I mean if I wanted to play DS1 again without poise, likable characters and a busted Dark Moon convenient then... no why would I play that? I dislike DS3 because I wasted too many hours to that game trying to like it. I have probably 500 hours over in it verse my 1200 in DS2 and 1000+ in DS1. The only real redeeming DS3 content is the final DLC which was good. Ashes sucked ass though.
"I decided I was going to talk to every NPC, listen to all their dialogue, no skipping, minimal use of the wiki and try a different build." So you tried to actually play the game for once and had FUN? What a shocking revelation!
Well... he didn't the cat talks for lengths about the four great souls, the same does Vengarl, the Wizard in Huntsmans Copse, the other guy in Lost Bastille and Shanalotte.
@@Teerapatkongrat outside of dlc almost every single area in ds2 can be directly walked to from majula? So idk what u mean it's not connected like ds1 ds3 is the only one of the 3 that has no connection to it's firelink/hub area
Honestly, I do have a 'feeling' for drangleic, for me it feels sad, cold and so so distant, as if the entire land was a ghost house, but not a scary ghost house, but a forgotten one that was there for so so so long that it forgot everything about itself; Dark Souls 1 is agressive, overbearing and terrifying, like the catacombs to a child; while Dark Souls 2 is ruins of a village after a great fire. You look around and the smoke and debris and little bits of flame are still dangerous to you, but you feel more sad than endangered. Dark Souls 3 is powerful; it's a violent road that expects excellency and fearlessness, where you need to buckle up, sharpen your sword and tense your neck, because YOU WILL FIGHT FOR YOUR LIFE. Dark Souls 1 is mistery. Dark Souls 3 is dangerus. Dark Souls 2 is sorrow.
I agree dude. I loved 2 because it felt so much like Kings Field. More exploration focused than the others. Even more so since teleporting wasn't gated behind progress. They expected you to reach some dead ends. And wander around.
@@zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcba0 i felt that the 1 achieved the sense of exploration and sadness more than the 2 ,but the 2 has different sadness,like he said, like a sorrowful empty village,while the one a somewhat darker hill ,full of green grass.
@@princevaldym7606 thats true about the feel thing but has nothing wrong, the only thing that does playing first ds2 than 1 is be shocked by how good both games are when they are so different. you lose nothing playing ds2 before ds1, if you ask me, quite the opposite, the majority of ppl who played ds2 first and then played ds1 agrees that both games are good, and ds1 is better overall, in the other side the ppl who played ds1 before ds2 say that ds1 is the best game ever(not gonna say if its true or not really i dont care) and that ds2 is shit(generalizing in both cases). normally ppl who played ds1 didnt like ds2 because it wasnt the same game and searching "wrongs" instead of enjoying.
same for me, same same, I always wanted to play a souls game and I couldn't get the first one but the second one was incredibly difficult for me, I played for hours and hours learning so much and had lots of hardships, the journey was grazy hard for me but fun as hell
What I simply respect, even value so much about Dark Souls 2 is that it is a non-Miyazaki Souls game, made "only" by the "B-Team", was rushed to no end and had a lead-change mid developement and yet it did so much right. Things that Dark Souls 1 did not have or did wrong were implemented and improved, even Dark Souls 3 neglected some of the things Dark Souls 2 created. Of all the things this game had going against it it still ended up having gotten so many things so right.
I always believed the hit boxes in DS2 ultimately made my timing and anticipation better for parrying and dodging, what with how broken it was. It made every other soulsbourne game feel like they had training wheels on lol
@@LeftSinkHandle Super this. DS2 was my first souls game and I beat it with the keyboard and mouse since I didn't have a controller at the time. nothing has come close to the insanely fun challenge of not only learning how Darksouls itself worked, but figuring out all of the controls without any button prompts as well. in DS3 the Dancer was the first boss to actually give me trouble, and Bloodbourn has been an absolute breeze when I occasionally play it on a friend's PS4, I'm 3 bosses deep and haven't died to a boss yet. so yeah I still wear only the Faaram set or Mirra set in dark souls 3, fight me. (it was also pretty cool to find the Ruin Sentinels armor in the Ringed City)
The reason i hate this game is the bugs and the movement. also the dlcs are just awful and bugged the eff out. Your sword will break in the Sinh dragon fight.
@@buckiemohawk3643 translate lol Não há nenhum bug que atrapalhe a jogatina, e há vários deles que vc tem que procurar causar, a movimentação não é problema também, ao menos que vc esteja jogando no teclado Dlcs horriveis? Senhor jesus, as dlcs de ds2 são ótimas, n é porque vc n consegue matar um chefe que ela é ruim
I'm surprised to hear you say you got SOTFTS without mentioning the DLCs at all. They have some of the best lore in the game and completion of them unlocks what I feel is the true ending to the game.
THIS. I mean to have a re-review of Dark Souls II praising its strengths and NOT mention the Ivory King Old Chaos fight is just ridiculous; it's one of the best (imo THE best) boss fight in the series
@@easterislehead oh yeah that fight gave me cancer because of its difficulty and difficulty doesn't come from the boss but the gank you have to face every time before fighting the boss which made learning boss's moves hard to learn
@@shashlik7959 Oh, sorry, I thought you ment you had low health when dealing with him. About the time, I beat him again a few days ago and I didn't find it took that long, but maybe that's just because I beat the entire game quickly, so I think I might have just not found it that bad in comparison with this game's borderline fetish with not having shortcuts to the bosses (Vanilla DS2 with DLCs, by the way).
Same my dude. I went into it after hearing all the hatred for years because I wanted to play every Souls game. Before the game was even over I was like “This game has a ton of problems, but god damn if I don’t love the hell out of it”. Turns out the hatred was extremely overblown and it’s actually a really fun, mostly well done game, one of my favorites actually.
I wasn't aware there was hate at all for Dark Souls 2 until my friend began to hate me and did everything he could to stay away from me. I lost a friend because I *didn't share the same opinion on a fucking game*
I am not those guys I am not a tough internet guy I am just a man of taste who knows that anyone who liked dark souls 2 liked dark souls for the wrong reasons or is a LIAR ok?
I didnt think I was being a douchebag I just thought what I was saying was just an accepted matter of public record. I thought OP WAS BEING THE DOUCHEBAG! haha
well ds1 wasn't actually that good as a souls game if you take the nostalgia goggles off so... your comment is a bit pointless. till this day, there is no souls content worse than practically all of ds1's second half. except maybe black gulch.
AH silver DS1 is actually good. I played it for the first time on the remaster after played DS 3 2 and bloodborne. DS1 is so much better than 2 it’s not even close.
Upon my daily meditation in majula? I made a horrific yet mesmerizing discovery concerning finer details of the surrounding graphics concerning majula especially...if anyone considers the books in the bible to be a possibility of truth?.....dark souls is a perfect setting that may describe the world we live in shortly before and after the great deluge...or "noah's flood".....the great pinnacle seen from everywhere is the tower of babel....the surrounding mountains?...if you look?.....you can see the petrified remains of the titans and hybrids that decomposed in a wax like fashion until petrification...the standing stones in the sea are women petrified....in the book of enoch it says the wives of nephilim became sirens.....the receding waters in majula.....to me?...I think it's a way of someone with alot of understanding of the past showing us in plain sight how the past was.......and I made one more discovery in the distant background.....I found a cross....the crucifixion cross....and the abbreviation of....U.S.A.....ill make a video soon on my channel.....call me crazy idga fiddler's fuck..... because I been around long enough to know if you can't take criticism?..you'll be ruined by compliments.
The cat Shalquior talks at length about all four of the Great Souls. The Lost Sinner is expanded upon by Straid Of Olaphis and even steady hand Mc Duff says some cryptic stuff about her, and Ornifex the weapon smith tells you some things about The Freja and if you unlock all his conversasions more is said by Man Scorpion Tark.
zxb995511 don't think I've ever seen anyone cover this detail in ds3 when it can to lore, but in the cathedral of the deep, there's cat like figures on the wall everywhere. not sure what it's supposed to mean but I belive they were also in ds2, in the castle.
Those cat statues are also in Bloodborne (in Cainhurst). I'm pretty sure they're just a real life architectural design that From have appropriated rather than anything lore significant. Banal, I know!
Didn't care for your smug demeanor in the initial response, but I'm really impressed with how you can admit to being guilty of it (just as bomberguy). Rest of the video should be interesting, regardless of your final opinion of the game.
I have to agree. I have to admit, I'm glad Mitch went back to DS2 and gave it a real chance. It really gave me more respect for him. Personally, I love DS2 and I have a hard time ranking it because it was so different. It did so many things well that other Dark Souls games just didn't do. It had so many upsides that people don't recognize simply because of the fact that it's DS2. Yeah, it's different, but that doesn't make it bad. Sure, you enjoy it on a different level depending on your playstyle. Basically, I agree with everything Mitch said in this video and I really like the way he approached it.
ladle is all you need to justify good game Honestly, I don't think you can ever label any souls game as "bad" or "not fun", they're all in a league of their own when compares to other games. It's really difficult to rank the series, because there are only really 5 games (DeS, DkS, DkS2, Bloodborne, and Dk3) in the whole subgenre lol I know PvP gives the games longevity, which is necessary, but I feel like it's been the driving force for all the negativity in the community lol (figures, at least). People really shouldn't rate games that aren't focused on multiplayer by how good the multiplayer is lol I've only played DkS3 and Bloodborne, but I've seen extensive gameplay on DkS2 and DkS1 btw not the same as actually playing it but I guess it's as close as it gets
Sam Horn Playing Dark souls 2 is completely different than watching it. One reason why people dislike Dark souls 2 is it's floaty control and the responsiveness is not that great for a Souls game
Somebody probably has said this, but the lack of finality is a feature. The point is that its a cycle and you are just one person in one cycle of hundreds. It lacks finality because it isnt final.
BigFry9591 The game is supposed to make you feel like it’s ending does not matter because, well... spoilers: it does not matter at the end of the day, as William said it’s a cycle and that is what you’re supposed to find out in DS2.
I realy liked The sneaky end youd get when you finished all The DLCs and equipped a crown. You were immune to humanity loss. So you were not cured, but had in a less triumphant way found away around The curse. A fitting way to finish The game imho
The finality of the game is hidden in its dlc.By acquiring the crowns you acquire the cure for the curse that you were looking for in the first place.The whole thing is just very poetic and personal.
I also feel that DS2 had many improvements that made it better, but also had some flaws that made it worse. However, I never understood the hatred for this game that some loved to dish out. Some want to only focus on the negatives while completely ignoring the positives. Many of the improvements that were initiated in DS2 were carried over to DS3, but DS2 never gets any credit. Ultimately, DS2 is a step forward in some ways, and a step backward in others. That still constitutes a good game, imho.
What about DS3? would you place it above DS2 even tho it has very little content compared to DS2 and some of that DS3 content is straight up from DS1 and 2. Don't forget they decided to remove poise for who knows why and magic is worst than melee by a lot in PVE wich makes for very little build variety also there is no reason to really go into NG+ unless you want 2 boss weapons from the same boss. I for one liked the option to fight a boss again in NG (with bonfire astetics or whatever they are called) so you are not force to do everything again just for that 1 weapon/spell and in DS2 NG+ was actually different, remember it was the only one to CHANGE boss fights and that is amazing on it's own. If DS2 is a step backward in some ways then DS3 is a step to the side lmao.
That's my point...DS3 does some things better and some things worse...whereas DS2 does some things better and some things worse. My point is that while both are flawed in some ways, they are both still good games...however some only want to focus on the negative aspects of DS2 while ignoring the good things.
haters hates DS2 because Miazaki wasnt part of project, he was working on Bloodborne at that time. So haters hate it just because its missing one name in credits... Because every one wanna look hip and cool.
When i try playing DS3 i just spam roll... And i was Knight... I wearing plate armor, right?? Why character does flips with heavy armor? Autobots roll out! Feeling of armor weight was lost.
