Dark Souls pre-orders- free upgrade to collector's edition

H

hlaalumaster9

CAGiversary!
Currently in stock at Gamestop.com. Online only.

PS3

Xbox 360


Collectors Editions are presently in shortage at both online and b&m stores. Your best options for grabbing a CE:

You can try calling Gamestop, Walmart, or BestBuy and see if they have any extras beyond the pre-order batch. Make sure to see if they are doing a midnight launch. If not, go first thing in the morning



Stores that will NOT have CEs at all:

Target - $10 gift card with purchase
K-Mart/Sears - $20 gamer coupon with purchase
Newegg - Confirmed to be shipping out regular editions but is giving a $20 coupon in compensation


ATTN AMAZON BUYERS:
If you had preordered with release day shipping but the expected delivery date is anything later than 10/4/11, it would be in your best interest to contact Amazon CS and complain :p

While supplies last - receive a FREE upgrade to the Collector's Edition of Dark Souls when you pre-order the Standard Edition at no extra cost.

Immerse yourself in the Dark Souls experience with the Collector's Edition, which comes wrapped inside a collectible custom designed metal case with protective sleeve, the highly anticipated Dark Souls game, a mini-strategy guide, unique art book packed with exclusive, high-quality imagery, the original soundtrack & behind-the-scenes videos taken with Dark Souls game development studio FromSoftware.

Dark Souls Collector's Edition Includes:
  • Special Designed Metal Tin Case & Protective Sleeve
  • Dark Souls Game
  • Mini-Strategy Guide*
  • Custom Art Book
  • Original Game Soundtrack*
  • Behind-The-Scenes Videos*
In stores October 4, 2011

*The Mini-Strategy Guide, Original Game Soundtrack & Behind-The-Scenes Videos are provided for digital download via a uniquely redeemable online code printed on a specially marked card inside each Collector Edition box.
Click to expand...
SOURCE:

http://preparetodie.com/en/preorder/


________________________________________________________________________


DarkSouls_LimitedEdition_PS3.jpg




Amazon Bonus Offer:

Pre-order Dark Souls and trade-in any video game between September 22nd and October 3rd, and get a $5.00 gift card.
Click to expand...


NOTE: Both PS3 CE and 360 CE lately show as out of stock

NOTE2: The product info for both CE and regular pages almost look the same


PS3 Collector's Edition $59.99 ASIN: B00542ZQJO

PS3 Regular $59.99 ASIN: B004NRN5EO

Xbox360 Collector's Edition $59.99 ASIN: B00542ZR4I

Xbox360 Regular $59.99 ASIN: B004NRN5DU
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote 0 Downvote
[quote name='MSI Magus']I disagree. I think DS sold well because it got a buzz going about it and not because it was a good game but because it was a hardcore game. When DS came out it became a badge for gamers cred. If you had not played or did not like DS all of a sudden you couldnt be considered a hardcore gamer. DS really was not that different from things like Kingsfield which came before it but got shit reviews. I think it just hit at the right time and got the right buzz of mouth. Thats part of why I am expecting this to drop in price hella fast, because I really bet that half the people that picked up DS to act all hardcore are not up for the experience again and thus there will be more copies printed then there are consumers available for it.[/QUOTE]

Thousands out there disagree that demons souls wasn't a good game. I don't base my judgement on reviews alone (though pretty much every review gave it a good grade) but you can't generalize for the rest of the population that they got demons souls because it was hard and not because it was an amazing game. I thought it was amazing.
 
[quote name='remag']Thousands out there disagree that demons souls wasn't a good game. I don't base my judgement on reviews alone (though pretty much every review gave it a good grade) but you can't generalize for the rest of the population that they got demons souls because it was hard and not because it was an amazing game. I thought it was amazing.[/QUOTE]

I agree 100% with MSI Magus. Before Demon Souls came stateside many sites gave it low scores and made vague claims of it being too hard. Many people post gave the game a high score because they're hardcore. Being completely fair the story or what you could consider one was virtually nonexistent. The combat was slow and if you ask me clunky... Obtaining some mats were way to low to be viable (pure bladestone... I think thats the one). The game did have amazing atmosphere, but it could be better in many ways.
 
