Yeah, I was sword 90% of the time with the occasional fist thrown in near the end. The general thread at the time was quite varied in how people said they did things though, which indicates to me that it's all viable and to go with what you find more fun.
I don't think that there's anything the scythe can do that the sword can't manage just as well. Myself, I usually stick with the sword and then concentrate on getting and boosting up the scythe towards the endgame when souls are more plentiful.
I don't think that there's anything the scythe can do that the sword can't manage just as well. Myself, I usually stick with the sword and then concentrate on getting and boosting up the scythe towards the endgame when souls are more plentiful.
If you get the special scythe, it sure does. It gets you more souls
amnesiasoft on
0
Options
KorKnown to detonate from time to timeRegistered Userregular
edited February 2011
It should be noted that the sword automatically reached full level via story elements. Whereas the scythe and fists do not.
MorninglordI'm tired of being Batman,so today I'll be Owl.Registered Userregular
edited February 2011
Scythe is fantastic crowd control. Damage wise not so much, but crowd control? YESSIR. I used it when being swarmed to clear space. It's got great moves to that effect.
Sword is great at fucking up one guy and okay at two or three at once but isn't so good at crowd control.
Fists are mad crazy damage. I whipped this thing out against super dudes and guys with lots of health. It's not so bad against groups of enemies that are really slow or are susceptible to knockback when you get the ground pound, but that leaves you in one spot for ages so if there is an enemy that wont get affected you will get hit.
Morninglord on
(PSN: Morninglord) (Steam: Morninglord) (WiiU: Morninglord22) I like to record and toss up a lot of random gaming videos here.
0
Options
Forever Zefirocloaked in the midnight glory of an event horizonRegistered Userregular
So I just beat it last night. Pretty satisfying, though the story kind of confuses me
So, Abaddon wanted to strike against Hell before Hell struck first. He tried to get the angels to go with the plan, but they denied him.
So he got Azrael and Ulthane together and forged the Armageddon Blade and smashed all the seals but the Seventh, the final one that would unleash the Four Horsemen. That way it drew Hell out to Earth, making it look like he was right in the first place so he could destroy their forces for good, but didn't involve the Apocalypse.
But then he failed and Straga killed him, and a woman's voice turned him into the Destroyer which is a fire dragon. Also the Charred Council sent War out anyway because they don't like him, and they wanted him to kill everything because the Charred Council doesn't really want balance, but to control the universe instead?
And I thought you were going after the Destroyer from the beginning, before Abaddon was killed and turned into the Destroyer?
Can anyone help me out here?
You're mostly there. As I remember it, and it's been awhile:
An unknown woman offered to turn Abbadon into the Destroyer; her identity has not been revealed yet, but there's a "Lilith" in some concept art somewhere, so that's the most likely candidate. The Charred Council knew that War was innocent all along, however, without proof of Abbadon's treachery, they felt they had to act as though War was at fault and play along in order to maintain their stance of neutrality. They concocted the plan to imprison him for the 100 years, then give him a chance to clear his name, hoping he would unmask the real culprits and deal with the problem.
So, really, it all was just a bunch of supernatural red tape.
And I don't think anyone can explain the whole "Going after the Destroyer before Abbadon became the Destroyer" bit. Chalk it up to "The Destroyer" being something of a legend, or a "title" that many beings have had.
Hmm...I have to disagree with part of your assessment there Houn.
You seem to imply that the Council was still relatively neutral in its proceedings and just playing the game with War in order to "play along" so that they could get to the truth.
You learn from both Azrael and the Watcher that the Council knew beforehand of Abaddons plans, that there never was any real question of who the culprit in the whole ordeal was. They framed War by letting him lose then punishing him all the while knowing that eventually he would find the truth; but that after that they were still planning on killing him via the Watcher before he could cause any problems by letting everyone else know that the Council was corrupt and let the shit hit the fan.
They exist purely to keep a balance between heaven and hell and to make sure the Creators plan goes according to...plan. But the fact that they knew what was happening and still let it happen and used War in the way they did shows that they are no longer following the direction set out by the Creator.
Anyway, not really related, I was kind of disappointed to learn some time ago when they said that Darksiders 2 wouldn't be a sequel but would take place during the same timeframe as the first game and just tell a different story. I find that to be pretty lame. You don't end the game the way they do and they not fucking continue that shit for the sequel.
Well it's implied that the horsemen were effectively in stasis until the Apocalypse; and when they were called forth by the breaking of the seals they were merely supposed to keep check on the sides to make sure they were playing by the rules.
Which is also more or less what the role of the council is supposed to be. The Horsemen are just their means to contact the mortal plane when the time came for the apocalypse. Aside from that role, they were just supposed to be neutral arbiters of the creators will to make sure everything went as was planned. That's all laid out in the intro movie.