RevampedCobra73 better bosses ( , amazing level design, new weapons that added new features, and finally a freaking lore that even completes the one from the original game. Making a review about dark souls 2 ignoring the dlc is like reviewing a beta version of a game (which is actually the biggest problem of this game. But now you can find the sotfs edition for 20$ , so it's definitely worth buying it)
The thing that SotFS did with the ending, though, was to encourage a perspective "Beyond the scope of light or dark", as Aldia puts it. Basically, your character can choose to give a big middle finger to all the notions of continuing the age or becoming a dark lord or whatever, and just leave to pursue a personal path. That final area does feel incomplete and a bit shit, but for me it just reinforced the notion of "Fuck all this cycle shit, I'm out."
SotFS was the perfect piece of shit.. they took their complete game, put in a couple extra enemies, changed some item location.. Put a shit covered bow on it & we all bought it. Dark Souls 1 will always be the best \\IŦÍ// Praise \✷/ The \|/ Sun
@8:50 "Bearer of the curse, seek misery. For misery will lead you to greater, stronger souls. You will never meet the King with a soul so frail and pallid. Seek those whose names are unutterable, the four endowed with immense souls. Their souls will serve as beacons. Once you have found them, return here to me. So that hope will not fade away. Bearer of the curse... Seek souls. Larger, more powerful souls. Seek the King, that is the only way. Lest this land swallow you whole... As it has so many others." .Emerald Herald 2014
Never understood the hate ds2 got, it was different yes but i enjoyed the hell out of it. Plus i thought it had some of the best fashion souls of the series imo.
Oh, please. Give me a break with that rethoric. I enjoyed the hell out of it myself but don't act like you seriously "don't understand" the hate it gets. It's sad, don't.
+Christian Cristof How is it bad that doesn't understand the hate? Most of the complaints it gets are subjective. You can hate the level design but that doesn't mean others had to, you may hate the bosses but others may not, you may see a big problem with soul memory but others may not even be into PvP so that doesn't really effect their overall experience in the slightest.
+Tudor Ciubotaru Every souls game has its fair share of bad bosses. DS2 has the most overall so yeah there are more fodder bosses making it seem like it has the worst bosses, but don't forget you have DS1 with some of the worst bosses in the series.
I find it kinda frustrating hearing you essentially say "on this run through I paid attention to the dialogue and the world". Surely playing a game like this through with one eye on the wiki page is obviously going to limit your enjoyment somewhat.
It does seem kind of unfair to criticize a game for it's weaker story and lore and the feel of it's world... when you've been skipping through it. It's fine to not like Dark Souls 2 story. But it sounds like this guy criticized it before he actually gave it a fair chance.
Sines314 really? Dudes played the game like a shit tone of times had more then enough time to listen and get into the game and your gonna blame him being on the wiki and not caring about the lore a few play threws as the reason to discredit the guy? Hahaha no, many of his points are fair and just you just can't stand someone not liking your game
Michael Santangelo your dumb, if you dont pay attention to the story you have no valid opinion on the story cause YOU DONT KNOW THE STORY. better luck next time being a shitbag lol
I love the atmosphere and feeling of Drangleic. It has such a feeling of loneliness and sorrow and I love it. If this game was given the full remaster treatment to make it look on par with DS3 it would be insane.
Or if it gets Remake from remake experts like Bluepoint just the way they did for Demons Souls, it might go for being the "worst" Dark Souls to being the Best one
One thing I really like about DS2 is all the fucking items that are hidden. There are soo many items one will miss if they don't do a certain thing or kill a certain enemy and sometimes need to get really lucky. The fashion souls is by far the best out of the series due to this. Also weapon stance.
PvP is absolutely irrelevant, it doesn't matter, in a few years people will move on and it'll be gone. It's a side diversion, less than a game within a game. Only the main game, the levels and the world the developers built and the encounters they designed, remain, and is thus what the games will be judged by beyond a short span of time.
DS1 and DS2 reminds me of Legend of Zelda and Legend of Zelda 2. Both games are really good but lots of people hate the sequel because it's different, which means it must be "bad". Then you get mob mentality where people want to join in the hate and negativity.
also, this is the only game where the story is about you. sure theres mentions about the big players in the world. but in the end its you who is important. you as the player get to know exactly as much as your character. as your character doesnt even know drangleic. and its inhabitants. most people just want a cool cinematic with cool guys to show off. and dark souls 2 isnt about that
I recently started playing DS2 and while I agree with you, it could have been done a lot better. I felt like it focused maybe 60% on how difficult the game was going to be and 40% on the story, which kind of ruined it for me. I get it, I'm going to die and lose my souls. You don't need to tell me 10 times in the first two minutes of the game. Bloodborne imo did what you're explaining much better. There's no cinematic explaining what you're about to face, just a contract and you receiving a blood transfusion. You learn quickly afterwards that you came to Yharnam to receive blood healing, and that you became a Hunter via the contract. All that you know about Yharnam comes from NPCs, most of whom tell you to fuck off because you're an outsider.
The opening sets the tone and lets you know what the theme of the game is going to be about; Recursion, nihilism, and the eternal struggle for meaning and survival. The game outright slaps in the face with the fact that things that were increadibly important in the first game don't mean anything in the face of time as kingdoms fall, great magics wither, legends are forgotten, and the greatest works of man and gods break and lay buried in the dirt like trash. The opening doesn't bother with vendrick or the lord bosses because they don't mater in the grand scheme of things as events repeat themselves and don't mater to you a lowly hollow as they are simply obstacles on your path. The reason the map doesn't make sense is not because they were lazy but because that's the point, the theme, you're losing your mind and are lost and confused blindly chasing down a some ill defined goal in the barest hope of achieving something you don't even recall. The crone's lines about dying over and over isn't some sort of "haha, this game is hard" nudge nudge wink wink moment, it's there to let you know that being a hollow is about struggling against forces you can't comprehend in an uncaring world, it's like something out of Nietzsche. However the game does also give it's light moments, shwoing the "silver lining" or perhaps the light that allows the shadows to exist in the hopeful inspiring spots, overcoming challenges, the ability to retain yourselves and struggle eternally so long as you remain strong of will, and the one ember item that tells you that even when everything is dead and gone there still exists a spark to reignite the flame again.
SupahFly the story of dks2 makes 0 fucking sense,they said its in a different universe but add so many references,items,bosses and npcs from dks 1‘s universe
@@m4sch1nom29 They never said it was in a different universe from DS1, just that it's in a time so long after that most proof that DS1 existed has long been eroded by time. Something that is a theme in DS2, that all things eventually end up forgotten, we see this in on of the NPCs having been petrified for so long the kingdom he came from has been erased from history. The only thing it's in a different universe from is Demon Souls and all the souls game still have the oblique reference to that game.
Ds1 is the first born that everyone enjoyed during honeymoon phase ds2 is the middle child that comes in during the tough parts of marriage and gets the blunt of emotional tragedy. Ds3 comes in after everything calmed down and is spoiled by everybody for being the baby.
For me personally, Dark Souls 2 nails an environment where everything has nearly achieved a sense of peace. I can’t really vouch for Dark Souls 1, but based on my viewing of that game, it still felt as if there was a conflict afoot, even if it had no relation to the player. In Dark Souls 3, the world feels as if it’s actively falling apart and you’re just along for the ride. In Dark Souls 2, the world feels old, and all of the people just left. There’s nothing else here for them, and yet you’re combing through the remains. It doesn’t feel grand like Dark Souls 1/3, it feels as though you were a couple hundred years late, and now everything is just...done. You’re just some pointless hollow working their way through the scraps of a dead kingdom in the vain hope that you can pull together the scraps of memories that mean nothing to you anymore. The story focuses on what YOU want to do, moreso than what you’re doing for the world. You aren’t fighting incredible horrors and monsters in order to save the world. You’re fighting to ultimately save yourself (and hence why this game is the only one that allows an option where you completely circumvent the linking of the fire.)
I'm just tired of people constantly bashing DKS3, yet constantly tell me DKS2 was peak perfection. DKS2 was probably the most disappointing to me because of its stupid emphasis on "PvP" with a very boring levels and bosses. I started on DS and eagerly looked forward towards every release. By no means do I hate DKS2, but by no means is it my favorite. Demon's souls was my favorite for that atmosphere it gave off. Sadly, only Bloodborne was able to recreate that for me. All the others felt to light hearted comparatively.
Livid77 loooool you're the only one that heard that, more than half the fanbase religiously defends Dark Souls 1 and shits on Dark Souls 2 every chance they get. Dark Souls 3 wasn't great, it was a just a big copy paste fan service instead of making new actual content. That's lazy and the fact that they changed the whole core of the game to DarkBorne style was garbage.
Jordan Robinson here you accuse me of being a fanboy. Yet, here are your comments spewing this filthy fanboyism attitude. Dark souls 2 was the biggest disappointment in the series and everyone knows it. It started with the watered down graphics, the areas being the most boring and shortest in the series, and the egregious sin of boring repetitive bosses. Lets not forget the bullshit that was soul memory that killed any hope of fun for long time who enjoyed invading and arena.
Tonni the thing with ds2 isn't that it's bad, it's that some problems, like the fact hitting enemies feels like hitting air, makes the game unenjoyable for people that care about it.
Main flaw of DaS2 to me is that while I feel skilled for traversing an area and only using about 3 estus flasks and 4 lifegems... It isn't fun. Sure, I've got the pulling and luring formula and a thousand alluring skulls and yearn casts but it isn't fun like Nioh is, that game handles environmental challenges well and doesn't force the same one over and over
the biggest problem for me about DS2, strangely, is that your character animations are very floaty and unrealistic and it breaks my immersion so hard. its the same for everything in the game. it feels like the changed everything back to some sort of beta version of demon souls. DS1 and DS3 have a more realistic feel as far as movement go. WHAT I LOVE ABOUT DS2 is its variety in armor and weapons and what those weapons and armor do for you other than just look cool. sad to me that they combined these two things in DS2 but didnt bring the variety in to DS3
Pretty much, yeah. The animations, even in DS1 are pretty beautiful. DS2 does lack a bit of polish in that regard. Those Falconer running animations... :(
My favorite part is how many more they put into the game with the release of Scholar of the First Sin. In the original, you saw like 3 ever, and they were in NG+ at the place where you spawn in. Places like the Shaded Woods area leading up to the castle just had more of those grotesque looking hollows, and the Brightstone Cove had Peasants in the camp I believe.
This is why I hate part of the Souls community. It's not people changing their minds, it's that they clearly don't know what they want out of the series. I love the series but some people just put such absurdly high expectations on these games.
GreiBert and? Go play dark souls remastered and then ask if it’s absurd. Cos playing a game filled with game breaking glitches, bugs and exploits is one thing, but playing a remastered versions and those problems STILL EXIST, is a whole other problem in itself
@@znightowlz6585 I didn't find any game-breaking glitches in the Remastered version. However, it is absolutely possible that I just missed them, BUT the thing you are doing here is a logical fallacy, because you are not at all addresing the problem presented by me. I didn't say other games are flawless, because they aren't. I noticed game breaking hitboxes in DS2, not in DS3 nor in DS1 or DSR.
'I also read a lot of hatred of dark souls 2 before I played it so this might have given me a bit of a bias before I actually played the game...' This. I never read any hatred for dark souls 2 before I played it and I've never understood why people hate on the game. I had no idea there were people who didn't like it until I joined an online dark souls community. To this day I don't understand their reasons, and it honestly sounds like the haters are just going along with an idea because it's cool. There are other great games who have suffered the curse of the hit game sequel. The curse is basically when people don't like any change, so they judge the sequel of a hit game so harshly that their critique doesn't even make sense. It takes years for those games to be seen for the gems they are. Some examples are Majoras Mask and Metroid Prime 2: Echoes.
