but it's really growing on me. It's a valid complaint to say that DS1 had no real penalty for dying repeatedly and DS2 is much more punishing in that regard. The only issue I have is that players will most likely die frequently early on, when Human Effigies are far and few between.
  • Bonfire ascetics are interesting and have no real downside
  • Fast travel from the first bonfire is convenient
  • Menuing was improved dramatically
Negative thoughts:
  • I'm disappointed with the bosses so far - most of them have been some variant of "big guy with big weapon" and the ones that aren't (scorpion lady, snake lady, chariot guy) are very easy fights. Seeing Ornstein was nice and was probably the most fun fight so far, but it also felt a little lazy. Dark Souls 1 also had a lot of humanoid bosses, but many of them were really fun to face, especially Artorias.
  • Many of the boss fights lack atmosphere, especially those regarding Lord Souls. Lost Sinner was not particularly engaging, just very difficult. I haven't gotten to the Rotten yet, but I've seen him in videos and he also looks quite disappointing. Compared to DS1, where bosses like Nito or O&S exist, a lot of the boss design in DS2 feels lackluster.
  • It's sort of off-putting that I can face the Pursuer as a pretty challenging boss in one area and then have to fight him three times as a regular miniboss in the very next area. Same with the Flexile Sentry. I like the theme of early bosses appearing later in the game as minibosses, but it feels frustratingly difficult to see them so early on.

Overall I like the game. It feels more challenging than DS1 but I can't tell how much of that is artificial difficulty or not, if that makes any sense.
 

jacob

the obstacle is the only way
is a Top Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Past WCoP Champion
I'm about 20 hours into a blind playthrough of DS2 so far, currently somewhere around Iron Keep and Tseldora with one Lord Soul obtained.
Positive thoughts:
  • I like the torch system, it adds a fun little minigame to areas with no real downside.
  • Regular mobs feel more engaging than DS1, though I'll have to see if they can keep this up through the whole game. I read that the AI was improved and made more aggressive.
  • I was originally annoyed at the whole "lose max health upon death" system but it's really growing on me. It's a valid complaint to say that DS1 had no real penalty for dying repeatedly and DS2 is much more punishing in that regard. The only issue I have is that players will most likely die frequently early on, when Human Effigies are far and few between.
  • Bonfire ascetics are interesting and have no real downside
  • Fast travel from the first bonfire is convenient
  • Menuing was improved dramatically
Negative thoughts:
  • I'm disappointed with the bosses so far - most of them have been some variant of "big guy with big weapon" and the ones that aren't (scorpion lady, snake lady, chariot guy) are very easy fights. Seeing Ornstein was nice and was probably the most fun fight so far, but it also felt a little lazy. Dark Souls 1 also had a lot of humanoid bosses, but many of them were really fun to face, especially Artorias.
  • Many of the boss fights lack atmosphere, especially those regarding Lord Souls. Lost Sinner was not particularly engaging, just very difficult. I haven't gotten to the Rotten yet, but I've seen him in videos and he also looks quite disappointing. Compared to DS1, where bosses like Nito or O&S exist, a lot of the boss design in DS2 feels lackluster.
  • It's sort of off-putting that I can face the Pursuer as a pretty challenging boss in one area and then have to fight him three times as a regular miniboss in the very next area. Same with the Flexile Sentry. I like the theme of early bosses appearing later in the game as minibosses, but it feels frustratingly difficult to see them so early on.

Overall I like the game. It feels more challenging than DS1 but I can't tell how much of that is artificial difficulty or not, if that makes any sense.
its funny that you say you like the torch mechanic because when the game was first announced torches were supposed to play a huge roll like almost a necessity since the game was going to be so dark, but it was changed last minute with a new lighting engine. Also bonfire ascetics raise the new game in the area that you use them so there is some drawback
 
its funny that you say you like the torch mechanic because when the game was first announced torches were supposed to play a huge roll like almost a necessity since the game was going to be so dark, but it was changed last minute with a new lighting engine. Also bonfire ascetics raise the new game in the area that you use them so there is some drawback
right I'm referring specifically to using bonfire ascetics to raise the area difficulty - it's a cool little mechanic along with certain items only being available above a certain NG level and I have no real complaints about it
 
about 45 hours in and doing the DLCs on my first playthrough - currently going Iron King -> Ivory King -> Sunken King and have just started Ivory King.

