Triple feature: EYE: Divine Cybermancy Review, Read Only Memories (demo) review, some long term goals for this blog.

EYE is a really bizarre game. I love it, but like many games I love, it's terrifically scruffy and flawed, but there's something about that game that makes me willing to forgive its flaws. It's a first-person shooter that plays more like an RPG--you create a character with certain stats, level him to what you want to do, equip him by unlocking items, and have an array of options from guns, swords, cybernetics, mind powers, and literal no-holds-barred magic. It gives a Shadowrun feel with its blend of dark cyberpunk dystopia with arcane and bizarre sorcery.

To get the cons out of the way: It's completely unpolished and poorly translated, the textures look like ass, and you'll probably fall through the map or get stuck on geometry at least once, and probably more times than that. You'll find missions unbeatable because an enemy fell through the map or because an ally's dialogue tree broke.

Every level sprawls with optional quests which you're left to find yourself. Occasionally you'll get a prompt, but it's rare, and there's usually more quests than the prompt dictates. There's usually layers and layers of areas inside of one mission zone.

The story is arcane, difficult to follow, and yet great, with countless factions plotting against each other as public (and private) secrets. You'll make deals with bandits, generals, and your worst enemies. You'll go undercover and then have the option to stay in that faction forever.

I'd recommend EYE if you like cyberpunk style and don't mind a game that's (very) rough around the edges. It has a lot of content and plenty of silly options to keep you entertained for a while if you match its wavelength.

-------------

For a cyberpunk feature in the opposite direction, Read Only Memories is colorful, fairly well polished and controlled, and very lively--but still undeniably cyberpunk. It's a point-and-click adventure game in the first-person perspective. The puzzles were pretty straightforward, but it was the demo after all--and this particular adventure game is more about the character interaction than anything else.

You're approached by a sentient robot whose creator has been kidnapped for mysterious purposes. Its cookie-cutter plot aside, the characters seem to have real depth and interesting backgrounds, the art is fantastic, and most of the world can be explored and learned about, even if a lot of it might sound like you've read it in 5 William Gibson novels before.

ROM really is in the opposite direction, because while EYE takes a route that's perhaps sloppily executed but so off-the-wall and full of content that you might find it entertaining regardless, ROM takes a relatively safe approach to the cyberpunk experience (except for being a point-in-click in 2015) and polishes it to a mirror shine. It's a little unfair to point out it has less content than EYE since only the demo is currently available, but one can tell even with a brief playthrough it doesn't come with the 'more-is-more' attitude EYE brought to the table. That said, it's wonderfully executed, the dialogue is cleverly written, and the demo--which is free and available here. Give it a shot!

I'm definitely looking forward to the full version of ROM, and I think you should too.

--------------

There are a few things I've wanted to do for a while that I think would be good options for this blog.

First, I'm going to try and start streaming again. This will require a connection with a great deal of bandwidth, which I do not have. I think this motel's connection could be reasonably measured in baud.

In the meantime, I'll try and review games as I'm playing them on the blog here. There's plenty of new games coming out I'm interested in, and while I won't always be able to shell out for a triple-A title, I'll try to do at least one new one a month.

I also have a horrifically tainted attempt at a Let's Play channel that never really got off the ground. I tried to LP Far Cry 3 like, 3 times. Each time I failed horribly, more each time than the last. The LPs before that were mired in technical difficulties (read: I know slightly more about video editing than the history of Mongolian royal families, in that I know that video editing does, in fact, exist in the present day.), poor presentation, and general tomfoolery. The only way I could really see resolving this would be to get someone to partner with me and help with commentary while I play the games--dual LPs always seem to do the best. (The only solo LPer I watch these days is supergreatfriend.)

My ultimate long term goal is to get an original Xbox and play some games that didn't make it to the Xbox 360 backwards compatibility line-up. There were great titles you can't find anymore, on 360 or on the PC. I'm looking at YOU, Jet Set Radio Future!

For now, though, I think I'll take the easy road and do some reviews of games I think didn't receive enough attention.

Time for some backlogged game reviews.

A lot of stuff's happened since my last game review, but I won't bore you with the details.

Let's talk about video games.

I've played quite a bit of games since Dark Souls. I say "since Dark Souls," but I still pick it up with some considerable purpose now and then. NG6+ won't beat itself.