Jason Steiner I think people who got good at dark souls expected to be gods in DS2 and then when they got shit on because it plays VERY differently it's because the game sucks.. and not the players.
i can't talk for the "haters" from the community because im not in touch with it whatsoever. nor did i get any bad bias towards dark souls 2 from the internet. nontheless i had some issues that really lowered the fun for me in ds2. first of, as i mentioned i didnt have a bias towards dark souls2. it was quite the opposite: i had huge expectations because i loved dark souls a lot. i played dark souls 1 on the computer with mods to increase the looks and atmosphere. and then i bought for 60euros dark souls 2 for the playstation 2 and it looked worse then a game than ds1 that i bought for 10 euros in steam. im not a graphic nazi, but still i expected more. especially after the numerous trailers with all those great lighting effects from the games convention. i kinda felt betrayed a little. i know many developers do it like this, but for me it was the first time that i played a game so much downgraded from the promotion. second big issue i had with ds2 was the level design. not the levels per se but how they are connected. at some point you were traveling up a castle, took an elevator at the very top, that shouldnt even be there and landed in an area full of lava. stuff like this. and remember how many people hated blight town in the first part? for me it was the same with several areas in ds2. i didnt like the poison swamp. i didnt like the poison cave. but i can forgive all this if it were not for the third point: i was very dissappointed with the bosses. most of them were just big humanoids, and very forgettable. and one more thing, even after my second playthrough i had think really hard which bosses were the lord souls. they didnt stand out in any way for me. if i think about ds1 nito, seath and so on; they had so much more character. for me at least. as you can see i dont even criticize any of the game mechanics. i enjoyed the game and it was fun. but for me it was without a second thought the worst part of the souls series. to be fair, it was also the only part where i didnt play the dlcs. or jsut short: bad level design and forgetable bosses.
honestly I dont hate DS2 but I dont love it either my main issue with it is how the world fits together like how MrCaturday said climbing to the top of a castle just to take and elevator up to a lava zone makes no since and everything felt really separate for me I did like how most of the areas looked but they just didnt make much since from how they should have fit together it just felt a little sloppy. the combat was fine if it did feel a little slow at times but it was reasonable. The only other thing that kinda bugged me was the bosses some of them were good but some of them felt more of they just wanted to put a boss there so here you are with little so no reason why it should be there. I have not yet played threw all the DLCs for DS2 but I do have a boss that I did enjoy fighting in the main game witch was the Lost Sinner I thought the boss was well made and the fight was fair but difficult the way to her was not that fun thou and felt more like a chore kind of like getting to Nito was in DS1 except the closest bonfire was way to close to enemies in DS2 for that one bonfire it was really annoying.
People always have their share of opinions but for me Dark Souls 2 is a really good game. I had so much fun beating the hollowed undead and the badass boss. The feelings of despair, frustration mixed with excitement and joy is indescribable and only could be experienced in the Souls series.
This. Harris's review is a God damn embarrassment, he was right about next to nothing. Thank goodness for people like Mauler calling him out in great detail.
I'm surprised you didn't bring up the changes ds2 makes in ng+. In ds3, everyone just has more health and damage output whereas in ds2, we see some new enemies and items. I personally loved that about ds2. It kept the game fresh during multiple playthroughs.
Better New Game Plus and Bonfire Ascetics were pretty much the only universally loved thing about Dark Souls 2. So it's really a shame these things weren't carried on into Bloodborne and Dark Souls 3...
well as a player who always plays with out shield and with dex build i hated the 2 pyros that came out of the walls when you first reached the sinner in ng+ :D
magic variety in DS2 was TOP NOTCH compared to the other games. even if you dont like the lore of Hexing, the actual spells are fun to use and the utility was interesting with the choice to reduce vision for defense or blow up dead bodies or sacrifice souls for damage. alot of that variety and utility is lost in DS3 with its focus on melee combat to the detriment of everything ells (look at crossbows between the 2 games)
DS2 had many great implementations. Did it contain problems? Yes. But so does DS3 and DS1. The worst part is when people claim the bosses are all uniteresting and copy pasted. And then they move on to say DS3 did a good job. Lul. Like he says, every souls game has it fair share of problems.
@@Wexexx I mean, the only time you fight the same boss in Ds3 is Gundyr... and you can hardly call that the same fight. It's not like you fight the dragon rider 4 times
@@Wexexx My main issue with DS2 is that enemies eventually stop spawning, and also a lot of the bosses suck. Don't get me wrong, quite a few are great, it's just hard to ignore the dragonrider, the covetous demon, and more.
DaDmoon BLade I thought they were a great call back to the first game without overstaying their welcome, plus the stray demon was only an optional boss
First of: I think it's great, that you reflected on your opinion on dark souls 2 and dont stick to your first impression, like so many people do. For me personally, DS1 will always be THE souls game, which doesn't mean it is without it's flaws. The second half was notibly... less good, I guess (not really sure how to put it rightly, since it still was pretty good, when compared to anything else, not souls), the pvp was pretty much just backstab fishing, the framerate issues and so on. What really worked however, was the atmosphere. No game to date, souls or otherwise, came even close to that. I never was one of the DS2 haters. I always thought it was a fun game, which in some ways was worse than DS1 (espacially the formerly praised atmosphere, as well as the overall asthetic) and in some ways improved on it. It is definitly the game with the best variety and viability in magic, hands down. Also, pvp is better than in DS1 and at least on par with DS3. What stands out most however, is that they CHANGED things, they tried to improve from Dark Souls, as opposed to DS3, which is 'just' Dark Souls all over again. The whole game is pretty much all fan service, which was decidedly disappointing for me when the game came out. I still like it, but it's like Star Wars 7: the same old thing all over again. This is why I still can't decide on a ranking of the souls games. DS1 is the game I most enjoyed, however that simply isn't objective since it was my first souls game, and nostalgia plays a big part in this. Still, number one. However, between 2 & 3 I can't decide. On a sidenote: For some reason I don't really like bloodborne. When I first played it, I only had one or two playthroughs of DS1 under my belt and was more or less a 'filthy casul' who was mostly relying on a shield to stay alive and got hammered by BB. I went back to it recently though and finished it more or less effortlessly (-old hunters) and still, even though eldritch horror is right up my alley, I liked it the least out of all the souls games.
MrMoepz my god.. I swear people like you don't understand the difference between a sequel and just putting shit in a game for the hell of it. Dark souls 3 is the CONCLUSION of the series, why the fuck would it be its own thing?
You're not necessarily wrong, but your not right. Miazaki is only on a "break" from Dark Souls. there could be a release for DS4 or BB2 tomorrow for all anyone knows. I feel like no one can really say X souls game is the best, due to all of them having unique problems, and that will rub some people off the wrong way compared to others. I can't fucking stand how slow DS2 feels, and how cheesy some of the enemies are with hitboxes, I-frames, hyper armor which shouldn't be on certain enemies, etc. I do like how they made fashion souls great again, and actually tried to use more than the same 5 color palettes that is usually incorperated in these games TL;DR: Nostalgia, and personal preference is what makes a good DSbourne game.
Easy there fella. As I said, I still like DS3 a lot. I just think that with DS3 they went the lazy route. They made pretty much exactly the same game as DS1, except with a few, well, maybe a lot of QOL improvements and even more fan service. Andre? Really? Come on... And that is not what a sequel is to me. A sequel does need to try some new things. If a series of books, or movies would be the exact same story every time, except with different character names, wouldn't that get boring really fast? This worked once, and for now, I don't even begrudge them for it. Because in the end it is still a good game. I just hope that when from returns to Dark Souls (and let's not kid ourselves, they WILL return eventually), it won't be for Dark Souls 1.3.
MrMoepz I think that the fan service was done that way on purpose. DS3 is essentially a meta commentary on letting Dark Souls go and try exploring new worlds
Bruh what do you mean there’s no “finality” to the soul of cinder. He literally uses the power of Gwyn, takes his Moveset and his music and makes this last ditch effort to prevent you from linking the fire. I almost feel like it was more final than Gwyn, but I know that’s a stretch
Yeah Soul of Cinder is the final attempt of the First Flame to do something cause it fades out in every single ending of the game anyway so basically by killing SoC you finish it Can't imagine something more final to this game even though Gael fight is the finale to the series
I never understood the dark souls 2 hate. In some aspects like customization I thought it was the best. I actually played ds1 ds2 bloodborne ds3 in that order. Ds2 feels more like a videogame-game version of dark souls if u know what I mean like each section was more like a level that one big world
Original ds2 was my most favorite dks game in the entire series until sots changed the way giant lord used to be a way to farm 1.2m souls per kill, it dropped 700 or 600k even with all that shit i used to use for the soul boosts. Original ds2 is still superior to sots.
Rolling is all messed up, hit boxes are all messed up, parrying & blocking and that lazy delay between pressing the attack button and the character hitting.. all of these things made me just wanna puke at ds2 it was never fun for me
@DCaladbolg Are you fucking for real? Go watch MauLer video on this topic, he shows many examples of shit hitboxes, shit grabs, shit backstabs. And if you ever played DS1 and DS2 you should have noticed that hitboxes in DS1 are pretty fucking good, they are not perfect, but definitely better than DS2 bullshit.
EpicxNerd73 same. I bought sotfs a week ago and have already put in 50 hours and almost gotten the platinum. I still like 1 and bloodborne more, but its enjoyable.
I like all Souls games. 1 is my favorite overall because I'm biased by nostalgia. I also really liked 2. But I don't think it feels like a Souls game. It feels a bit more clunky and you have less control over your character. Attacks have great and fluid animations but all the movements (aside from weapons) feel a bit slower. It definitely did some things better, like powerstancing is an obvious one. The way characters held weapons looked nicer to me. They were at a downward angle like in Bloodborne. 3 falls somewhere between 1 and 2 for me, and Bloodborne is the one I enjoy the most, nostalgia aside. It's got everything I want, and damn is it a gorgeous game. Now, time to actually watch the video.
Maybe the less control over your character is a PC thing, because I play on Xbox One and have never felt like I told my character to something, and they didn't do it.
Angus Jameson The less control is just how the game works. You can't immediately turn around in Dark Souls 2. You can't switch directions while attacking, your character slowly changes that direction. You may not know what I'm talking about but here's an example: you roll, then decide to attack opposite direction you attacked with a roll attack. In 2, your character either attacks to his left or right, trying to turn around. In DeS, 1, 3, or Bloodborne, you immediately attack exactly where you wanted. But yes, I love DS2 for what it is.
Its just my opinion, but I feel the slower turning is more realistic. Yes the instantaneous turning does give you more control, I will not deny that, but does look a little odd when your does an instant 180 with moving their legs. Thanks for explains that to me, though, I understand your thinking now, and I can respect your opinion.
Angus Jameson It is more realistic for sure! Same wirh DS2's rolling. It's a lot longer, slower, and when you roll backwards you actually turn around, instead of doing what's physically impossible like in DS1 or 3, which is rolling opposite the direction you're facing.
I really enjoyed ds2 it was around the time when I was depressed and very far away from people and when I was depressed I played this for the first time and i was so enveloped into the story and I was so mesmerized by the design and story It really changed me after this one memorable experience of a game.
I don't know for some reason I'm drawn too Dark Souls 2. I find it fun and entertaining. This reason it's kind of my favorite and I guess I really just enjoy the atmosphere I don't know but I keep coming back to it.
The problem is some idiots succeeded to spread some cancer and hate over DS2 and every weak minds listened. And after, more people got poisoned. DS2 is my favourite Souls series. And yes, I started in 2009 with demon's Souls and platinum all the games no exception.
Dark Souls 2: SotFS is my favorite in the series simply for the PvP and customization. I still like to coop and invade to this day to try out different builds. Yes the enemies and bosses were underwhelming and the story and level design was very vague and sometimes made no sense. But after really thinking about, the story, your quest, and the level design all fit the central theme of the game. None of it is suppose to make sense and everything is genuinely meaningless because there's nothing you can do to change the cycle of the curse. You're losing your mind as you grow closer to your hollow state, the world and time itself is collapsing and overlapping, taking the throne will only make you another Vendrick, another Gywn prolonging the inevitable of humankind's extinction. This cycle of trying to Kindle the flame has been done SO many times, so many kingdoms have risen and fallen with the same outcome. You're just another wanderer slowly going hallow like everyone else and there's nothing you can do. The story may not be as obvious and somewhat lacking, but it is deep and fits the theme of Dark Souls. I respect the game for what it is and that it tried to be different.