[quote name='admiralvic']I agree 100% with MSI Magus. Before Demon Souls came stateside many sites gave it low scores and made vague claims of it being too hard. Many people post gave the game a high score because they're hardcore. Being completely fair the story or what you could consider one was virtually nonexistent. The combat was slow and if you ask me clunky... Obtaining some mats were way to low to be viable (pure bladestone... I think thats the one). The game did have amazing atmosphere, but it could be better in many ways.[/QUOTE]

Yes, the pure bladestone. Had to grind for about 8 hours before it dropped. Fortunately, there was tons of souls to be had by grinding for it (black phantom skeleton) so it wasn't a total waste of time for me. It was tough and I'm no where near hardcore. It was fun and hard enough to make me want to play it every day until I plantinum'ed it, which was my first ever.
 
I never said DS wasnt good, your putting words in my mouth. I think it was hugely overrated but still a good game. My previous comments were not meant to imply it was a bad game, just that its a very niche game that I guarantee some people did not like but pretended they did just because it was a hardcore game. I equate it to FFVII a lot, not so much because VII was a difficult game that gave you a hardcore gamer badge for playing, but because VII made a lot of people play it because of the hype around it and many of those people then abandoned the series.

DS regardless of how good or bad it was was a massive hit. Personally I feel like many of those millions of sales were people that bought the game out of curiosity and many of those people will not buy a sequel. It is a game that the stars aligned perfectly for huge sale.
 
[quote name='PrinnyOtaku']...there's no way in hell I'm even touching the game given the holiday's lineup..[/QUOTE]

Horrible taste confirmed. This is the game that should be causing you to miss out on other games.
 
Of all the new games out this year, this will be the only one I care to buy without some sort of price drop.

And it is not just because of Demons Souls; But because of Kings Field and Armored Core for some reason From Software has always made games I personally enjoy regardless of score. It's the same kind of love I have for Dynasty/Samurai Warriors.
 
@MSI: I didn't put anything in your mouth, what you said could've been interpreted either way. Irregardless of which opinion it was, you still stated that it was similar to King's Field (which I said I hated) :p

I'm curious how the "played it just to see the fuss but won't buy the sequel" mentality will play out. User reviews seem pretty pleased with the game, it's not like people lash out saying out overrated and shitty it was and disappointed by the hype.

I haven't enjoyed a single From Software title, but I'll refrain from trolling too hard. They're definitely not for me, and neither are Koei titles :/

@dudejeff: I don't even... I hope you're not 100% serious with that post.
 
[quote name='PrinnyOtaku']
I'm curious how the "played it just to see the fuss but won't buy the sequel" mentality. User reviews seem pretty pleased with the game, it's not like people lash out saying out overrated and shitty it was and disappointed by the hype.
[/QUOTE]

I believe it will have similar success to the first game. Many people will go out and buy it just to prove they're hardcore. Regardless of why a game is hard... when its seen as hard people generally flock to it. Even if it has a 15% obtain rate on YGC... (demon souls)
 
It's always been one of those games that confuse me. Many of the reviewers and DS worshippers haven't even finished the game.

They praise it and say what the love about it... but never finish it. Boggles my mind. Only reason I don't want to "start" it (a second time) is because I'm OCD about completing games to 100% and I can't commit to such a timesink when I'm doing intern work.
 
[quote name='PrinnyOtaku']@MSI: I didn't put anything in your mouth, what you said could've been interpreted either way. Irregardless of which opinion it was, you still stated that it was similar to King's Field (which I said I hated) :p

I'm curious how the "played it just to see the fuss but won't buy the sequel" mentality will play out. User reviews seem pretty pleased with the game, it's not like people lash out saying out overrated and shitty it was and disappointed by the hype.

I haven't enjoyed a single From Software title, but I'll refrain from trolling too hard. They're definitely not for me, and neither are Koei titles :/

@dudejeff: I don't even... I hope you're not 100% serious with that post.[/QUOTE]

I wasnt talking to you I was talking to the other person that wigged out. As for the hype thing, my point is that I think people dont say anything because they are scared of being thought of as casuals. Its like being 13 and saying you hate whatever boy band or crappy heart throb is popular. DS as I said was a badge placed on your chest making you a hardcore gamer, if you disliked it your gamer cred was questioned.
 
That's certainly plausible. But if that's the case, what a sad bunch the game community is. Who the fuck cares really. Not to mention in my case, I could always outargue anyone who thinks I'm casual because I don't like DS :p

**Bring it on!** :)
 
Reviewers who liked it were unable to finish Demon Souls? I could see giving up in the first 2-3 hours, but once you get over the initial hump and learn the mechanics it becomes much more manageable. If you stick with it enough to get past the halfway point, I don't see why they would be unable to finish it unless they did not enjoy the gameplay. But if they did not enjoy the gameplay, why would they be giving it a good review?