Anyways, I played two diametrically opposed games in that time in-between, and I think both deserve more press than they get. They aren't *super* indie, but people don't talk about them enough.

The first is The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind. I used to think of myself as a huge elder scrolls fan, but looking back I think literally every Elder Scrolls title could stand to learn from Morrowind. Go backwards in time to Arena and Daggerfall, and you find a hopelessly retarded UI, broken code, and worlds largely made of copy-pasted cells and towns with the sole intent of being mind-numbingly massive. Everywhere in Elder Scrolls I and II looks the same, because it's all very poorly procedurally generated. I suppose that was considered amazing in the 90s, but then again so were pogs.

The later titles, Oblivion and Skyrim, bear their own faults. Oblivion is easily the worst elder scrolls game--I say the worst because I like to pretend Elder Scrolls Online doesn't exist. I played the beta and made dry-heaving noises the entire time--Oblivion, for all its production value and attempt to suck you into the game, simply doesn't have the balls that Morrowind did. The world is bland, boring fantasy land number a billion--the world feels like a Renaissance festival with exceptionally bad cosplayers--the character models are, amazingly, even uglier than Morrowind's, the grass is way too manicured, and the small inventions they eventually turned into Skyrim don't save the game from ultimate mediocrity.

Skyrim itself seems like they were simultaneously trying to please the "mainstream" audience and snivelling fanboys who were incensed at the lack of werewolves in (vanilla) Morrowind, the lack of dual-wielding, and so on. (I personally find dual-wielding absurd, unless you're dual-wielding rocket launchers. See Advent Rising) The combat system, while a vast improvement over its predecessors, still sucks indescribable amounts of ass, and it's usually easier and more rewarding to sneak around and shoot stuff from a distance. Of course, once your sneak skill becomes absurd and you have chameleon enchanted on every possible wearable item, that stops being the case too.

So what did Morrowind have that neither its predecessors nor its descendants did?

I already gave the answer away--balls.

Morrowind was a highly experimental game. I can't say it didn't fail in a lot of respects--the combat is boring, slow, and requires no real strategy. The core gameplay could be described as "walking a lot." It's not brave or amazing because of any of its core gameplay values, but because it immerses you in a unique, beautiful world, and damn well expects you to get interested.

Characters in the main story expect you to read about the history of the world. It's immensely slow-paced, and it's perfectly fine with that. I played a character who, rather than fighting, tended to bribe or smooth-talk her way to her goal. This was not only extremely lucrative, but also gave me an excuse to delve into the rich world Bethesda built around this particular masterwork.

I can't recommend Morrowind to people who got into Elder Scrolls at Skyrim. You'll curse at the fact you aren't shooting lightning out of your fingers within 3 minutes. It's a game for people who prefer books, Curl up, relax, and enjoy the scenery. You'll go through swamps, roads made by lava, mushroom towers, craggy islands, an entire city section built inside of a crab shell, and chat with a couple gods along the way.

Now let's talk about Morrowind's complete logical opposite, which also happens to be amazing.

I speak, of course, of Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance.

MGR was originally called Metal Gear Solid: Rising. The idea was that it would contain fast-paced stealth that required you to use acrobatic manuevers to stay hidden. You'd also be able to strategically cut off limbs or pieces of a machine by aiming your sword in "Blade Mode." Kojima had trouble designing the game and turned it over to Platinum Games, famed at the time for their work on Devil May Cry and Bayonetta.

Platinum scrapped (most of) the stealth and instead focused on the action. And I mean *really* focused. The combat is fast paced, requires a great deal of timing and patience despite that there's usually more than one dismembered limb in the air at any given time.

And, well, you can do this:

That's the first boss fight, by the way.

As demonstrated in the above video, well thought out quick-time events sprinkle the action with intense short videos of acrobatic robot murder. The best part is MGR still feels like a Metal Gear game: there's plenty of codec calls that offer context to the world around you, lots of Kojima's natural story-telling weirdness that combines seemingly rational ideas with completely insane ones (strangely enough, I'd say this story is a little more sensible than some of the MGS titles, especially 2.), and of course, lots of insanely long cutscenes.

I wound up playing Morrowind after MGR, perhaps to get a breather. It didn't last too long, because I was stupid and killed a vital NPC. At some point I'll get off my lazy, dumb ass and get her back with a console command. Until then, I'm playing Warframe, which I'll review when I stop sucking at it.