And tricking war makes sense when you take into account that
the council is no longer neutral but is in it for their own ends; we don't quite know what those ends are as of yet but it's safe to assume they're trying to play heaven and hell off each other to gain control over everything in the creators absence. Tricking War was just a ruse to get everything totally fucked up and to keep their hands ostensibly clean of the matter from outside observers.
The fine details aren't there, sure. But it is the first game in a series and many things were left open ended purposefully. But it all makes sense within the context we're given for the first game.
Aww, darksiders 2 is not a true sequel? That sucks because the ending was pretty damn cool
Completed the game just now, fun times. Didn't use scythe at all and the gauntlets only for AoE damage/control with the tremor drop and earthquake.
I was completely stacked full on undyings and greater healing things but I hardly needed them for the final battles, don't think I lost anything at all in the first fight and the second wasn't too bad on my health.
Anyway, not really related, I was kind of disappointed to learn some time ago when they said that Darksiders 2 wouldn't be a sequel but would take place during the same timeframe as the first game and just tell a different story. I find that to be pretty lame. You don't end the game the way they do and they not fucking continue that shit for the sequel.
Now wait... Isn't the second one going to have four players? How are they going to do that if it takes place at the same time?
Anyway, not really related, I was kind of disappointed to learn some time ago when they said that Darksiders 2 wouldn't be a sequel but would take place during the same timeframe as the first game and just tell a different story. I find that to be pretty lame. You don't end the game the way they do and they not fucking continue that shit for the sequel.
Now wait... Isn't the second one going to have four players? How are they going to do that if it takes place at the same time?
Clearly whoever we're following has the mysterious power to create up to 3 other clones of themselves.
Anyway, not really related, I was kind of disappointed to learn some time ago when they said that Darksiders 2 wouldn't be a sequel but would take place during the same timeframe as the first game and just tell a different story. I find that to be pretty lame. You don't end the game the way they do and they not fucking continue that shit for the sequel.
Now wait... Isn't the second one going to have four players? How are they going to do that if it takes place at the same time?
I never read anything where they said it would be 4-player. Did they? I just know that's what everyone on the forums said after beating the first one. "Woo! The 2nd one better be 4-player co-op!"
Chance on
'Chance, you are the best kind of whore.' -Henroid
Anyway, not really related, I was kind of disappointed to learn some time ago when they said that Darksiders 2 wouldn't be a sequel but would take place during the same timeframe as the first game and just tell a different story. I find that to be pretty lame. You don't end the game the way they do and they not fucking continue that shit for the sequel.
Now wait... Isn't the second one going to have four players? How are they going to do that if it takes place at the same time?
I never read anything where they said it would be 4-player. Did they? I just know that's what everyone on the forums said after beating the first one. "Woo! The 2nd one better be 4-player co-op!"
I thought they did. But I might be wrong... I get all the trickle down information from you guys. :P
Well it's implied that the horsemen were effectively in stasis until the Apocalypse; and when they were called forth by the breaking of the seals they were merely supposed to keep check on the sides to make sure they were playing by the rules.
Which is also more or less what the role of the council is supposed to be. The Horsemen are just their means to contact the mortal plane when the time came for the apocalypse. Aside from that role, they were just supposed to be neutral arbiters of the creators will to make sure everything went as was planned. That's all laid out in the intro movie.
And tricking war makes sense when you take into account that
the council is no longer neutral but is in it for their own ends; we don't quite know what those ends are as of yet but it's safe to assume they're trying to play heaven and hell off each other to gain control over everything in the creators absence. Tricking War was just a ruse to get everything totally fucked up and to keep their hands ostensibly clean of the matter from outside observers.
The fine details aren't there, sure. But it is the first game in a series and many things were left open ended purposefully. But it all makes sense within the context we're given for the first game.
It's been a few months but I feel I have to correct this story post!
My understanding is that they knew of Abaddon's plan, but did not have any hard evidence to prove what they were claiming. If they had gone after him without proof, it would have been interpreted as siding with hell. They thought letting Abaddon carry on with his plan would be best. Sending War on a "revenge mission" was just a way to ensure he would be punished without the council ever taking sides to outward observers: the whole thing is just the fault of War.
The only problem with this is that humanity doesn't seem to have any worth in that analysis, but I'm not sure it's been mentioned if the council has any responsibilities to protect humans.
Korlash on
0
Options
Linespider5ALL HAIL KING KILLMONGERRegistered Userregular
edited May 2011
My spider-sense tells me the next game will have you play this guy.