Some like Oblivion, I personally hate it because of some of the choices the developers made (mainly the leveling system). It's not that I think it's a bad game or that people are crazy for liking it, it's just that I HATE that core mechanic. It's much the same with Dead Rising, a zombie game almost tailor made for me if it weren't for that damn time limit mechanic, so I have no interest in playing it as I hate being rushed. Others don't mind and enjoyed the game quite a bit.

If you don't like the game because action RPGS aren't your cup of tea or you disagree with some of the core choices the developers made in the game (I, for example, am also no fan of the method required to obtain blade stones), that's fine. But if the only reason you think it sucks is because the game kicked your ass, then you just come off like the whiny fox who can't reach the high-hanging grapes.
 
Personally, I liked it because it was hard. I was really happy because they were reviewed well, since it helps Atlus. I haven't finished it, but I finish very few games over 15 hours on consoles.
 
Can you guys explain why it is hard. Is it ghosts and goblins hard like memorizing patterns or is it more like Bioshock on Hard where you just have to be less reckless?
 
[quote name='slowdive21']Can you guys explain why it is hard. Is it ghosts and goblins hard like memorizing patterns or is it more like Bioshock on Hard where you just have to be less reckless?[/QUOTE]

its similar to bioshock in how you had to play more tactfully but there was more to it than that. The game is designed to punish you in a very cheap way. All the souls you had (cash) are left where you died and if you cant reclaim them on your next try (lit next, not the next time you try that stage) they're gone forever. People could invade your game and kill you for quick souls. Enemies were very powerful and one screw up could kill you. Failing to do something usually resulted in death. Based off your alliance (good/evil) enemies/you are stronger/weaker. Most bosses had very set ways of fighting them. etc.

@ Owl:

A lot of bigger sites care more about relations/views than ethics. I posted a review of neptunia explaining that I didn't enjoy all the references (after a while I grew bored of them) and mentioned I wasn't a fan of the piracy undertones and was told (by the senior editor of the game) that I didn't get it and I failed to understand the concepts behind the game. The game still got a 7, but because I didn't like their parody (god forbid) they were like I knew nothing. Take a bigger game like LA Noire and lets say you didn't like it because driving wasn't your thing, minor story elements were missing (which would add realism), and you didn't like the limited open world. Now when IGN reviewed it with a 8.5 people complained it was too low and the person reviewing was an idiot (yes with an 8.5). Now if you were to go as far as a 6... people will claim your site is trolling for views, you didnt get the game, you were too much of a noob (that came up in the people vs gamespots infamous 2 review), and other stuff. Due to this a lot of sites just prescore bigger games and write reviews to justify the score.
 
I've been able to guess GameSpot's reviews for bigger titles spot on most of the time, or at worst within .5 of the review score. Lol. Definitely should place bets on these things.

Was that a Japanese team iF/CH(?) editor or someone working at NISA?
 
[quote name='admiralvic']its similar to bioshock in how you had to play more tactfully but there was more to it than that. The game is designed to punish you in a very cheap way. All the souls you had (cash) are left where you died and if you cant reclaim them on your next try (lit next, not the next time you try that stage) they're gone forever. People could invade your game and kill you for quick souls. Enemies were very powerful and one screw up could kill you. Failing to do something usually resulted in death. Based off your alliance (good/evil) enemies/you are stronger/weaker. Most bosses had very set ways of fighting them. etc.

[/QUOTE]

Thanks for the info. I used to hate when people hacked Diablo, dropped in, killed my guy and left with my loot. I guess I could play offline to avoid that though.
 
[quote name='admiralvic']I agree 100% with MSI Magus. Before Demon Souls came stateside many sites gave it low scores and made vague claims of it being too hard. Many people post gave the game a high score because they're hardcore. Being completely fair the story or what you could consider one was virtually nonexistent. The combat was slow and if you ask me clunky... Obtaining some mats were way to low to be viable (pure bladestone... I think thats the one). The game did have amazing atmosphere, but it could be better in many ways.[/QUOTE]

I feel like you're making up crap just to insult the game. Demon's Souls had generally positive reviews before it came overseas. All this stuff about the game getting great reviews because they're trying to convince everyone that they're "teh hardcore" is just nonsense.

The combat was far from clunky. If you found it too slow, maybe you were using, oh I don't know, a slow and heavy weapon?

And what does the low chances of getting Pure stones have to do with anything? They were only necessary if you're a completionist. That's like complaining that you can't get a full rune set after doing one run through Diablo 2.
 