You played this game without wiki and skipping dialogs for the first time? Are. You. Fuckin. Serious? I mean...really?! What are you? A casual? This is what Souls and Bloodborne is about!
Austin S sure it's not hard but why someone does that and scores a game bad because of that is just beyond me. The lore is one aspect which made this game so special. That he changed his mind after following the dialoges etc. shows exactly this.
grimbldoo, "lore is not the game"? what does this even mean? so every game either needs to be a visual novel or have no lore whatsoever? lore/narrative/dialogue is what fleshes game worlds out and makes them feel interesting and lived in. that's fine if you want to play a game by skipping all the dialogue, but its certainly not the way its meant to be played...
I've always had a hard time describing how Dark Souls and DaS2's stories are different, while neither being truly "better" than the other. But I think I've found a description that fits pretty nicely. The story of the first game relies heavily on the characters to get the history across to the player. Many characters are very significant to the plot, and are talked about extensively in-game. But Dark Souls 2 focuses far more heavily on the politics of the universe first and foremost. I feel this works because the main theme was already so well fleshed out in the first game, so it lent to the notion that they can now flesh out the WORLD more in the second game. People are less talked about, while locations and events take center stage and become the focal point of a lot of dialogue in 2. I've always loved this about DaS2. I've always been more invested in lore aspects involving geography, historical events, and how the world itself is being affected, rather than a story that focuses more on individual characters. I know I'm a minority in that sense, and I can see how it would be odd to some. Most people want characters to relate to and fall in love with.
For me, DS2 is the best in the series. The gameplay isn’t as fast as DS3, but the journey through the world feels epic. I’m talking about the scholar of the first sin edition. After completing a play through of the game you feel like you have been through hell lol. There is such a great tone and feel to the environment of the world. It’s the same feeling of desperation to overcome as the first game, but you know more about the world like you said. The story feels fleshed out, and what I love about DS2 is that you get more time to enjoy the journey rather than just the end of the story. In DS1 It was so heavily emphasized that you would be Gwyn’s successor that you almost forget you are your own character. In DS2 it feels like there’s more of a choice in a way. I don’t know how to describe it. The covenants are very interesting to me, and I really enjoy the ways that they can overlap. DS2 is special in its own way. Don’t get me wrong, I still love DS1 so much. Im playing it currently, but I don’t think DS2 gets the credit it deserves
Personally, I think Dark souls 2 is the funnest in the series to replay. While I haven't played Bloodborne or 3 yet, Dark Souls 2 is nice because starting a new game in it actually has encouraged me to try new play styles that I never would've tried. NG+ is a lot more fun in other souls games but new games in 1 and demon's can be very punishing if you're not used to what you're doing, Dark souls far more so.
Casual Apple Ey now, kamikaze enemies are a tradition in the DS series. I vaguely remember getting my ass roasted in the cathedral of the deep a few times by them.
Just want to point out how beautiful DS2's intro cinematic is compared to all the other three. The lighting, realism, and especially the rain in the forest I find incredible
Ds2 is the best for me not for the bosses or the pve in general but the feeling. The windblowing atmosphere matches so well with your character and other characters that are forgetful, without purpose in this hopeless place of Drangleic that does it for me.
I always thought people were pretty unfair to 2, but I also recognize my own bias. It was my first one and my friends who played the first one talked me into pre-ordering it and we spent all of spring break in a small room with all our Xboxes and slammed through it. I was the new guy so I thought it was super challenging but I had dudes in the same room to play with (when soul memory wasn't being admittedly idiotic). There's a lot of the same type of nostalgia people have for 1 that I have for 2. That might skew my opinion of the game a bit, but in other ways I had no expectations or baggage from 1. I was able to judge it completely on its own merits. Also worth noting I've never bothered with SOTFS.
i just dont like pivoting , maybe im stupid, but i hate how enemies can pivot mid attack animation to hit me after i moved out of range but i cant do that. idk. in DS1 the only enemies that came close to being able to do that to me were just giants in anor londo but wayyyy less than most enemies ive met in DS2. that and enemy placement. maybe if i played with mods to remedy those two things it wouldnt leave such a sour taste in my mouth.
most of those are justified by realism, when you thrust a sword in real life you can change it's direction at the last second. You can also do it yourself by turning the analog stick as you attack.
@@Ghorda9 Also for game play it kinda seems to suck the suspense out of fighting a trained knight who's rendered completely powerless by you drifting slightly to the left.
Ghorda9 Then whats the point of adding a dodge mechanic when enemies can nullify it by Ista turning. This is A Game and Compramize needs to be made over 'realism'. If i wanted realistic sword combat, i would practice HEMA.
@@jazzmaster909 1st, they can't if you actually get gud and learn to dodge at the right time instead of just roll spamming like a noob. Second, the tracking was so bad in the first game that you didn't HAVE to roll to avoid it, you could simply just walk slightly to the left to avoid attacks.
The enemy tracking in DS2 is pretty horseshit. It takes away all the depth from the combat and forces you to approach everyone in the same way. The lousy hit boxes exacerbate this usually.
"bosses don't require a change of strategy" as you get dumped on by the dragonriders because you're using a slow weapon, and get dumped on by the demon of song because you're overencumbered lol
My favourite build I've ever had in ANY of the three souls games came from Dark Souls 2. Dual wielding blue flames with crystal magic weapon, soul greatsword, and some ranged spells was the best. I feel like the sheer amount of different weapons and how you can build around them really helped keep the games longevity for me personally. In 1, I always seem to fall back on some variation on Pyro+Dex or Giantdad, same for 3 (minus the poise face tanking of course). The DLC weapons and spells in 3 helped keep things interesting too, but 2 was always the game I was able to come back to whenever I was bored.
Dark Souls II may possibly be my favourite in the series. However, in descending rank order, these are what I feel are the big stains, without which I think the game would be hugely more popular: 8 Shrine of Amana 7 Backtracking to Executioner Chariot 6 Brume Tower 5 Black gulch 4 Iron Keep 3 No man’s wharf 2 Backtracking to blue smelter demon 1 Backtracking to Sir Alonne
I started out by playing bloodborne and fell in love with it (never played dark souls before at the time) i loved it so much that when dark souls 3 came out i decided to buy that game because i heard it was "simular to bloodborne" and i ended up loving that game also. I decided to try dark souls 2 after that and something just seemed alittle off but i still played it but definetly nowhere near as much as the other 2 games. And then i just recently got dark souls remastered and i dont know i think its my favorite out of all of them something about the world and how it all connects is amazing you can tell they really put some time and patience into that game. i wish they would just keep making more dark souls games, we nees darks souls 4 damnit!
I don't think decent amount of armor and weapons are enough to describe the insane level of customization in ds2. So many weapons and armors are there that look unique and astheticly pleasing.
@@BigFry9591 Ι think i was one of the few that i leveled up ADP even if i had no idea what it does. I always tend to focus on mobility and i thought ADP (with AGILITY) made me faster or leveled up my attack speed (lol xD) so i leveled it up first and paid more attention there. After noticing no different i looked up in youtube and i saw it was about s lmao
the ONLY things that ds2 could've done without was the enemy vanishing after so many times killing them, then the soul memory. other than that ds2 was well designed, especially the DLCS . the 3 were amazing. then the use of red phantoms after so many ng+ kept things interesting. which still leads me to believe the series isn't over. Mr M. said HE wasn't going to work on a souls game now but doesn't mean his team wont. I hope they do cause it's just 1 of those games thats, that good it could survive many sequels. think about it & let the feast begin
It's certainly annoying with enemies stopping to spawn if you're farming them for stuff (Frickin Heide Knights...) but there is 2 built-in ways to alleviate that, Covenant of Champions (available in Majula) and Bonfire Ascetics.
completely agree, those where two of three issues i had with the game, third issue was how long it's been and they never fixed Faith after they fucked it raw, but tbh it ain't so bad once i trained myself to play more passive i guess...
steve guff DS2 wasn't well designed if we're going by Souls standards. Levels were bland and lacked the creativity of 1, combat and rolling felt clunkier, the bosses weren't nearly as memorable or fun to fight, and there were way too many gank squads of enemies. It did improve on several things though, like PvE, Co-op, performance, and the UI.
NG+9 is the highest difficulty I'm pretty certain, and the damage enemies do doesn't become all that significant with each increase after the first, so I highly doubt that.
DS2 was way more fun than DS1 imo, the bonfire placement was extremely consistent and the environments were so different and engaging (some of the best in the series), each one offering new mechanics and tools to overcome the areas. An underrated and overhated gem
The idea of drug addiction also crossed my mind when I first started. You'll lose everything when branded the symbol of the curse...your very light (serious addicts tend to lose their family/friends, possessions, and even their personality and spirit, and they become lost) hence they go "hollow" and lose their "soul". Over and over they try to "light the fire" (rid their cursed addiction by various means, seeking other ways to find happiness and regain spirit) and over and over they relapse. There's more interpretation that would support this symbolism further.
Started the Series with Ds2 and it still stays my Favorite Game,especially for the Heavy Melancholic Feeling. The World somehow felt more Connected and Deeper to me,even if its the Game of the Series with the lesser connected World from a Technical Point. But i love them all and every Game of the Series has something uniqe on its own and can stand good on its own Feet.
I found Majula was an incredibly depressing hub, but not by being dark and gloomy. The music design was utterly perfect, I always felt at ease in majula but also found the area kind of eerie. Hard to explain but I’m sure there are others who know what I mean.
People just forget that Dark Souls is a full blown trilogy story and try to judge the second game as a stand alone story/experience. It's the middle bit of a trilogy story that takes place over an impossible to say for sure, but for a fact several hundred if not at least a thousand years. Dark souls 2 was the middle bit of that trilogy and it was just meant to portray the world as it was in continuation of the cycle, the futility of fighting fate. You're meant to stop and say "Hey wait, I did all of this before, is my entire hero's journey pointless?" Dark souls 3 then comes along nicely and wraps up the story that the first game started and the second game expounded upon. Long story short, we're all fighting against our true natures out of fear of what we don't know, and that fear can drive us to ruin worlds for countless generations, but fighting our nature out of fear is ultimately pointless and makes us suffer far more than simply resigning over to the reality of the world.
S.M. grimbldoo all three games play way different. That's just silly if anything ds2 plays more like ds1. Ds3 plays more like bb and frankly I never played bb before so when I went into ds3 after the other two games being completed multiple times it was vastly different and resulted in me hating the game for the first few weeks till I got the playstyle down. Frankly I hate bb after playing it and would have hated ds3 if it wasn't for a friend encouraging me to play it more. All in all this ds3 plays like ds1 and ds2 plays nothing like them is bullshit. It's an easy transition from ds1 to ds2 and a nightmare of a transition from those two to ds3.
Cuttlefish That is just simply not true, and it’s not a matter of opinion. 2 and BB have drastically different systems while 1 and 3 are nearly identical. I didn’t even notice the slight change to my play style in 3 until after I went back to 1. Maybe you just got used to 2, but the only similarity between 3 and BB is the speed, and the only difference between 1 and 3 is the speed. Personally, I’ve yet to beat either 2 or BB, but I’ve finished 1 and 3 many, many times, and I routinely switch between the two because there’s very little difference in combat.
I don’t hate this game I actually like playing it from time to time it feels way different than the other souls games. Which gives me a different challenge But I think it is the worst of the series for the main fact that the level design and all the mob enemies that swing faster than you kinda force you to play as a defense build. But me personally I like playing more aggressive but it just doesn’t feel as satisfying as bloodborne or ds1 or ds3. Also I found the bosses really lack luster honestly the only ones I liked were in the dlc’s besides lost sinner.