Fume Knight and Sir Alonne have been my two favorite bosses in the entire game by a wide margin because of the atmosphere of the fight and how they basically force you to intimately learn their movesets. Neither of them top Artorias, in my opinion, but both capture the same feeling I got when facing off against Artorias the first time. I think it's because they both have mixups regarding how long they can extend their combos - that little facet alone makes them both incredibly challenging.
 

tcr

sage of six tabs
is a Tutor Alumnusis a Team Rater Alumnusis a Smogon Discord Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnus
I'm about 20 hours into a blind playthrough of DS2 so far, currently somewhere around Iron Keep and Tseldora with one Lord Soul obtained.
Positive thoughts:
  • I like the torch system, it adds a fun little minigame to areas with no real downside.
  • Regular mobs feel more engaging than DS1, though I'll have to see if they can keep this up through the whole game. I read that the AI was improved and made more aggressive.
  • I was originally annoyed at the whole "lose max health upon death" system but it's really growing on me. It's a valid complaint to say that DS1 had no real penalty for dying repeatedly and DS2 is much more punishing in that regard. The only issue I have is that players will most likely die frequently early on, when Human Effigies are far and few between.
  • Bonfire ascetics are interesting and have no real downside
  • Fast travel from the first bonfire is convenient
  • Menuing was improved dramatically
Negative thoughts:
  • I'm disappointed with the bosses so far - most of them have been some variant of "big guy with big weapon" and the ones that aren't (scorpion lady, snake lady, chariot guy) are very easy fights. Seeing Ornstein was nice and was probably the most fun fight so far, but it also felt a little lazy. Dark Souls 1 also had a lot of humanoid bosses, but many of them were really fun to face, especially Artorias.
  • Many of the boss fights lack atmosphere, especially those regarding Lord Souls. Lost Sinner was not particularly engaging, just very difficult. I haven't gotten to the Rotten yet, but I've seen him in videos and he also looks quite disappointing. Compared to DS1, where bosses like Nito or O&S exist, a lot of the boss design in DS2 feels lackluster.
  • It's sort of off-putting that I can face the Pursuer as a pretty challenging boss in one area and then have to fight him three times as a regular miniboss in the very next area. Same with the Flexile Sentry. I like the theme of early bosses appearing later in the game as minibosses, but it feels frustratingly difficult to see them so early on.

Overall I like the game. It feels more challenging than DS1 but I can't tell how much of that is artificial difficulty or not, if that makes any sense.
the reason I didn't like Dark Souls 2 as much as 1 was because the difficulty WAS raised, artificially. Tons of bosses aren't really "tough" they're just multiple of them to raise the difficulty. Similarly there are areas that are just littered with mobs. In later parts of the game some enemies are pretty cool, like those one wall enemies in the place before you fight bell guy.

I remember playing through the game and the early part just felt so bullshitted, like they made it super easy because it was the beginning, but it was a dark souls game so they had to increase the difficulty somehow. A good example of that is in the forest of fallen giants, how one of the very first areas there, right next to the heide knight, are littered with like 6 soldiers that all attack you at once. Or the area in the lost bastille right before the ruin sentinels boss had a room where 5 soldiers just rush you in a tight area. As you said, tons of bosses seem really dumb. Half of them are just "circle right and slash every once in a while" (ruin sentinels, dragonslayer, dragonrider, lost sinner, pursuer, last giant, etc etc). Then again there are some really fun ones. For one I really REALLY liked the Looking Glass Knight fight and the Smelter Demon fights, their gimmicks were cool as fuck and I actually felt accomplished fighting them

Unfortunately none of the really important bosses feel important. Like in DS1 you spent the entire area trying to get to Seath or Nito and when fighting them it felt super fucking epic, but in the first 2 hours of the DS2 playthrough you can get to a good 2/4 of the "important 4", which is dumb imo but whatever. Post Shrine of Winter is where the game really REALLY picks up and where I feel Dark Souls 1 kinda fell off.