My overall message is you should be open to games of various paces. A slow paced game has just as much to offer as a fast-paced one, and vice versa--if done properly, the pace won't inhibit the designer's ability to communicate through their medium. If you're more into slow-paced games, give yourself a chance to delve into some action with MGR. If you prefer adrenaline pumping games, try out something a little slower with Morrowind.

'Hatred' trailer: Why this trailer frustrates me

Here's the trailer link. It's extremely violent. It's only a minute thirty or so, but it's very, very disturbing. Make sure little eyes and ears are far away.

Destructive Creations is a new developer, and this is their first game. They're using Unreal Engine 4, which is about the only thing I can say they've presented about their game I actually like. My gut reaction to this trailer was a deep feeling of sadness--at first, for the innocent characters being mercilessly slaughtered on screen. Second, that someone in the game industry saw fit to take many, many steps backward. The dark, edgy tone combined with the senseless murder reeks of a game trying too hard to make controversy without enough of a serious message to back it up.

This trailer, to be fair, did make me think. Of course, I was thinking about why I had such a strong negative reaction to it, and why I would never, ever buy or recommend this game. But it might be a valid argument to say I'm somewhat hypocritical for not wanting this game. After all, I've played many games that do some of the same things the trailer depicts. I've played dark toned games, I've played violent games where the violence itself was senseless, graphic, and brutal, I've played games where you were the villain and slaughtered innocent people. I've played games that were all three of those combined. So why does Hatred stick in my craw so darn much?

Let's see what the developers had to say about their game. I've bolded certain portions for emphasis, because they make it clear they had no idea what they wanted to do with this concept from the beginning.

"Hatred is an isometric shooter with disturbing atmosphere of mass killing, where player takes the role of a cold blood antagonist, who is full of hatred for humanity. It's a horror, but here YOU are the villain. Wander the outskirts of New York State, seek for victims on seven free-roam levels. Fight against law enforcement and take a journey into the antagonist's hateful mind. Gather equipment of the dead ‘human shields’ to spread Armageddon upon society. Destroy everything on your way of hunt and fight back when it's disturbed...

...just don't try this at home and don't take it too seriously, it's just a game. :)

The question you may ask is: why do they do this? These days, when a lot of games are heading to be polite, colorful, politically correct and trying to be some kind of higher art, rather than just an entertainment – we wanted to create something against trends. Something different, something that could give the player a pure, gaming pleasure. Herecomes our game, which takes no prisoners and makes no excuses. We say ‘yes, it is a game about killing people’ and the only reason of the antagonist doing that sick stuff is his deep-rooted hatred. Player has to ask himself what can push any human being to mass-murder. We provoke this question using new Unreal Engine 4, pushing its physics (or rather PhysX) systems to the limits and trying to make the visuals as good as possible. It's not a simple task, because of the game's non-linear structure and a lot of characters on the screen. But here at Destructive Creations, we are an experienced team and we know how to handle the challenge!"

Once this contradiction we saw in the trailer is enumerated, Hatred's primary problem suddenly becomes clear--the creators, and by extension the creation both suffer from cognitive dissonance. In simpler terms, they want to have their cake and eat it, too. 

Are we supposed to be relaxing and having fun blowing away a bunch of sprites without empathizing with them, or are we supposed to be going on a dark, serious journey through the mind of a disturbed individual? If it's the former, why make the characters cry and beg for their lives in carefully rendered detail--why try to stoke any empathy with them at all? Make them cartoonish sprites (Hotline Miami), make them say amusing things when they die (Saints Row 4), make it multiplayer so there's a sense that the character we're "killing" is just an avatar of a real person who isn't actually affected in any serious way. The bottom line is, keep reinforcing to the player that this is just a game, via the mechanics and tone of the game itself. When you're having the kind of fun these games are supposed to offer (it's called 'abnegation,' where you lose yourself in a simple, monotonous, but nevertheless entertaining activity to allow your brain to rest), heavy concepts should be shown the door.

But if instead, we're supposed to ask ourselves what can push any human being to mass-murder, then purposefully fun (remember: "pure, gaming pleasure") abnegative gameplay isn't the right tool for the job. Instead, the gameplay and settings could either be varied, allowing for many different opportunities to build on the character (see The Last of Us and Tomb Raider, which include differing gameplay elements and dynamic characters--a great combination!) or could be a purposefully boring slog (Spec Ops: The Line, or, on the more obscure indie side of things, Bunnies vs. Bunnies. I'm not kidding about that last one--it's a dead serious game about genocide. It's quite brilliant in execution. If you're up for that kind of experience, give it a shot) that forces the player to think about why someone would do something like that.