As an early adopter of this series I have the most love for Demon's Souls. Each game had its own pros and cons, but Demon's was my first love and I have to stick by it. I seriously believe it was the best game of the series. It had the least convoluted attributes, it was short, which made NG+ a more relevant mechanic, and it had the greatest build variety without feeling like a broken game. You could be a true glass cannon in that game with a bow or magic, or be a survivable faith spec. Sure, there were some broken mechanics (infinite stunlock, running firestorm), but those came later in the game's life, whereas Dark Souls pvp felt broken to me within the first week and mostly stayed that way. Each game felt like an improvement over the previous, but each one had some glaring flaws as well. Here's the pros and cons of what each sequel brought to the table/changed in my opinion since Demon's Souls. Dark 1: PROS - Connected world and creative shortcuts. Estus. Attunement. landmarks were visible from across the game world and everything in the world felt connected. CONS - Armor upgrades. FAP ring. Farming upgrade materials. Parts of the game felt unfinished. No attempts at improving PvP. Game felt too long to make good use of NG+ features. Many broken mechanics and glitches at launch. Covenants and pvp felt largely broken. Dark 2: PROS - attempted to combat smurfing (though ultimately failed with soul memory). Dual wielding/weaponization, and off-hand move sets. Arena. Fluid animations/canceling. Overall balance of weapons and strategies (poison, bleed, acid, etc. all useful). Central hub/home base. Slow estus recovery. Backstabs no longer instant. Covenants were creative, fun, and rewarding (at least at launch). Bell Keeper and Rat covenants were well done. CONS - Soul Memory was absolutely horrible the way it was implemented. Many animations were too slow/varied in speed. World felt connected superficially, zone connections didn't feel right, couldn't see other parts of the world like in DkS or DkS 3. Limited invasion orbs. Dark 3: PROS - (some) anti-twinking. Item box limited your consumables on-hand. Charged strong attacks. Covenant equipment slot. CONS - Mana. Estus allotment (and at the blacksmith?!?). The game should have brought back spices/grass with limited on-hand, and removed estus altogether, then mana would've worked well. Lack of strategies (poison, magic, frost, etc. are garbage). Anti-twinking mechanics only factored weapon upgrades and not estus, ring, spells, etc. Off-hand weapons had a limited move set. Estus chugging. Covenants were less interesting. PVP-only balance adjustments. PVP is dominated by curved sword and straight sword. As you can see, I gave DkS 2 the most pros because, quite honestly, it did the most to take the series forward in the right direction and corrected many flaws of the previous entries. DkS 3 was awesome, but it took many steps backwards, likely because of all the criticism that DkS 2 received from DkS 1 fanboys. Other thoughts: Weapons/infusions that don't scale with attributes should be removed (raw, dragon). They break the games too much and make no sense.
I have to combat your perspective on Dark Souls 3 having grasses as a healing mechanic. I played through Demon’s Souls, as the second game in the series that I played (Dark Souls 2 being the first.) Firstly, grasses and blood vials will ALWAYS be seen as a negative for me. I understand that you can buy them and hoard a shit ton of them, but it’s overly punishing in the early game when you can’t amass a large enough amount to properly continue rerunning a boss or an area you’re stuck on without having to take a break in order to get more grass/vials. In other words, the grass and spice system fucking sucked, even when I could buy 99 of them to ez mode most bosses in the game. Generally, I think that Dark Souls 3 is actually a pretty good game as far as the combat system goes. In PvP it definitely falls into a simple button mash/defensive spam contest, but those criticisms also go right up against Demon’s Souls, but in PvE the combat feels fluid, fast, and fun, while still retaining a sense of thought. Demon’s Souls’ combat never felt great to me, although I enjoyed the game enough to nearly 100% it on PS3. My problems with the game mostly focused around the disjointed difficulty spikes in some areas and the extremely lackluster bosses. With the exception of flame lurker and corrupted king, I can’t really remember a boss that wasn’t more than a speed bump in Demon’s Souls. Maiden Astrea was a sick lore boss, but I don’t really consider her a memorable fight since all you end up doing is killing her knight and then she just ends herself. None of the bosses really pushed you to do much differently or better than a previous boss. Then, there’s the disjointed PvE experience with running some of the world’s. World tendency was a fascinating mechanic, but it oftentimes resulting in a heavily weighed negative experience towards the player when you started to escalate towards negative world tendency (a particular invader in the poison bog comes to mind. You know, the one with Bind; the sword that does damage through shields so helpfully found in a poison swamp that makes it impossible to roll) I can remember a lot of instances in Demon’s Souls where the encounters were not only challenging but just outright unfair/unfun. It resulted in a lot of just dashing through areas and ignoring enemies when certain areas had some overtuned fights. In Dark Souls 3, there aren’t as many instances of blatantly unfair encounters where you don’t have some way around them. I think that your nostalgia heavily changed your opinions on the other games. Don’t get me wrong, I loved Demon’s Souls as a game-but it’s nowhere near flawless, and generally every change made in the series after it has been a great improvement upon it (with the exception of the lore and characters. I think the characters in Demon’s Souls feel the most lively even if that doesn’t say much.)
I love how DS2 handles Hollowing. It was a nice middle ground between how DS1 did it and how Demon's Souls handles Soul form. DS1 hallowing was barely a problem at all and in Demon's it was too harsh.
In regards to the world of Dark Souls 2, am I the only one who kept tackling the wrong area because the game didn't quite guide you to where you needed to go properly? I'd go places where I feel like I was meant to go later first, because that's where I felt the world design was leading me. Then after I'd beat that area, I'd backtrack and try a different path and find that this new area was too easy because I was meant to go here before I went to wherever else I went. Some examples are: I went *Forest of Giants* > *Lost Bastille* > *Belfry Luna* > *Sinner's Rise* . That's the order the world's paths lead me. From there I backtracked to *Heide's Tower of Flame* > *No Man's Wharf* > *Cathedral of Blue* (All of which were too easy because I beefed up while dealing with *Lost Bastille* ) Next I went to the *Shaded Woods* . For once I felt like I was in the rights spot, but there was still uncertainty. After this I found *The Pit* , *Grave of Saints* , and *The Gutter* . I felt like I may have ended up here prematurely, so I exited and tried to find somewhere else to go. I ended up finding how to get to *Huntsman's Copse* > *Harvest Valley* > *Earthen Peak* where I currently am. I have no idea if I'm on the right track, or if I'm tackling things too soon. This, for me at least, makes part of the game enjoyable and parts of it unenjoyable because when I get there, I breeze right through. I could easily look up a guide online to see which order I'm supposed to tackle the areas in, but that defeats the whole purpose of exploration. In Dark Souls 1, I felt like I was where I was supposed to be, or in instances I found myself in an area I wasn't supposed to tackle yet, the game let me know me know with subtle (or sometimes not so subtle) hints and clues. Anyone else have the same gripes? I'm still not finished with the game and I don't expect this problem to remedy itself anytime soon.
The thing about your experience is there are multiple pathways to reach the same areas, like you killed the pursuer to go onto lost bastille at the top of Forest of giants. But you could also start the game going to Heide's(which is what i did) to No man's warf THEN to Lost Bastille, which are both acceptable pathways. From there you have access to either Shaded Woods or Huntman's Corpse for the progression, which i find admirable about the game. As Dark souls 1 if you didn't find the pathway to undead burg(which I didn't and went to the cemetery first) you fight monsters much to powerful for your current gear. the people who say dark souls 2 is linear is semi correct but also wrong, they are linear but you also have multiple paths to take.
Randcarte I went to the cemetery first too, and after getting whooped many I realized maybe there's probably somewhere else I need to go. I don't mind multiple paths. In fact, it's great. The problem I have is going through certain paths and being rising to the challenge of those areas makes other areas far too easy. I would have preferred a more streamlined level design with clever and hidden ways to get to different areas early, mainly so that the difficulty stays relatively consistent. If they're going to give you different paths then I feel they should find a way to scale up paths you didn't take so when you finally get to them it isn't a cake walk. Some areas were fun and challenging and other areas were too easy and boring.
subseven Somehow my path after i got to the Iron Keep was *Iron Keep, Belfry Sol, The Brume Tower, Iron Passage*. The Iron Passage at lvl 67 was the worst experience i've ever had.
Dark Souls 2 will always be one of my favourite RPGs. It expanded on it's arsenal so much. You could literally play as any character type and have a great time. In Dark Souls 3 everything seems to point to a dex build. As a mage I got crucified and a theify build didn't do anywhere near enough damage.
I highly recommend playing dark souls 2 how you mentioned near the beginning: "Trying a type of build I wasnt comfortable with." I've always played through souls games as a hybrid Dex pyro, but when I went back to DkS2 I tried out a STR/FTH build for the first time and had a tons of fun, but then again maybe that's because dks2 is the only souls game that has fun to use miracles.
tbf i recently replayed ds3 in coop as cleric/paladim type of characeter, lightning longsword, lots of healings, lightning arrow, lothric banner, paladin-like look. it was tons of funs to support people in both pve and pvp and being very tanky and dangerous due to poise-casting miracles like stake
DS2 does a lot in terms of allowing different magic bases strats as all 4 (sorc, pyro, miracle, hex) are very strong both on their own and as a pure caster build.
I like the magic in Ds2 since you don't have the meta stat to do actual damage in comparison to Ds3. as a sorcerer you can kill the beginning enemies at the forest of giants in 2 hits. most offensive magic is ranged focust, but with the right amount of casting speed can be fired at melee range with a small change of trading hits. that being said, the fact that that the casting speed in Ds2 is tied to attunement makes a pure caster build waayyy more viable. I also like the buffs in ds2, all types of magic have some sort of buffs. though sorcery and hexes have one of the best pvp buffs, the sorcery one trading HP for an incredible increase of magic damage. the hex an almost melee damage nullifying buff with the cost of tunnel vision, literally. even though all magic has potential in Ds2, with the right build and great magic barrier, you can nullify magic in pvp. leaving casters running and crying for help... also in ds2, you can complete the game with 1 spell in pve. in pvp if, you parry someone, you can finish him off in one spell.
I still miss power stance, real poise, and non-instant estus. I think ds3 is a better pve experience than ds2 but, ds2 had a better combination of mechanics for pvp; if you don't mind losing a ring slot to counteract soul memory.
i actually think PvP is way more interesting at higher sm in ds2 anyway. People experiment more because they can (without having to go and use a soul vessel). Sure there is lots of cancer, but there's also a ton of people who find creative uses for weapons and systems that just isn't possible when most of your stats are effectively nothing.
The most memorable boss in the series to me is oceiros the consumed king in DS3. I remember fighting him multiple times to try and figure out what was going on with him.
>tfw you realise both DS1 and DS2 are fun
life is good
Its true, Sadly the same can't be said about DS3
Meti 'Not The Bad Guy' Why must people needlessly hate what they love
+Meti 'Not The Bad Guy'
Did you just try to turn fun into something objective? Wow, people really do anything to stay in the hate bandwagon.
***** people wanted another ds1.
I mean if I wanted to play DS1 again without poise, likable characters and a busted Dark Moon convenient then... no why would I play that? I dislike DS3 because I wasted too many hours to that game trying to like it. I have probably 500 hours over in it verse my 1200 in DS2 and 1000+ in DS1. The only real redeeming DS3 content is the final DLC which was good. Ashes sucked ass though.
"I decided I was going to talk to every NPC, listen to all their dialogue, no skipping, minimal use of the wiki and try a different build."
So you tried to actually play the game for once and had FUN? What a shocking revelation!
TheSPOREREX More like a person playing the game for the first time
I still feel he didn't really talked to everybody, a lot of things he says aren't "build upon" actually are
Well... he didn't the cat talks for lengths about the four great souls, the same does Vengarl, the Wizard in Huntsmans Copse, the other guy in Lost Bastille and Shanalotte.