This was easily one of my top 10 games. I thought it was very well done/paced and I enjoyed the story though it did get confusing near the end. I actually bought this game twice once on my 360 then again through steam to play on my PC. I think I liked the KBAM controls infinitely better than the xbox.
Very excited for 2 I hope it is at least as awesome as the first.
also, if you look at the legendary weapon enhancements they are tailored towards a specific one of the 4 horsemen's primary weapon. Wars to chaos eater, deaths to the scythe etc
Yeah, I was super disappointed with the performance of the revolver.
The grapple chain was hilarious good times though, it was like playing DMC 4 without having to deal with Nero's whiny ass.
THQ must be doing its best to ensure that no one cares about the second game. They'd better have one helluva storyline cooked up to make up for not continuing from the awesome note that Darksiders ended on. I was really looking forward to serving up some asswhuppings with the full Horsemen crew.
Anyway, not really related, I was kind of disappointed to learn some time ago when they said that Darksiders 2 wouldn't be a sequel but would take place during the same timeframe as the first game and just tell a different story. I find that to be pretty lame. You don't end the game the way they do and they not fucking continue that shit for the sequel.
Now wait... Isn't the second one going to have four players? How are they going to do that if it takes place at the same time?
I never read anything where they said it would be 4-player. Did they? I just know that's what everyone on the forums said after beating the first one. "Woo! The 2nd one better be 4-player co-op!"
It's not confirmed, but pretty much implied since they've gone on record saying that DS 1 was supposed to be co-op from the beginning, but they weren't big enough as a studio to pull it off. I guess it isn't for certain that they can pull it off now, but it wouldn't surprise me.
But, probably speaking as a minority, I would hate to see it happen. I've never found co-op with more than one player to be particularly fun, and designing the game around it will almost certainly impact the single player content in a negative way, as it usually does. And that's what's important to me.
That, compounded with hearing that it probably won't even be direct sequel, completely decimates my expectations for DS 2. Which is a shame, because I really did love the first game. Still interested in seeing how it turns out, but not getting my hopes up at all.
Cherrn on
All creature will die and all the things will be broken. That's the law of samurai.
I just finished darksiders last night, it was a surprise that a game that very much has a kitchen sink approach to it is just so good. It was never boring, and it never spent to much time with any one mechanic/puzzle. The only bad thing I could say about it is that the controls may be to much for some.
Now I know, the game is very much compared to Zelda* but I got a big Legacy of Kain vibe of the game in both overall tone and the basic play mechanics.
*I've never actually played a Zelda game, I plan on changing this once I finish off my thesis.
Please don't go. The drones need you. They look up to you.
0
Options
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
edited June 2011
You know. While I enjoyed Darksiders I hope they tweak the combat a little bit from the gameplay and visual perspective.
I would say that, as far as visuals go, I hope they beef up how devastating the attacks look the feel of impact when you do them. Kind of like what THQ is doing with that Warhammer game.
Also, add a bit more variety to combat and making up the damage you do.
Posts
Pokemon Safari - Sneasel, Pawniard, ????
XBL - Foreverender | 3DS FC - 1418 6696 1012 | Steam ID | LoL
Then again the world ends in 2012 so it could be just prophecy rather then really good marketing.
It makes perfect sense, as far as the information given. Yes, there are some loose threads for the sequel, but it's largely self contained.
What's makin' u mad, bro?
I used the Scythe a lot too. Mainly using it at the end of sword combos to harvest more souls. It also works great against those little spiders.
http://steamcommunity.com/id/idolninja
Sword is great at fucking up one guy and okay at two or three at once but isn't so good at crowd control.
Fists are mad crazy damage. I whipped this thing out against super dudes and guys with lots of health. It's not so bad against groups of enemies that are really slow or are susceptible to knockback when you get the ground pound, but that leaves you in one spot for ages so if there is an enemy that wont get affected you will get hit.
If it makes perfect sense to you, help me out with my post at the top of this page.
XBL - Foreverender | 3DS FC - 1418 6696 1012 | Steam ID | LoL
You're mostly there. As I remember it, and it's been awhile:
So, really, it all was just a bunch of supernatural red tape.
And I don't think anyone can explain the whole "Going after the Destroyer before Abbadon became the Destroyer" bit. Chalk it up to "The Destroyer" being something of a legend, or a "title" that many beings have had.
That help?
You learn from both Azrael and the Watcher that the Council knew beforehand of Abaddons plans, that there never was any real question of who the culprit in the whole ordeal was. They framed War by letting him lose then punishing him all the while knowing that eventually he would find the truth; but that after that they were still planning on killing him via the Watcher before he could cause any problems by letting everyone else know that the Council was corrupt and let the shit hit the fan.