From both the trailer and the statement of the developers, Hatred is a game without any real direction.  Unlike many bad games that suffer from bad publisher practices, poor optimzation, bad writing--this game's entire concept was flawed from the beginning. I think it's fair to say not only is Hatred unlikely to be good, It's impossible for it to be good--it's taken two very separate directions at once.

--

As a final side note, I'm incredibly confused that they seem to think games trying to become some kind of higher art is a bad thing, or something that ought to have a counterculture--like there needs to be something to bring games back from the precipice of snobbiness. First, making a fun, engaging game is an art form--there's a reason Chess or Shogi or Go have been around so long, and those have no narrative to speak of. They simply have deep and fascinating game mechanics. Second, why *wouldn't* you want it to become a higher art? I honestly hope and believe that someday we'll have video games that have the same mythic quality as the Iliad, the same mystique as the Mona Lisa, or the same grandeur as Notre Dame. I don't think it's foolish, immature, or shortsighted to think that won't be out of reach for humankind. I can't say there are video games like that now, but that says nothing about the genre itself--video games are only, by the most generous estimations, 67 years old. Think about that. How many other art forms--not in the general sense of art genres like romanticism or modernism, but literally entire new ways of expression--like music or sculpting or painting--are only that old? It has a lot of room to grow. That art form has grown, and not just because of technology--because of a growing heritage of games to build on. To demonstrate, here's a game about love. and here's a game about loneliness. In both games, everything is a square. (Okay, so Love has some lines and a circle at times, as well.)

Stream next week!

I was happy to see a good turnout of folks on the stream last Sunday. I think I'll make this a regular thing. Tune in any time between 5 and 9:30 pm, CST, and I'll play video games for you.

From now on, I'll put anything I do on streams on a schedule the day after the previous stream. I have a few interesting games on PC that I think would be fun to show off. Most are fairly big name titles, but I've got a couple interesting indie and AA* games that should hold your attention. For the most part, I'll just be going through my Steam library. I'll try to give each game at least an hour of screen time. Dark Souls 1 or 2 may be on regularly--I got them both recently and I'm getting tons of replay value out of them--but not every week.

Our final game for the night will always be an audience choice. I'll list a sampling of my steam library and let you pick a game. I'll also let you know if this sampling contains some interesting, wonderful, or awful games. (All of which might make for interesting viewing!) I'll link a picture of the sampling here on the blog if you want some time to think about the decision, and we're done with our penultimate game of the night, I'll open up a picture of the sampling and let you guys choose from it. All the games will already be installed. If you have me on steam, know I have a certain game not on that list, and want me to stream that, make your decision at least a day before the stream so I can download it ahead of time.

Audience Choice roster for the week,

Next week's stream schedule should go something like:

5:00 - Far Cry 3: How do I hold all these explosives
6:00 - Alpha Protocol: You ain't seen what we seen
7:00 - Dark Souls 2: The continuing adventures of Punchmaster
8:00 - Audience Choice

*AA is a term for games with a higher budget than an indie title but still relatively small compared to the overall industry--usually in the 1-5 million dollar range.

Dark Souls Review

Dark Souls is the best game experience I've had to date. I don't say that lightly. I have 197 games in my steam library, and while I no longer own many of my other games, I'd be wiling to place betting money that I've played at least that many console and computer games outside of Steam. Video games are my preferred medium—some people have books, some have comics, some have movies, some have bas-reliefs built from bubble gum, I have games. (Though I still enjoy plenty of the former, excepting the bas-reliefs.) From Software has created a masterpiece not only of gameplay, but of storytelling, atmosphere, and design. While casual gamers might be turned away by the steep difficulty curve, those who press on will find a rich, challenging, and powerful experience.