TheSPOREREX omfg your comment was soo Perfect i almost came
TheSPOREREX find any none lore freaks that would actually do that, overall opinion says your wrong from most players
When I'm at Heide's tower I can almost feel the wind on my face, that area had a great atmosphere
The Art direction in the games superb even tho all the area are not connect like DS1
Honestly I think ds2 smacks in atmosphere, tone, and music way more than other souls games
I felt that too But Probably felt it because of the fan beside me keeping my Laptop cool
It's a beautiful place
@@Teerapatkongrat outside of dlc almost every single area in ds2 can be directly walked to from majula? So idk what u mean it's not connected like ds1 ds3 is the only one of the 3 that has no connection to it's firelink/hub area
Honestly, I do have a 'feeling' for drangleic, for me it feels sad, cold and so so distant, as if the entire land was a ghost house, but not a scary ghost house, but a forgotten one that was there for so so so long that it forgot everything about itself; Dark Souls 1 is agressive, overbearing and terrifying, like the catacombs to a child; while Dark Souls 2 is ruins of a village after a great fire. You look around and the smoke and debris and little bits of flame are still dangerous to you, but you feel more sad than endangered.
Dark Souls 3 is powerful; it's a violent road that expects excellency and fearlessness, where you need to buckle up, sharpen your sword and tense your neck, because YOU WILL FIGHT FOR YOUR LIFE.
Dark Souls 1 is mistery.
Dark Souls 3 is dangerus.
Dark Souls 2 is sorrow.
Excellent, love the thoughts, agreed.
I agree dude. I loved 2 because it felt so much like Kings Field. More exploration focused than the others. Even more so since teleporting wasn't gated behind progress. They expected you to reach some dead ends. And wander around.
@@zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcba0 i felt that the 1 achieved the sense of exploration and sadness more than the 2 ,but the 2 has different sadness,like he said, like a sorrowful empty village,while the one a somewhat darker hill ,full of green grass.
*mystery
Trying to understand how you wrote the first part, yet still misspell mystery and dangerous at the end lol
Dark souls 2 was the first dark souls I've ever played
And i fucking loved it
【KillMeXD】 same man it was good
thunder king gaming well I
Did it because I basically watched everything about ds1 so when ds2 rolled around I was ready to get on board I
@@princevaldym7606 thats true about the feel thing but has nothing wrong, the only thing that does playing first ds2 than 1 is be shocked by how good both games are when they are so different. you lose nothing playing ds2 before ds1, if you ask me, quite the opposite, the majority of ppl who played ds2 first and then played ds1 agrees that both games are good, and ds1 is better overall, in the other side the ppl who played ds1 before ds2 say that ds1 is the best game ever(not gonna say if its true or not really i dont care) and that ds2 is shit(generalizing in both cases).
normally ppl who played ds1 didnt like ds2 because it wasnt the same game and searching "wrongs" instead of enjoying.
@@princevaldym7606 i started dark souls 2 i love it and i stopped 1 because it s trash
same for me, same same, I always wanted to play a souls game and I couldn't get the first one but the second one was incredibly difficult for me, I played for hours and hours learning so much and had lots of hardships, the journey was grazy hard for me but fun as hell
I have great memories of Dark Souls 2. Love hearing that Majula tune in the background of this video.
Isn’t that sweet?
What I simply respect, even value so much about Dark Souls 2 is that it is a non-Miyazaki Souls game, made "only" by the "B-Team", was rushed to no end and had a lead-change mid developement and yet it did so much right. Things that Dark Souls 1 did not have or did wrong were implemented and improved, even Dark Souls 3 neglected some of the things Dark Souls 2 created. Of all the things this game had going against it it still ended up having gotten so many things so right.
This is so true
I always believed the hit boxes in DS2 ultimately made my timing and anticipation better for parrying and dodging, what with how broken it was. It made every other soulsbourne game feel like they had training wheels on lol
@@LeftSinkHandle Super this. DS2 was my first souls game and I beat it with the keyboard and mouse since I didn't have a controller at the time. nothing has come close to the insanely fun challenge of not only learning how Darksouls itself worked, but figuring out all of the controls without any button prompts as well.
in DS3 the Dancer was the first boss to actually give me trouble, and Bloodbourn has been an absolute breeze when I occasionally play it on a friend's PS4, I'm 3 bosses deep and haven't died to a boss yet.
so yeah I still wear only the Faaram set or Mirra set in dark souls 3, fight me. (it was also pretty cool to find the Ruin Sentinels armor in the Ringed City)
The reason i hate this game is the bugs and the movement. also the dlcs are just awful and bugged the eff out. Your sword will break in the Sinh dragon fight.
@@buckiemohawk3643 translate lol
Não há nenhum bug que atrapalhe a jogatina, e há vários deles que vc tem que procurar causar, a movimentação não é problema também, ao menos que vc esteja jogando no teclado
Dlcs horriveis? Senhor jesus, as dlcs de ds2 são ótimas, n é porque vc n consegue matar um chefe que ela é ruim
I'm surprised to hear you say you got SOTFTS without mentioning the DLCs at all. They have some of the best lore in the game and completion of them unlocks what I feel is the true ending to the game.
THIS. I mean to have a re-review of Dark Souls II praising its strengths and NOT mention the Ivory King Old Chaos fight is just ridiculous; it's one of the best (imo THE best) boss fight in the series
@@easterislehead oh yeah that fight gave me cancer because of its difficulty and difficulty doesn't come from the boss but the gank you have to face every time before fighting the boss which made learning boss's moves hard to learn
@@shashlik7959 But the Loyce Knights tank most of the enemies for you if you just wait for them and pick your fights.
@@shindrac that way you have to wait even longer before meeting the boss
@@shashlik7959 Oh, sorry, I thought you ment you had low health when dealing with him.
About the time, I beat him again a few days ago and I didn't find it took that long, but maybe that's just because I beat the entire game quickly, so I think I might have just not found it that bad in comparison with this game's borderline fetish with not having shortcuts to the bosses (Vanilla DS2 with DLCs, by the way).
I fucking adore Dark Souls 2, despite its flaws.
Chauncy preach
Agreed
Sad
Same my dude. I went into it after hearing all the hatred for years because I wanted to play every Souls game. Before the game was even over I was like “This game has a ton of problems, but god damn if I don’t love the hell out of it”. Turns out the hatred was extremely overblown and it’s actually a really fun, mostly well done game, one of my favorites actually.
@@toooydoeur Yakuza fan 💀
I wasn't aware there was hate at all for Dark Souls 2 until my friend began to hate me and did everything he could to stay away from me. I lost a friend because I *didn't share the same opinion on a fucking game*
Karim Kirolos thank you, nice person
and you fucking deserved it to because dark souls 2 represents being a piece of shit
Oh look, Tangerinian is one of "those guys"
I am not those guys I am not a tough internet guy I am just a man of taste who knows that anyone who liked dark souls 2 liked dark souls for the wrong reasons or is a LIAR ok?
I didnt think I was being a douchebag I just thought what I was saying was just an accepted matter of public record. I thought OP WAS BEING THE DOUCHEBAG! haha
It was never a bad game. The problem was that it came after DS 1 lol
ITwas exactly
well ds1 wasn't actually that good as a souls game if you take the nostalgia goggles off so... your comment is a bit pointless. till this day, there is no souls content worse than practically all of ds1's second half. except maybe black gulch.
AH silver DS1 is actually good. I played it for the first time on the remaster after played DS 3 2 and bloodborne. DS1 is so much better than 2 it’s not even close.
AH silver, the whole point *is* that people have nostalgia. His comment isn't pointless, it's true. Yours is more pointless.
ITwas, dang this comment stung. Its like the hate FF8 got for having the gall to come after 7. Nostalgia goggles too thick.
I must confess I get high...cut this game on...stare off into the sea and sunset in Majula while the eerie,comforting music pulls me in... haha
Upon my daily meditation in majula? I made a horrific yet mesmerizing discovery concerning finer details of the surrounding graphics concerning majula especially...if anyone considers the books in the bible to be a possibility of truth?.....dark souls is a perfect setting that may describe the world we live in shortly before and after the great deluge...or "noah's flood".....the great pinnacle seen from everywhere is the tower of babel....the surrounding mountains?...if you look?.....you can see the petrified remains of the titans and hybrids that decomposed in a wax like fashion until petrification...the standing stones in the sea are women petrified....in the book of enoch it says the wives of nephilim became sirens.....the receding waters in majula.....to me?...I think it's a way of someone with alot of understanding of the past showing us in plain sight how the past was.......and I made one more discovery in the distant background.....I found a cross....the crucifixion cross....and the abbreviation of....U.S.A.....ill make a video soon on my channel.....call me crazy idga fiddler's fuck..... because I been around long enough to know if you can't take criticism?..you'll be ruined by compliments.
@@michaelbelmont5305 bro you good?
@@retarddog6505 Na...I'm out... Gotta re up....til then?..I'm dead too
The cat Shalquior talks at length about all four of the Great Souls. The Lost Sinner is expanded upon by Straid Of Olaphis and even steady hand Mc Duff says some cryptic stuff about her, and Ornifex the weapon smith tells you some things about The Freja and if you unlock all his conversasions more is said by Man Scorpion Tark.
zxb995511 don't think I've ever seen anyone cover this detail in ds3 when it can to lore, but in the cathedral of the deep, there's cat like figures on the wall everywhere. not sure what it's supposed to mean but I belive they were also in ds2, in the castle.
Those cat statues are also in Bloodborne (in Cainhurst). I'm pretty sure they're just a real life architectural design that From have appropriated rather than anything lore significant. Banal, I know!
steve guff that cat spicies is called Abyssian, just a reference to the abyss.
Its debatable weather Man Scorpion Tark is referring to The Duke that created Freja or Aldia. I personally lean towards Aldia.
Aldia didn't created Freija, it was created because of the soul of the paledrake, aka seaths.
Didn't care for your smug demeanor in the initial response, but I'm really impressed with how you can admit to being guilty of it (just as bomberguy). Rest of the video should be interesting, regardless of your final opinion of the game.
Thanks. That was a big thing I wanted to get across in this video.
I have to agree. I have to admit, I'm glad Mitch went back to DS2 and gave it a real chance. It really gave me more respect for him. Personally, I love DS2 and I have a hard time ranking it because it was so different. It did so many things well that other Dark Souls games just didn't do. It had so many upsides that people don't recognize simply because of the fact that it's DS2. Yeah, it's different, but that doesn't make it bad. Sure, you enjoy it on a different level depending on your playstyle. Basically, I agree with everything Mitch said in this video and I really like the way he approached it.
ladle is all you need to justify good game
Honestly, I don't think you can ever label any souls game as "bad" or "not fun", they're all in a league of their own when compares to other games. It's really difficult to rank the series, because there are only really 5 games (DeS, DkS, DkS2, Bloodborne, and Dk3) in the whole subgenre lol
I know PvP gives the games longevity, which is necessary, but I feel like it's been the driving force for all the negativity in the community lol (figures, at least). People really shouldn't rate games that aren't focused on multiplayer by how good the multiplayer is lol
I've only played DkS3 and Bloodborne, but I've seen extensive gameplay on DkS2 and DkS1 btw
not the same as actually playing it but I guess it's as close as it gets
I would recommend you go back and play dark souls 1 Sam Horn it is also a great game
Sam Horn Playing Dark souls 2 is completely different than watching it. One reason why people dislike Dark souls 2 is it's floaty control and the responsiveness is not that great for a Souls game
Somebody probably has said this, but the lack of finality is a feature. The point is that its a cycle and you are just one person in one cycle of hundreds. It lacks finality because it isnt final.
What?
BigFry9591 The game is supposed to make you feel like it’s ending does not matter because, well... spoilers: it does not matter at the end of the day, as William said it’s a cycle and that is what you’re supposed to find out in DS2.
I realy liked The sneaky end youd get when you finished all The DLCs and equipped a crown.
You were immune to humanity loss. So you were not cured, but had in a less triumphant way found away around The curse.
A fitting way to finish The game imho
The finality of the game is hidden in its dlc.By acquiring the crowns you acquire the cure for the curse that you were looking for in the first place.The whole thing is just very poetic and personal.
But.... that's the same for all the "Relink the Flame" endings...?