I pre-ordered Demon's Souls the day before it came out because of the great reviews from Japan. I got the DE because of how hard people said it was. The game is hard, but not unfare in anyway.

The character creation, and pvp made the game my #1 ps3 game. Most games have scripted battles and leave you without any emotion. DS makes your heart race when you're in the middle if fighting 3 black-eyed knights while some BP is invading your world. This is because you DO have something to lose, and it making winning all that much sweeter.

IMO too many people want a game like WOW where nothing really happens when you die, including pvp. Most people either hate the game or love it. It has nothing to do with being hardcore, or a good gamer, it has to do with taste.

my 9 cents
 
[quote name='AukeySeven']I pre-ordered Demon's Souls the day before it came out because of the great reviews from Japan. I got the DE because of how hard people said it was. The game is hard, but not unfare in anyway.

The character creation, and pvp made the game my #1 ps3 game. Most games have scripted battles and leave you without any emotion. DS makes your heart race when you're in the middle if fighting 3 black-eyed knights while some BP is invading your world. This is because you DO have something to lose, and it making winning all that much sweeter.

IMO too many people want a game like WOW where nothing really happens when you die, including pvp. Most people either hate the game or love it. It has nothing to do with being hardcore, or a good gamer, it has to do with taste.

my 9 cents[/QUOTE]


I agree. I had to buy Demon's Souls 3 times before I started to enjoy it. The first time, I couldn't get past the training level, but that was the very first time I played an RPG. The 2nd time, the game intimidated me too much and traded it way. The 3rd time, I grew a set of balls and got the platinum trophy. Demon's Souls became my favorite game of all time!
 
[quote name='warpedsoul']I agree. I had to buy Demon's Souls 3 times before I started to enjoy it. The first time, I couldn't get past the training level, but that was the very first time I played an RPG. The 2nd time, the game intimidated me too much and traded it way. The 3rd time, I grew a set of balls and got the platinum trophy. Demon's Souls became my favorite game of all time![/QUOTE]

See to me this is a critical flaw. Even if a game ultimatly turns out to be good in the long run it should not be forgiven for having the first several hours be a mess. I mean I hear people mark games down all the time for being good at the start and falling apart at the end. So why is it any more forgivable for a game to stink it up for hours just to get good at the mid to end? Several people here have said DS does exactly this.

Anyways slightly more on topic. I am excited to play this game. I doubt they will but I am hoping they refine the mechanics to make the combat less slow and clunky(and no I did not use a 2 handed weapon)and I am hoping they offer more difficulty options. I never understand why so many developers make their game either blisteringly hard or mind numbingly easy...its not that hard to make several difficulties that range the gambit and your game will please everyone. Just seems like lazy design to do anything different.
 
[quote name='MSI Magus']See to me this is a critical flaw. Even if a game ultimatly turns out to be good in the long run it should not be forgiven for having the first several hours be a mess. I mean I hear people mark games down all the time for being good at the start and falling apart at the end. So why is it any more forgivable for a game to stink it up for hours just to get good at the mid to end? Several people here have said DS does exactly this.

Anyways slightly more on topic. I am excited to play this game. I doubt they will but I am hoping they refine the mechanics to make the combat less slow and clunky(and no I did not use a 2 handed weapon)and I am hoping they offer more difficulty options. I never understand why so many developers make their game either blisteringly hard or mind numbingly easy...its not that hard to make several difficulties that range the gambit and your game will please everyone. Just seems like lazy design to do anything different.[/QUOTE]

The game wasn't blisteringly hard, it just wasn't something you could run through, obviously. What's wrong with learning and getting better? As people have said, the game isn't necessarily unfair in frustrating you, it just doesn't hold your hand. Lazy design is where you have checkpoints every 5 minutes, with that developers basically point you to the exit and you walk straight.

And I'd rather play a game starts out slow, get progressively better, and ends on a good note than a game that starts out with a bang and then not knowing what the fuck to do with itself, throws bland cookie cutter at you until you realize that it's not getting any better and stop playing.
 
[quote name='gotdott']The game wasn't blisteringly hard, it just wasn't something you could run through, obviously. What's wrong with learning and getting better? As people have said, the game isn't necessarily unfair in frustrating you, it just doesn't hold your hand. Lazy design is where you have checkpoints every 5 minutes, with that developers basically point you to the exit and you walk straight.