Dark Souls is an Action RPG developed by From Software, a Japanese game development company that's been in the business for over 20 years. Their original foray into action RPG titles was King's Field on the PS1. The bones of Dark Souls can be found there—challenging gameplay, a mysterious environment, and a plot that plays its cards close to the chest. They've had plenty of other forays into various genres, however—point-and-click adventure, survival horror, and a rather famed mecha shooter series known as “Armored Core.” (That deserves its own review sometime. I still have a copy of AC: For Answer.) I like to think they've brought skills from each of those forays into making Dark Souls. Its environments beg for attention, much like a well made point-and-click; the atmosphere is dark and harrowing, much like survival horror; and the action is tight and tactical, much like a mecha shooter

In Dark Souls, you are an undead, a person born with a horrible curse known as “Hollowing” that will ultimately result in the breaking of your mind and soul. In fact, Hollowed undead are frequently your opponents throughout the game. You're taken to the northern land of Lordran and indefinitely detained in an Asylum, but freed by a mysterious knight who tells you of a prophecy handed down in his family--”He who rings the Bells of Awakening will know the fate of the Undead.”

With only this lead to go on, you are plunged into a dark, rich, beautiful, and above all dangerous world. Dark Souls is renowned for its difficulty and certainly doesn't disappoint—you'll die, a lot, and early on the game is especially punishing. However, you might press on, as many have, and once you've learned the essentials of parrying, dodging, backstabbing, and so on, you'll find Dark Souls offers a huge and varied feast of experiences. Whether you're there for the atmosphere and story, to studiously collect every hidden item and best every foe, or to battle against human enemies in PvP, you'll be floored by the master craftsmanship evident in From Software's Magnum Opus.

Dark Souls has the best story execution I've seen in a game. Dark Souls doesn't give anything up easily, and the story is no exception—if you want to get the full story of the lore, read item descriptions, talk to NPCs, and explore often. Even after beating the game once, you'll be left with many unanswered questions. It expects you to get the story through careful study of your surroundings—not through a cutscene that handily explains every loose end. If you've been made used to ignoring details about a game that don't make sense, you'll want to shake that tendency when you play Dark Souls. Nothing is by accident here.

The story and atmosphere of Dark Souls is dark (appropriately) and oppressive. Silent Hill 2 fans will not be disappointed—it's got that old, familiar perspective of being a small, insignificant being caught in massive machinery which only barely recognizes you as a threat. I remember going into an area (accessible, but not recommended, at the beginning of the game) where enemy models from the tutorial zone were present, but didn't pay me any heed—they were praying to withered vases, staring out into a dark sea, weeping in corners, or bashing their heads on walls. This small detail of temporarily transforming these enemies into set pieces did wonders for the atmosphere. For the first two-thirds of the game, there's no fast travel except for hidden shortcuts that you must ferret out for yourself. (There is also no map, mini or otherwise, at any point in the game. You have to find your way yourself.) These shortcuts both make the game itself incredibly immersive and belies brilliant level design—the work that goes into making an elevator that goes from one sprawling, open-ended area to another be geographically accurate is phenomenal and daunting, and these shortcuts are offered throughout the whole game world.

The gameplay itself is tight and functions well, and though some controls are finnicky (a jumping attack directly after a roll was still deep magic at the end of my playthrough) it won't detract from your overall experience. The game features little to no randomness (the only random element is item drop rates), so any time you die, you'll know exactly *why* you died—you'll be able to try again being more informed. That's rare in almost any game for me—in what I would call a well-crafted game, about 70% of my deaths were due to my own mistakes while 30% seemed to be the result of the internal dice not going my way, poor controls or simply bad design. In Dark Souls, *every* death was a learning experience—I can't say that of any game I've played since the PS1. (Spyro the Dragon, for those inquiring. As an interesting trivium, this is the only game that my Dad has ever reviewed.) It manages to walk the fine line of making an Action RPG very well—your character build matters, but it will never be a sufficient substitute for skill. Every build requires something of the player.

Perhaps the bravest choice Dark Souls makes is its slow pace. It demands the player take their time and think through a situation, rather than mash buttons and hope for victory. I tried going to an early level area after finding some powerful gear and grinding some levels. I played how I would a poorly made beat-'em-up—mashing my attack key, occasionally blocking, and hoping for the best. Despite my superior equipment, I was still beaten—badly. The enemies dodged, blocked, and parried my feeble attempts, despite being well below my level. Soon I was back to holding my shield up, waiting for openings, rolling under the arc of attacks and counter-attacking at a more advantageous angle. There are a slew of environmental hazards as well—bottomless pits, fortresses full of devious traps, invisible walkways over chasms of razor-sharp crystalline structures. But each time, you're given the tools to best these dangers, even if you don't realize it immediately. If there's a way to play Dark Souls, it's this—take your time, take nothing for granted, and adapt as quickly as possible.