I also feel that DS2 had many improvements that made it better, but also had some flaws that made it worse. However, I never understood the hatred for this game that some loved to dish out. Some want to only focus on the negatives while completely ignoring the positives. Many of the improvements that were initiated in DS2 were carried over to DS3, but DS2 never gets any credit. Ultimately, DS2 is a step forward in some ways, and a step backward in others. That still constitutes a good game, imho.
Spot on!
What about DS3? would you place it above DS2 even tho it has very little content compared to DS2 and some of that DS3 content is straight up from DS1 and 2. Don't forget they decided to remove poise for who knows why and magic is worst than melee by a lot in PVE wich makes for very little build variety also there is no reason to really go into NG+ unless you want 2 boss weapons from the same boss.
I for one liked the option to fight a boss again in NG (with bonfire astetics or whatever they are called) so you are not force to do everything again just for that 1 weapon/spell and in DS2 NG+ was actually different, remember it was the only one to CHANGE boss fights and that is amazing on it's own.
If DS2 is a step backward in some ways then DS3 is a step to the side lmao.
That's my point...DS3 does some things better and some things worse...whereas DS2 does some things better and some things worse. My point is that while both are flawed in some ways, they are both still good games...however some only want to focus on the negative aspects of DS2 while ignoring the good things.
haters hates DS2 because Miazaki wasnt part of project, he was working on Bloodborne at that time. So haters hate it just because its missing one name in credits... Because every one wanna look hip and cool.
When i try playing DS3 i just spam roll... And i was Knight... I wearing plate armor, right?? Why character does flips with heavy armor? Autobots roll out! Feeling of armor weight was lost.
it's feels wrong you didn't even touch on ds2 dlcs
J . Jonah Jameson best parts of ds2.
RevampedCobra73 better bosses ( , amazing level design, new weapons that added new features, and finally a freaking lore that even completes the one from the original game. Making a review about dark souls 2 ignoring the dlc is like reviewing a beta version of a game (which is actually the biggest problem of this game. But now you can find the sotfs edition for 20$ , so it's definitely worth buying it)
arthur roland your unnecessary parentheses really threw me off
Xan yeah I know , everytime i try to say lot of things i completely lose myself. Really annoying.
arthur roland a friend of mine got it for 10 of steam
The thing that SotFS did with the ending, though, was to encourage a perspective "Beyond the scope of light or dark", as Aldia puts it. Basically, your character can choose to give a big middle finger to all the notions of continuing the age or becoming a dark lord or whatever, and just leave to pursue a personal path. That final area does feel incomplete and a bit shit, but for me it just reinforced the notion of "Fuck all this cycle shit, I'm out."
Yeah, I liked the new ending.
Ironic isnt it :D
The SotFS ending didn't say you prevent world's ending if you choose your own path either. Otherwise who ever gives a shit about linking the fire?
SotFS was the perfect piece of shit.. they took their complete game, put in a couple extra enemies, changed some item location.. Put a shit covered bow on it & we all bought it.
Dark Souls 1 will always be the best
\\IŦÍ// Praise
\✷/ The
\|/ Sun
Dragonslayer Ornstein It’s quite refreshing to have a third, alternative path that’s neither so black or so white
@8:50
"Bearer of the curse, seek misery.
For misery will lead you to greater, stronger souls.
You will never meet the King with a soul so frail and pallid.
Seek those whose names are unutterable, the four endowed with immense souls.
Their souls will serve as beacons.
Once you have found them, return here to me.
So that hope will not fade away.
Bearer of the curse... Seek souls. Larger, more powerful souls.
Seek the King, that is the only way.
Lest this land swallow you whole... As it has so many others."
.Emerald Herald 2014
And there's the cat who says a couples sentences about each of those 4 bosses.
Oooooor bearer seek seek lest for people who skip it everytime lol
@@danielgulsvig1189 lol!!
I'm pretty sure you mean
"bearer of the curse...
seek...
seek...
lest..."
Also, the Crestfallen talks about them.
Never understood the hate ds2 got, it was different yes but i enjoyed the hell out of it. Plus i thought it had some of the best fashion souls of the series imo.
Oh, please. Give me a break with that rethoric. I enjoyed the hell out of it myself but don't act like you seriously "don't understand" the hate it gets. It's sad, don't.
It would probably have been received better if it wasnt named Dark Souls 2. Coming from Dark Souls people expected a sequel.
+Christian Cristof
How is it bad that doesn't understand the hate? Most of the complaints it gets are subjective. You can hate the level design but that doesn't mean others had to, you may hate the bosses but others may not, you may see a big problem with soul memory but others may not even be into PvP so that doesn't really effect their overall experience in the slightest.
Soracool123 bosses still sucked, though...
+Tudor Ciubotaru
Every souls game has its fair share of bad bosses. DS2 has the most overall so yeah there are more fodder bosses making it seem like it has the worst bosses, but don't forget you have DS1 with some of the worst bosses in the series.
I find it kinda frustrating hearing you essentially say "on this run through I paid attention to the dialogue and the world". Surely playing a game like this through with one eye on the wiki page is obviously going to limit your enjoyment somewhat.
It does seem kind of unfair to criticize a game for it's weaker story and lore and the feel of it's world... when you've been skipping through it.
It's fine to not like Dark Souls 2 story. But it sounds like this guy criticized it before he actually gave it a fair chance.
Sines314 really? Dudes played the game like a shit tone of times had more then enough time to listen and get into the game and your gonna blame him being on the wiki and not caring about the lore a few play threws as the reason to discredit the guy? Hahaha no, many of his points are fair and just you just can't stand someone not liking your game
Michael Santangelo your dumb, if you dont pay attention to the story you have no valid opinion on the story cause YOU DONT KNOW THE STORY. better luck next time being a shitbag lol
Lexort 420 *you're**you are***thou art****thou'st art
Yeah when I heard that, I thought, "isn't that just how you're supposed to play games?"
I love the atmosphere and feeling of Drangleic. It has such a feeling of loneliness and sorrow and I love it. If this game was given the full remaster treatment to make it look on par with DS3 it would be insane.
Haha I am happy that From Software will probably never do that.
Or if it gets Remake from remake experts like Bluepoint just the way they did for Demons Souls, it might go for being the "worst" Dark Souls to being the Best one
I never feel lonely because there is always bunch of enemies chasing me
Would have to fix most of the bosses and areas since they are shit to meh
One thing I really like about DS2 is all the fucking items that are hidden. There are soo many items one will miss if they don't do a certain thing or kill a certain enemy and sometimes need to get really lucky. The fashion souls is by far the best out of the series due to this.
Also weapon stance.
Not a hiden thing but who doesnt love to run around dressed as a fool killing huge enemys( im talking about the fool armor in the iron castle)
rakkatytam you also can't talk about what was good about ds2 without just pancaking everything in the game powerstancing ultra greatswords
i played through dark souls 2 amd decided to restart, so im at the forest of fallen giants and find 2 parts in it i completely missed in my first run
rakkatytam I fucking hate that
Somebody You May Know best part about a game is when you replay it and find new things
I loved dark souls 2. Sadly I still need a PS4 for BB.
Josiah Duff prepare for death, you gotta go out of your dark souls comfort zone in that game lol
Josiah Duff nah man bb is more casual definitely
ShK0 0 its hilarious how BB base game is a joke, but the dlc is hard af on NG+ variants
Josiah Duff I think Ds2 is free this month if you're a ps plus member on ps4.
Aether Veilborne bullshit
I-I'm sorry can we discuss how much From cares about ventriloquism? Every person I talk to in these games is really really good at it I'm telling you.
Brandon Medeiros LOL
Brandon Medeiros Lore Implications?
andre and lothric seem to have.... not mastered it.
Brandon Medeiros andre the blacksmith move his mouth when talking, I think he is the only one who can do that
He can only do it in 3 because it was accidentally in 1
I really enjoyed ds2.. beautiful game with a great sense of exploration and mystery
@@thethethehthehthe I totally agree.. it's like there's some emptiness and whatever was there is just... gone now
I think we can all agree on one thing.
DS2 PVP is superior to DS3 PVP.
Well DKS3 PVP is shit, lol.
PvP is absolutely irrelevant, it doesn't matter, in a few years people will move on and it'll be gone. It's a side diversion, less than a game within a game.
Only the main game, the levels and the world the developers built and the encounters they designed, remain, and is thus what the games will be judged by beyond a short span of time.
Steel Tarkus PVP is extremely relevant to the longevity of a game.
Steel Tarkus yes, because it never gets boring killing the exact same enemies over and over again.
Steel Tarkus what an absolute shit you said.
DS1 and DS2 reminds me of Legend of Zelda and Legend of Zelda 2. Both games are really good but lots of people hate the sequel because it's different, which means it must be "bad". Then you get mob mentality where people want to join in the hate and negativity.
DS1 reminds me more of Castlevania Symphony of the Night. If DS1 had more music in each different area it would've been perfect
the opening to dark souls 2 is about the story.
the whole game basicly is about the curse and its effects
also, this is the only game where the story is about you.
sure theres mentions about the big players in the world.
but in the end its you who is important. you as the player get to know exactly as much as your character.
as your character doesnt even know drangleic. and its inhabitants.
most people just want a cool cinematic with cool guys to show off.
and dark souls 2 isnt about that
I recently started playing DS2 and while I agree with you, it could have been done a lot better. I felt like it focused maybe 60% on how difficult the game was going to be and 40% on the story, which kind of ruined it for me. I get it, I'm going to die and lose my souls. You don't need to tell me 10 times in the first two minutes of the game.
Bloodborne imo did what you're explaining much better. There's no cinematic explaining what you're about to face, just a contract and you receiving a blood transfusion. You learn quickly afterwards that you came to Yharnam to receive blood healing, and that you became a Hunter via the contract. All that you know about Yharnam comes from NPCs, most of whom tell you to fuck off because you're an outsider.
The opening sets the tone and lets you know what the theme of the game is going to be about; Recursion, nihilism, and the eternal struggle for meaning and survival. The game outright slaps in the face with the fact that things that were increadibly important in the first game don't mean anything in the face of time as kingdoms fall, great magics wither, legends are forgotten, and the greatest works of man and gods break and lay buried in the dirt like trash. The opening doesn't bother with vendrick or the lord bosses because they don't mater in the grand scheme of things as events repeat themselves and don't mater to you a lowly hollow as they are simply obstacles on your path. The reason the map doesn't make sense is not because they were lazy but because that's the point, the theme, you're losing your mind and are lost and confused blindly chasing down a some ill defined goal in the barest hope of achieving something you don't even recall. The crone's lines about dying over and over isn't some sort of "haha, this game is hard" nudge nudge wink wink moment, it's there to let you know that being a hollow is about struggling against forces you can't comprehend in an uncaring world, it's like something out of Nietzsche. However the game does also give it's light moments, shwoing the "silver lining" or perhaps the light that allows the shadows to exist in the hopeful inspiring spots, overcoming challenges, the ability to retain yourselves and struggle eternally so long as you remain strong of will, and the one ember item that tells you that even when everything is dead and gone there still exists a spark to reignite the flame again.
SupahFly the story of dks2 makes 0 fucking sense,they said its in a different universe but add so many references,items,bosses and npcs from dks 1‘s universe
@@m4sch1nom29 They never said it was in a different universe from DS1, just that it's in a time so long after that most proof that DS1 existed has long been eroded by time. Something that is a theme in DS2, that all things eventually end up forgotten, we see this in on of the NPCs having been petrified for so long the kingdom he came from has been erased from history. The only thing it's in a different universe from is Demon Souls and all the souls game still have the oblique reference to that game.
Ds1 is the first born that everyone enjoyed during honeymoon phase ds2 is the middle child that comes in during the tough parts of marriage and gets the blunt of emotional tragedy. Ds3 comes in after everything calmed down and is spoiled by everybody for being the baby.
True. Dark Souls 2 is the one that had it the hardest and it shows. A Lot....
For me personally, Dark Souls 2 nails an environment where everything has nearly achieved a sense of peace.