They exist purely to keep a balance between heaven and hell and to make sure the Creators plan goes according to...plan. But the fact that they knew what was happening and still let it happen and used War in the way they did shows that they are no longer following the direction set out by the Creator.
Anyway, not really related, I was kind of disappointed to learn some time ago when they said that Darksiders 2 wouldn't be a sequel but would take place during the same timeframe as the first game and just tell a different story. I find that to be pretty lame. You don't end the game the way they do and they not fucking continue that shit for the sequel.
Origin: Galedrid - Nintendo: Galedrid/3222-6858-1045
Blizzard: Galedrid#1367 - FFXIV: Galedrid Kingshand
Just think of the Dread Pirate Roberts and it makes more sense.
Origin: Galedrid - Nintendo: Galedrid/3222-6858-1045
Blizzard: Galedrid#1367 - FFXIV: Galedrid Kingshand
Like, what the hell the Horsemen and the Council do or were supposed to do beforehand. And the whole issue of tricking War makes no sense either.
On a general level you can piece together a narrative of sorts but the specifics are just all messed up.
You're in luck, since that's exactly what the sequel is going to be about.
http://steamcommunity.com/id/idolninja
Which is also more or less what the role of the council is supposed to be. The Horsemen are just their means to contact the mortal plane when the time came for the apocalypse. Aside from that role, they were just supposed to be neutral arbiters of the creators will to make sure everything went as was planned. That's all laid out in the intro movie.
And tricking war makes sense when you take into account that
The fine details aren't there, sure. But it is the first game in a series and many things were left open ended purposefully. But it all makes sense within the context we're given for the first game.
Origin: Galedrid - Nintendo: Galedrid/3222-6858-1045
Blizzard: Galedrid#1367 - FFXIV: Galedrid Kingshand
Completed the game just now, fun times. Didn't use scythe at all and the gauntlets only for AoE damage/control with the tremor drop and earthquake.
I was completely stacked full on undyings and greater healing things but I hardly needed them for the final battles, don't think I lost anything at all in the first fight and the second wasn't too bad on my health.
Also, the top hat skeleton was mighty brilliant.
Now wait... Isn't the second one going to have four players? How are they going to do that if it takes place at the same time?
I never read anything where they said it would be 4-player. Did they? I just know that's what everyone on the forums said after beating the first one. "Woo! The 2nd one better be 4-player co-op!"
I thought they did. But I might be wrong... I get all the trickle down information from you guys. :P
It's been a few months but I feel I have to correct this story post!
The only problem with this is that humanity doesn't seem to have any worth in that analysis, but I'm not sure it's been mentioned if the council has any responsibilities to protect humans.
That gun doesn't even make any sense.
Twitter
Very excited for 2 I hope it is at least as awesome as the first.
also, if you look at the legendary weapon enhancements they are tailored towards a specific one of the 4 horsemen's primary weapon. Wars to chaos eater, deaths to the scythe etc
It's unfortunate
The grapple chain was hilarious good times though, it was like playing DMC 4 without having to deal with Nero's whiny ass.
THQ must be doing its best to ensure that no one cares about the second game. They'd better have one helluva storyline cooked up to make up for not continuing from the awesome note that Darksiders ended on. I was really looking forward to serving up some asswhuppings with the full Horsemen crew.
Some folks think the game will be appearing on the cover of the next Game Informer, but this ain't a hard nut to crack: it'll be at E3.
Darksiders was in my top 5 of last year, can't wait to see what's next.
It's not confirmed, but pretty much implied since they've gone on record saying that DS 1 was supposed to be co-op from the beginning, but they weren't big enough as a studio to pull it off. I guess it isn't for certain that they can pull it off now, but it wouldn't surprise me.
But, probably speaking as a minority, I would hate to see it happen. I've never found co-op with more than one player to be particularly fun, and designing the game around it will almost certainly impact the single player content in a negative way, as it usually does. And that's what's important to me.
That, compounded with hearing that it probably won't even be direct sequel, completely decimates my expectations for DS 2. Which is a shame, because I really did love the first game. Still interested in seeing how it turns out, but not getting my hopes up at all.
Now I know, the game is very much compared to Zelda* but I got a big Legacy of Kain vibe of the game in both overall tone and the basic play mechanics.
*I've never actually played a Zelda game, I plan on changing this once I finish off my thesis.
It is 95% done, anyway. But yes, I do too think it is very good and deserves more than a sequel.
Definetly looking up for more stuff from Vigil Games!!
Please don't go. The drones need you. They look up to you.
I would say that, as far as visuals go, I hope they beef up how devastating the attacks look the feel of impact when you do them. Kind of like what THQ is doing with that Warhammer game.
Also, add a bit more variety to combat and making up the damage you do.
Darksiders 2?
:x