Finally, if you're tired of newer games costing too much and playing too little, Dark Souls: Prepare to Die edition (containing expansion content) is only $20 on Steam. It's rare that you see a $20 game that can hold your attention for—according to my gameplay time—over 63 hours. That 63 hours was far from a 100% playthrough—there were plenty of unexplored areas left. I'm not even sure I scratched the surface of the expansion content. After beating the game, you're instantly transported into “new game plus,” which increases the difficulty of all the enemies and gives you the chance to play the game over again, perhaps acquiring things you missed previously. The game is programmed so that infinite iterations of new game plus are available, so you can play the game over on the same character as many times as you like. I'll probably try a new character concept out rather than continue in NG+. My original was a heavy armored beast of a man who played through most of the game with a dragon's tooth re-purposed as a massive club in one hand and a weighty, spartanesque shield in the other, but throughout the game I found fascinating spells that begged to be cast, and weapons made for the dexterous hand, neither of which my beast could use to any effect.

GAME ADVICE TIME! This will be longer than usual, as Dark Souls is a game that requires a lot from the player. I'd love to see more people get into this game, so I'll try and ease that difficult early learning curve as best I can. If this review inspires you to pick up the game—or if you've just picked up recently out of mere serendipity—feel free to shoot me a message.

The best advice one can give is to make good use of the wikis. There are two main wikis, and if you have the patience to do so, cross-reference them. For the most part, the wikia is more helpful:http://darksouls.wikia.com/wiki/Dark_Souls_Wiki but I've noticed the wikidot has better articles at times, notably their article on poise.http://darksouls.wikidot.com/ If you have a friend who's played the game before, make a resource of them—you'll need it.

if you get the game on PC, I highly suggest acquiring a controller of your choice (make sure it's PC compatible—i.e., have a tutorial video for installation at the ready, unless you've chosen an Xbox 360 controller, of course). You'll want maximum control over your movement and WASD and mouse controls simply won't cut it. I personally used a Dualshock 3 because Dualshock controllers have been my favorite since their inception, but to each their own. If this is your first time using a controller and you've chosen NOT to use an Xbox 360 gamepad, make sure you can find a tutorial for installation somewhere. I went through three different drivers for the Dualshock 3 before I found one that worked at all.

Get the Master Key starting gift. You'll thank me later.

If your equipment load is over half of your maximum, your rolls will be slow and clumsy and your run speed will be slower as well. This is known as 'fatrolling' and will inevitably end up going poorly for you. The two most straightforward ways to alleviate this issue are to wear lighter armor or increase your Endurance stat (which is a useful stat for almost everyone, btw—it also increases Stamina, meaning you can roll, run, jump, attack, and block more often), but there is a third route. If you slay the (very, very hard) boss at the bottom of the tower which leads to the Taurus Demon (you'll need the master key to get there from Undead Burg, but you can access it in Darkroot Basin as well, just next to the area with the crystal golems and the hydra), his ring will increase your equipment load by 50. Try to manuever around his attacks and strike him from his backside. His double handed overhead is unblockable, and if you try to roll to his side while he does it, he'll follow your movements and hit you. I'm not sure if it's an instant kill at all times, but I never survived it once. Any time you see him preparing this move, get back.

There is a reason literally every class starts with a shield. Shields are the most useful equipment in the game—if you're fighting a tough new boss, the best strategy is often to switch to a shield that best blocks their damage type. I frequently cleaned my inventory of various weapons, but I kept every shield I found, and made use of almost every one.

Since you'll almost certainly need to know: the Stability stat determines how much stamina an attack will drain from you if it makes contact with your shield. This is the main advantage of greatshields—they tend to have stability in the 65-80 range, while other shields are closer to 40-60. Poise determines how difficult you are to stagger. You'll probably want to have somewhere around 55 for light armor and at least 76 for heavier armors, especially if you're planning on PvP. (I can't speak much on PvP—it never went well for me, sadly) The Havel's Armor set, found in Anor Londo, grants the highest poise in the game at 121, but is immensely heavy.

That's all. If you're looking for a challenge or an atmospheric setting and mysterious story, I couldn't recommend this game enough.