And I'd rather play a game starts out slow, get progressively better, and ends on a good note than a game that starts out with a bang and then not knowing what the fuck to do with itself, throws bland cookie cutter at you until you realize that it's not getting any better and stop playing.[/QUOTE]

Well first off I disagree on the difficulty thing and clearly so do many other people. It amazes me the way DS fans like to brag about the games difficulty, challenge and how it is not a walk in the park like other games...but the second its listed as a downside then DS fans start changing their tune and saying its not a challenging game. It reminds me of Dragon Quest fans who pitch a fit anytime someone says you need to grind in that series, yet brag that the game takes 100s of hours to finish...which contradicts the no grind statement since there is simply not that much content.

Second as for the being good in the first half vs the last half of the game thing. I again disagree because of a game starts off weak many people will quit before they even have a chance to get interested in a game. It should not matter if the first few hours or last few hours suck...either way your buying a product that had lazy development.

Edit - Either way I will drop this discussion since I know some people have a real stick up their butt about even the smallest amount of off topic discussion.
 
That's how I an with another game known to be hard -- Etrian Odyssey. When I first played it, yea, it was hard. I died and died. After 200+ hours in the first 2 games, they're now easy. It was hard because it doesn't hold your hand. It was way because you learn what to do, what to avoid, how to fight, etc. So people saying it's hard and easy at the same time aren't wrong. It's hard, but it becomes easier once you figure things out, meaning the game isn't really cheating.

Sure, even Phalanx, the first boss is hard til you figure out what to do. Then it's a breeze. In a way, that is good design.
 
I'd love to go for this deal, but not sure what console to order it for! I'd prefer the Xbox 360, but it might be better on the PS3 since it might be primarily developed on it, like Demon's Souls.
 
[quote name='slowdive21']Thanks for the info. I used to hate when people hacked Diablo, dropped in, killed my guy and left with my loot. I guess I could play offline to avoid that though.[/QUOTE]
If you want to play online, the other option is playing in Soul form. The only time players can invade your game is if you are in body form. With the cling ring you have 75% of max health instead of 50% compared to body form. Your agro pull range is also smaller in soul form since you are much quieter. Your attack power is also higher than in body form.

[quote name='MSI Magus']See to me this is a critical flaw. Even if a game ultimatly turns out to be good in the long run it should not be forgiven for having the first several hours be a mess. I mean I hear people mark games down all the time for being good at the start and falling apart at the end. So why is it any more forgivable for a game to stink it up for hours just to get good at the mid to end? Several people here have said DS does exactly this.[/QUOTE]
At the time, it sucks, but when you look back in hindsight, it is a an excellent example of adherence to roleplaying. In Demon's Souls you are not a warrior attempting to stop an external force from attacking a kingdom, you are in a world that is so firmly under the control and influence of the enemy that there are barely a couple dozen sane people left in all of Boletaria. With so few people left there is no one around to teach you or hold your hand. As it would be if you were really in Boletaria, it is sink or swim.

You feel so powerless in the beginning because compared to the forces of the Old One, you are powerless. It's the progression from weakling who can barely handle a slave soldier who learns and grows and against all odds becomes strong enough to banish the Old One that makes the journey so satisfying.

Later when I started a fresh character after a couple of playthroughs with my first guy I was amazed at how easy the first non-tutorial level was in retrospect now that I was well versed in defense, tactics, and knew the attack patterns of all the enemies. Most of the difficulty of the first level(s) comes from not being accustomed to having an actual challenge at the start of a game. You have to learn through doing to be more cautious than the typical action RPG.

[quote name='elessar123']Sure, even Phalanx, the first boss is hard til you figure out what to do. Then it's a breeze. In a way, that is good design.[/QUOTE]
Right, the first time I killed that boss it took me 25-30 minutes to beat it because my character choice didn't have a ranged attack and I foolishly wasted all my fire bombs. So I ended up spending 30 minutes running around the periphery, picking off hoplites, and occasionally moving in when there was an opening to attack Phalanx.
 
[quote name='MSI Magus']Well first off I disagree on the difficulty thing and clearly so do many other people. It amazes me the way DS fans like to brag about the games difficulty, challenge and how it is not a walk in the park like other games...but the second its listed as a downside then DS fans start changing their tune and saying its not a challenging game. It reminds me of Dragon Quest fans who pitch a fit anytime someone says you need to grind in that series, yet brag that the game takes 100s of hours to finish...which contradicts the no grind statement since there is simply not that much content.