Also the final boss is cheap af. Fuck curse man
 

jacob

the obstacle is the only way
is a Top Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Past WCoP Champion
it looks sooooooooooooo good.

i recently started replaying dark souls 1 to get hyped for dark souls 3 and i gotta say i forgot just how good it is compared to dark souls 2. The thing im maybe most hyped about ds3 is the fact that Miyazaki is directing it, ds2 just didnt feel the same and its because he didnt lead the project
 
So DS3 launches today (in about an hour from this post, actually). I've bought it but I won't be able to play the game itself until early May since I have to work on my senior thesis, but I figured it'd be useful to bump this thread.

Currently the game is on sale at Gamesplanet for $46.33 (https://www.reddit.com/r/GameDeals/comments/4dxf46/gamesplanet_preorder_dark_souls_iii_3199_4633) and is available worldwide except for Japan and North Korea. You can also get another 5% discount by linking your Steam account to your Gamesplanet account and then joining the "for UNCUT!" group on Steam (it may take about 10 minutes) for a final price of roughly $44, over a 25% discount.
 
Enjoying Dark Souls 3 a lot so far. I started with a Pyromancer going for a hybrid-y build so I haven't been using weapon arts too much yet, I'd forgotten that you can only use them if you're two-handing your weapon. There are shields that let you use weapon arts while one-handed as well but they're pretty uncommon and the ones I've found haven't been very good. Magic is also kind of indirectly nerfed by the fact that you have to choose whether you want your Estus to be for healing HP or MP, so the more magic you want to use the less healing you have available.

Making an Uchigatana available really early is both nice and kind of annoying since I've been dumping all my upgrades into it so far and haven't tried many new things.

The PC port actually seems to have some minor issues, I've seen occasional bits of lag and had one weird bug where a bunch of textures failed to load and tried dying to make it go away and the game got stuck on an infinite loading screen. On the upside, the load times are actually really quick which is a relief since it still forces you to go to the hub area to level up, unfortunately.
 
I have been hearing scary things about the pc port, should I avoid it until patches come out? Or are those cases more of exceptions to the rule.
 
idk, I'm 10 hours in and I haven't had any problems beyond the ones in my last post and none of the people I know who got it had any issues either. If you do get it and it's really bad that's what Steam Refunds are for.
 

vonFiedler

I Like Chopin
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
Fuck you weren't kidding about the Uchigatana

But I'm more impressed that the first chest I encountered was a mimic (I am so fucking glad to have the weapon it dropped though). That's two really good weapons in about 30 minutes.
 
probably around half or 2/3 of the way through and really enjoying it, random thoughts

-It seems like it might be the most linear Souls game, I don't think I've ever had more than two areas at a time to explore. That said it goes the Bloodborne path and named areas are generally pretty damn big instead of having some big and some small like Dark/2, and they're as winding and twisted as Souls games generally are.
-"Illusory wall here!" next to a regular wall seems to be the new "Treasure down here!" next to a bottomless pit and this game seems to have an even bigger obsession than normal for making enemies appear behind you. One particularly tough one just materializes out of thin air.
-Weapon Arts seem like a pvp thing for the most part, a lot of them boil down to a little bit of extra movement or a slightly stronger attack. There are a couple stronger, slower attacks that seem decent in pve still against tough enemies.
-I do like the way that new Magic is handled now, with tomes that you can take to a vendor to unlock several new spells at a time instead of having to wait to find a new vendor and then finding a ton at once.
-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0LdIZ8TWYo is one of my favorite tracks from the series so far, fun boss too if a bit easy
-this has kinda been known for awhile but anyone who thought Dark Souls 2 had too many references to the first is going to have some serious issues with this one
-I wish they would just put Equip Load back on Endurance, or give you .5 point on Endurance and Strength each or something, as its own stat it almost always feels like a poor investment so I never put any points into it, then I have to micromanage armor whenever I want to equip a heavier weapon.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top