What? No, we've established that you've played enough of either game to think its basically Diablo: An Isometric, randomly generated level design, left-click spamfest with randomly generated item prefix/suffix system and very limited inventory space. Dark Souls has none of these features! They're as far separated in systems/design as any two RPGs can be.
No, I specifically mentioned the primary differences. You don't seem to know Diablo very well, though. The best (and most interesting) loot in the original Diablo were unique items and items with preset stats - like King's Sword of Haste - which varied very little in overall performance.
I did forget that levels are randomly generated in Diablo, that's true. Since I'm not that much into architecture - and much more into finding and interacting with stuff, I don't think the exploration varies THAT much in Dark Souls from random levels. But if you're into architecture and nice (often) empty vistas - I understand why'd disagree.
So, if resources and time were infinite you'd agree with me that they should have a really good combat/weapon systems like Dark Souls. What if you took the 100% combat, aka 100% gameplay, systems from Dark Souls and added a huge open world like Skyrim? I couldn't care less about the Lore of the Witchers IP. I just want a sweet RPG. Generic fantasy is fine. I feel Darker settings lend themselves to better atmosphere, because the medieval days were very dark! You'd take your kids down to watch the outlaw be hung, drawn and quartered and they'd be bored! These days even adults are sheltered from that kind of thing. Nanny/police states of labour slaves clicking away on facebook who can't stand up for themselves as their rights are stripped away one by one because of faceless "Terrorist" bullshit. But I digress….
Well, if time and resources were infinite - I would take combat to a much, much higher level than Dark Souls.
But what I'm saying is that if Witcher 3 could be Witcher and have more significant loot distinction, I'd be fine with it. It's not a big deal to me, because I don't expect Dark Souls when I play Witcher.
Personally, I get bored with dark, dark, dark and gritty, gritty, gritty. I like variety - and I love lush forests and stuff like that.
Dark Souls + Skyrim in an ideal world would be better than just Skyrim - but not that much better.
As I said, I think Skyrim has much better stealth - and it also has MUCH better archery. I also MUCH prefer the perks over dreary stats - and I know that stats matter a lot in Dark Souls.
I like new toys in my progression - not incremental increases.
Skyrim is a much, much better games for my tastes than Dark Souls could ever hope to be, but to each his own.
Well, that sounds pretty good, but Dark Souls combat still trumps any combat of any RPG. Even Mount and Blade, War of Roses, where you do a left, right, up swing and have to block accordingly isn't as good because it just over complicates things and draws your attention away from the scene as a whole and on to nuances of the monsters stance. DS touches on this focus but just enough that you can still view the whole scene and when your weapon can impact the walls, which isn't a feature of MnB, this is important.
It doesn't trump Skyrim when it comes to stealth, archery or mounted combat - now does it?
It's great for melee combat, but I think RPGs emphasize combat way too much already.
That's kinda why I tend to play stealthy characters - so I can enjoy exploration without constant conflict.
I'm not really a combat, combat, combat guy.
Probably why I got sick of Dark Souls so quickly, because I'd already played Demon's Souls until I couldn't take it anymore.