Second as for the being good in the first half vs the last half of the game thing. I again disagree because of a game starts off weak many people will quit before they even have a chance to get interested in a game. It should not matter if the first few hours or last few hours suck...either way your buying a product that had lazy development.

Edit - Either way I will drop this discussion since I know some people have a real stick up their butt about even the smallest amount of off topic discussion.[/QUOTE]

Chill dog, don't take everything so personal.


On topic:
Any word on why they have 2 separate listings for reg and CE
 
Some of you are trying to play up the hardcore street cred too much, as if we give a shit what others say. If anything, DS illustrates the starvation of difficult games that people like me crave. The sense of accomplishment plays to our ego, because the game is designed so that you go from zero to hero. That's why it was so well received and the reason you're back is either because you loved it, or secretly desire it.
 
All this talk about starting off slow and shitty then getting better near the end being a good thing.

FFXIII much? But in that case, it's a negative on the game, right? Right?

I didn't find Phalanx or Tower Knight particularly hard... but I also don't find bosses taking 10+ minutes of doing the exact same thing "fun." Once you've learned the mechanics, the repetition got to me. It's not like combat evolves that much once you get going.

The game did make me nervous though, and the atmosphere was terrific. But, I disagree with the whole "no penalty for death" part of games nowadays as being worse. They challenge you in much different ways.
 
Or you can be like me and give up on games like this because I dont find it fun dying and having to retrace my steps through the exact same enemies again at a slow and plodding pace. I just got very bored and need more action/less repetition through the exact same environment and ememies every time I die. Not knocking the game, just not my cup o tea. Maybe in a past life when I had more time on my hands.
 
Ok, Demon's Souls IS hard at times, but I noticed that some levels where my spell caster had a HUGE problem with my melee guy just blew through it without much problem.

And the game is setup to get help from people online if you're having trouble (not in the frist level which might be a flaw for some). It forces people to play together.

IMO Demon's Souls was much more exciting during the first few weeks due to how many people were online (no wait for invading/helping others) vs playing it a couple months ago, which you might wait around for 10 minutes.

So in re: to Dark Souls I think everyone should get it during the release month for the online aspect.
 
Agreed aukey. That's why I'm day1 buying, which I usually don't do.

Demon's Souls without the phantoms is not the same game, and plaything through it now is different since you never see them.
 
[quote name='AukeySeven']
So in re: to Dark Souls I think everyone should get it during the release month for the online aspect.[/QUOTE]
I dont know about anyone else (or how this game will be) but it wasnt till around a week later before I could even stay connected/join a game.
 
Looks like we are getting the full guide after all but the bad news its a digital download now

Link: jrpgtribe.com/news/dark-souls-limited-edition-will-now-include-a-full-guide/
 
[quote name='joker______']Looks like we are getting the full guide after all but the bad news its a digital download now

Link: jrpgtribe.com/news/dark-souls-limited-edition-will-now-include-a-full-guide/[/QUOTE]


pre-order canceled
 
Giving a digital edition is like giving nothing.

I think Im gonna cancel my preorder now too and just wait for the game to be 30 bucks.
 
[quote name='joker______']Looks like we are getting the full guide after all but the bad news its a digital download now

Link: jrpgtribe.com/news/dark-souls-limited-edition-will-now-include-a-full-guide/[/QUOTE]
what.the.fuck.
 
Why wouldn't they still include the "mini" game guide as well as the full digital guide? They've been advertising this collector's edition for awhile, so what's going to happen to all the physical "mini" guides?
 
This really is the only deal breaker they could have tossed at me. We should all email atlus with our disappointment in a mature manner.
 
[quote name='Ribkage']This really is the only deal breaker they could have tossed at me. We should all email atlus with our disappointment in a mature manner.[/QUOTE]
Yeah this needs to change or I'll just buy the standard used at some point. I don't care if they charge more for it I just want physical stuff. fuck digital content.
 
[quote name='joker______']Looks like we are getting the full guide after all but the bad news its a digital download now

Link: jrpgtribe.com/news/dark-souls-limited-edition-will-now-include-a-full-guide/[/QUOTE]

Although this is sort of disheartening the Demon's Souls guide from the deluxe edition was excellent. To me the guide didn't have any "fluff" like some guides seem to have.
The other thing I liked is that nothing was kept secret in the guide. It told you where all the best places to farm souls/stones/etc were as well as how to do a "perfect run through" from start to finish without missing any content.

If the Dark Souls guide follows the DS's guide in style/content I'd gladly fork over MSRP for the package.

I for one am still keeping my preorder cause digital guide > no guide.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top