I think the "git gud" culture evolved out of a frustration with the frequent bashing the games get for their difficulty, even though the difficulty is exactly what it's supposed to be: adamantium levels of hard. It's okay to admit you can't stomach the perserverance-based gameplay and chalk it up as "not for me". But most of the game's detractors are not that graceful.

Grossly simplifying the situation for brevity, but here it goes.

Like some others above noted TW is a more narrative/atmosphere-oriented affair, while DS follows the Japanese mentality of requiring you to practice for hours on end to perfect your skills, and beat a difficult yet fair challenge only once you accomplish that. In contrast, you won't find many people (if at all) who could not complete TW or similar western games because they were lacking the skills, but because they got bored or lost interest; it is akin to reading a book, anybody can do it if they invest the time.

In that sense the overall philosophy of DS is not any different from other core Japanese game styles like fighting games or shmups. Git-gud idiots are the members of the western community who couldn't handle the sudden influx of "awesome" (disclaimer: I'm biased toward JP games, but appreciate everything else too) when DS suddenly got popular.

I spend 99% of my time playing shmups and (non-Mortal Kombat) fighters, and this is something we see in those communities all the time. New players either outright blame the game for their lack of skills and patience, or they half-assedly beat a simple one and then convince themselves that everybody who can't are 'noobs' and not worthy of their time. Then they go on random forums and start posting shit :)

In short: apples to oranges -- they are very different, but go play both because they're excellent in different ways. Applies to all 3 games in both series.

Not really sure why The Witcher 3 is brought up. Both series are completely different from how they play and how they tell a story.

As far as my thoughts on Dark Souls 3 goes...nothing right now. I played like 30 minutes so far (which isn't really enough for me to say anything about most stuff), but the menu theme is pretty dope. Once I get further down the line I'll probably post something in the "What are you playing" thread.

I think Dark Souls 1 still looks beautiful with all the DSFix enhancements enabled. Each to their own.

I'm not even sure what your complaint about auto aim and auto save is.

The series is light on story, but has some interesting lore and characters between the action. I don't think most people are playing these games for good story telling.

Some games are just designed for a console controller, I find every Dark Souls game unplayable with a KB / Mouse.

Totally different games.

Seems like you mostly attracted troll posts with your question...

I made a topic about Dark Souls 3 myself a while back, when I bought it. I already shared a few of my first impressions there, but most of it focused on the technical aspects, such as performance, the installation via Steam etc. I've since spent much more time playing DS3, but still I haven't completed my first playthrough. I might update the thread with some more thoughts on the game, once I've reached the end of the main storyline.

Here's the thread, if you're interested: https://www.gog.com/forum/general/dark_souls_3_retail_versions_steam_cheese

Meanwhile, just let me say this: The game itself is excellent. If you enjoyed one of the previous Souls games at all, then you can't go wrong with DS3. As for the technical quality, I'm not sure where the whole "bad console port" talk comes from, because I found it to be near flawless. It runs smoothly, has short loading times, and so far not a single crash. Overall, the PC version actually seems to be the best version of the game, as long your system is reasonably decent.

Regardless of the size of my package ( which is quite impressive... but I digress ), I just wanted to say: If you ignore all the "hardest game evar" bullshit, and the "messiah of video gaming" hype, and really give the series a chance, then you might just find that, at the very least, they are excellent Action-RPGs with some very unique and memorable ideas.

But I will agree that the success of Dark Souls 1 and its push towards the Western market ( with the Xbox360 & PC release etc. ) attracted a lot of idiots. But then, so does any other major video game release, especially if it has any kind of competitive multiplayer features.

It probably comes from the many people affected by issues your anecdotal experience didn't happen to encounter. Most of the recent negative reviews on Steam mention bugs and other technical issues.

It's not as if the developer has a history of stellar pc ports.

They have 3 PC games and 1 bad port, which was their first PC game ever so I think they can be cut a little slack.

And user reviews, the newer generations of PC gamers whine like little babies if their FPS drops below 60 for a moment and have zero troubleshooting skills to fix the simplest of issues that could be the cause of their problems.

Yes the masses of people bitching about being banned inexplicably are just pussies - real men don't complain about that shit.

It's not inexplicable, it's either cheaters or people that have played with cheaters. And it's not really banning, it just limits your co-op and invasions to other people that are flagged.

I'm not sure I'd consider 50+ hours of gameplay without a single technical problem as "anecdotal experience". Even if there are some problems, which for one reason or another I haven't encountered, it's still smoother and more stable than any other AAA/ AA game I've played in recent years. That's a far cry from a "bad port".

And the only Souls game known to have a questionable port is Dark Souls 1, which was apparently From Soft's first venture into the PC market ( and even that wasn't originally planned -- they only did the port, because PC gamers practically demanded their own version of the game ).
That sounds about right. And those would be exactly the type of people to whine about their bans afterwards, down-rate the game etc.

I'm not even much into the online aspects of the game, but I'm glad they're doing something about cheaters. In a multiplayer environment cheating is a no-go, since it quickly ruins the fun for everyone else.

Of course it could only be those two possibilities - some random dude on the internet like you would know. Further all of the people on Steam losing their shit over saved games getting deleted are - how did you phrase it? Just 'babies' that can't deal with minor 'troubleshooting" issues.

In other words - as you said - Dark Souls 3 is a fully functioning game no one should complain about - divas.

And what are steam reviews other than a bunch of random assholes on the internet? Just cause there's a lot of them doesn't make them any smarter.

Right because that 50hrs was spread over 50 different hardware setups?

I'm sure QA follows that rule too - 50hrs is all they need on one rig to know something works right?
Yes anyone that doesn't share your experience and thought on the matter = random asshole on the internet. That seems reasonable.