I can’t really vouch for Dark Souls 1, but based on my viewing of that game, it still felt as if there was a conflict afoot, even if it had no relation to the player. In Dark Souls 3, the world feels as if it’s actively falling apart and you’re just along for the ride.
In Dark Souls 2, the world feels old, and all of the people just left. There’s nothing else here for them, and yet you’re combing through the remains. It doesn’t feel grand like Dark Souls 1/3, it feels as though you were a couple hundred years late, and now everything is just...done. You’re just some pointless hollow working their way through the scraps of a dead kingdom in the vain hope that you can pull together the scraps of memories that mean nothing to you anymore. The story focuses on what YOU want to do, moreso than what you’re doing for the world. You aren’t fighting incredible horrors and monsters in order to save the world. You’re fighting to ultimately save yourself (and hence why this game is the only one that allows an option where you completely circumvent the linking of the fire.)
Imo, I think every dks game is great in different ways, and that people need to stop tearing apart whichever game isn't their favorite.
POOKIE POW Agreed
POOKIE POW just have fun with all, because BB is my favorite I still love demons, ds1 2 and 3 I don't get the argumebt
I'm just tired of people constantly bashing DKS3, yet constantly tell me DKS2 was peak perfection. DKS2 was probably the most disappointing to me because of its stupid emphasis on "PvP" with a very boring levels and bosses. I started on DS and eagerly looked forward towards every release. By no means do I hate DKS2, but by no means is it my favorite. Demon's souls was my favorite for that atmosphere it gave off. Sadly, only Bloodborne was able to recreate that for me. All the others felt to light hearted comparatively.
Livid77 loooool you're the only one that heard that, more than half the fanbase religiously defends Dark Souls 1 and shits on Dark Souls 2 every chance they get. Dark Souls 3 wasn't great, it was a just a big copy paste fan service instead of making new actual content. That's lazy and the fact that they changed the whole core of the game to DarkBorne style was garbage.
Jordan Robinson here you accuse me of being a fanboy. Yet, here are your comments spewing this filthy fanboyism attitude. Dark souls 2 was the biggest disappointment in the series and everyone knows it. It started with the watered down graphics, the areas being the most boring and shortest in the series, and the egregious sin of boring repetitive bosses. Lets not forget the bullshit that was soul memory that killed any hope of fun for long time who enjoyed invading and arena.
I had to stop and stare for a bit when I came across Drangleic castle, Vendrick, Black Gulch, and Shulva. The game is beautiful.
DS2 may have less "soul" of a Soul game than other Soul games, but it certainly isn't a bad game. Not at all.
Tonni the thing with ds2 isn't that it's bad, it's that some problems, like the fact hitting enemies feels like hitting air, makes the game unenjoyable for people that care about it.
Tonni I am liking your comment mostly because I had no idea what you were saying at first
DK KR
I don't understand how people understood my comment
read it backwards flipped upside down in an 88 degrees angle
that you realize I was lying about understanding your comment
Main flaw of DaS2 to me is that while I feel skilled for traversing an area and only using about 3 estus flasks and 4 lifegems... It isn't fun. Sure, I've got the pulling and luring formula and a thousand alluring skulls and yearn casts but it isn't fun like Nioh is, that game handles environmental challenges well and doesn't force the same one over and over
the biggest problem for me about DS2, strangely, is that your character animations are very floaty and unrealistic and it breaks my immersion so hard.
its the same for everything in the game.
it feels like the changed everything back to some sort of beta version of demon souls.
DS1 and DS3 have a more realistic feel as far as movement go.
WHAT I LOVE ABOUT DS2 is its variety in armor and weapons and what those weapons and armor do for you other than just look cool.
sad to me that they combined these two things in DS2 but didnt bring the variety in to DS3
Pretty much, yeah. The animations, even in DS1 are pretty beautiful. DS2 does lack a bit of polish in that regard.
Those Falconer running animations... :(
My favorite part is how many more they put into the game with the release of Scholar of the First Sin. In the original, you saw like 3 ever, and they were in NG+ at the place where you spawn in. Places like the Shaded Woods area leading up to the castle just had more of those grotesque looking hollows, and the Brightstone Cove had Peasants in the camp I believe.
This is why I hate part of the Souls community. It's not people changing their minds, it's that they clearly don't know what they want out of the series. I love the series but some people just put such absurdly high expectations on these games.
HeacyArtillery6 aaand no one gives a fuck
@@iRandom_Thoughts aaaaaand you are correct about that
Is it absurd from me to expect hitboxes that aren't completely broken? Functioning AI? Balanced healing system and issued stat called ADP?
GreiBert and? Go play dark souls remastered and then ask if it’s absurd. Cos playing a game filled with game breaking glitches, bugs and exploits is one thing, but playing a remastered versions and those problems STILL EXIST, is a whole other problem in itself
@@znightowlz6585 I didn't find any game-breaking glitches in the Remastered version. However, it is absolutely possible that I just missed them, BUT the thing you are doing here is a logical fallacy, because you are not at all addresing the problem presented by me. I didn't say other games are flawless, because they aren't. I noticed game breaking hitboxes in DS2, not in DS3 nor in DS1 or DSR.
For all who say "DS 2 is too ez", there is a covenant for you, legends say that this was the vanilla idea of the difficulty for DS2
I just bought it again, and got in that, ruin sentinels are beating my cheeks
Kite The Dank they clapping them as well? If not they aren’t pounding ass properly
Kite The Dank ....wait....you were talking about face checks not ass checks....
@@znightowlz6585 🤦he means they're beating his ass
It feels easy because you played ds1 first... Ds2 in paper is a lot more harder...
I loved dark souls 2
dtee taylor thank you friend
me too :p
dtee taylor I hated slow and clunky
Me too. Haters are being silly, talking about how it 'feels', etc.
'I also read a lot of hatred of dark souls 2 before I played it so this might have given me a bit of a bias before I actually played the game...' This. I never read any hatred for dark souls 2 before I played it and I've never understood why people hate on the game. I had no idea there were people who didn't like it until I joined an online dark souls community. To this day I don't understand their reasons, and it honestly sounds like the haters are just going along with an idea because it's cool. There are other great games who have suffered the curse of the hit game sequel. The curse is basically when people don't like any change, so they judge the sequel of a hit game so harshly that their critique doesn't even make sense. It takes years for those games to be seen for the gems they are. Some examples are Majoras Mask and Metroid Prime 2: Echoes.
Jason Steiner I think people who got good at dark souls expected to be gods in DS2 and then when they got shit on because it plays VERY differently it's because the game sucks.. and not the players.
i can't talk for the "haters" from the community because im not in touch with it whatsoever. nor did i get any bad bias towards dark souls 2 from the internet. nontheless i had some issues that really lowered the fun for me in ds2.
first of, as i mentioned i didnt have a bias towards dark souls2. it was quite the opposite: i had huge expectations because i loved dark souls a lot. i played dark souls 1 on the computer with mods to increase the looks and atmosphere. and then i bought for 60euros dark souls 2 for the playstation 2 and it looked worse then a game than ds1 that i bought for 10 euros in steam. im not a graphic nazi, but still i expected more. especially after the numerous trailers with all those great lighting effects from the games convention. i kinda felt betrayed a little. i know many developers do it like this, but for me it was the first time that i played a game so much downgraded from the promotion.
second big issue i had with ds2 was the level design. not the levels per se but how they are connected. at some point you were traveling up a castle, took an elevator at the very top, that shouldnt even be there and landed in an area full of lava. stuff like this. and remember how many people hated blight town in the first part? for me it was the same with several areas in ds2. i didnt like the poison swamp. i didnt like the poison cave. but i can forgive all this if it were not for the third point:
i was very dissappointed with the bosses. most of them were just big humanoids, and very forgettable. and one more thing, even after my second playthrough i had think really hard which bosses were the lord souls. they didnt stand out in any way for me. if i think about ds1 nito, seath and so on; they had so much more character. for me at least.
as you can see i dont even criticize any of the game mechanics. i enjoyed the game and it was fun. but for me it was without a second thought the worst part of the souls series. to be fair, it was also the only part where i didnt play the dlcs.
or jsut short: bad level design and forgetable bosses.
You should check out the DLC's. There's some great bosses there.
honestly I dont hate DS2 but I dont love it either my main issue with it is how the world fits together like how MrCaturday said climbing to the top of a castle just to take and elevator up to a lava zone makes no since and everything felt really separate for me I did like how most of the areas looked but they just didnt make much since from how they should have fit together it just felt a little sloppy. the combat was fine if it did feel a little slow at times but it was reasonable. The only other thing that kinda bugged me was the bosses some of them were good but some of them felt more of they just wanted to put a boss there so here you are with little so no reason why it should be there. I have not yet played threw all the DLCs for DS2 but I do have a boss that I did enjoy fighting in the main game witch was the Lost Sinner I thought the boss was well made and the fight was fair but difficult the way to her was not that fun thou and felt more like a chore kind of like getting to Nito was in DS1 except the closest bonfire was way to close to enemies in DS2 for that one bonfire it was really annoying.
People always have their share of opinions but for me Dark Souls 2 is a really good game. I had so much fun beating the hollowed undead and the badass boss. The feelings of despair, frustration mixed with excitement and joy is indescribable and only could be experienced in the Souls series.
DS1, DS2 and DS3 all three have good things and flaws. I still like DS2 the best, so I am gladd it gets some love
Sansker
_Stop it, get some help_ - Micheal Jordan
Sansker glad someone else thinks ds2 is the best
Harris is 100% wrong about shields in the Dark Souls games, he straight up said that if you use a shield you're playing the game wrong.
This. Harris's review is a God damn embarrassment, he was right about next to nothing.
Thank goodness for people like Mauler calling him out in great detail.
Thank you.
@@exeledusprince9165 Unfortunately if you try to direct them to that critique they whine about it being to long
@@ThisisKyle shame really. Theres so much quality to it.
Just an FYI you can prevent a roll after a jump. Just do a plunging attack
why the fuck didn't i ever think of that...
Well I feel dumb now.
caleb hubble life saving technique #12
caleb hubble That is going to make that one jump in hunyer's copse so much easier.
You are a saint and a genius
I'm surprised you didn't bring up the changes ds2 makes in ng+. In ds3, everyone just has more health and damage output whereas in ds2, we see some new enemies and items. I personally loved that about ds2. It kept the game fresh during multiple playthroughs.
Better New Game Plus and Bonfire Ascetics were pretty much the only universally loved thing about Dark Souls 2. So it's really a shame these things weren't carried on into Bloodborne and Dark Souls 3...
the build diversity?
CryptoAgudio agreed!
ds3 has new rings on subsequent playthroughs too but yeah
well as a player who always plays with out shield and with dex build i hated the 2 pyros that came out of the walls when you first reached the sinner in ng+ :D
magic variety in DS2 was TOP NOTCH compared to the other games.
even if you dont like the lore of Hexing, the actual spells are fun to use and the utility was interesting with the choice to reduce vision for defense or blow up dead bodies or sacrifice souls for damage.
alot of that variety and utility is lost in DS3 with its focus on melee combat to the detriment of everything ells (look at crossbows between the 2 games)
DS2 had many great implementations. Did it contain problems? Yes. But so does DS3 and DS1. The worst part is when people claim the bosses are all uniteresting and copy pasted. And then they move on to say DS3 did a good job. Lul.
Like he says, every souls game has it fair share of problems.
@@Wexexx
I mean, the only time you fight the same boss in Ds3 is Gundyr... and you can hardly call that the same fight.
It's not like you fight the dragon rider 4 times
What about the fourth asylum demon and the old demon king?
@@Wexexx My main issue with DS2 is that enemies eventually stop spawning, and also a lot of the bosses suck. Don't get me wrong, quite a few are great, it's just hard to ignore the dragonrider, the covetous demon, and more.
DaDmoon BLade I thought they were a great call back to the first game without overstaying their welcome, plus the stray demon was only an optional boss
First of: I think it's great, that you reflected on your opinion on dark souls 2 and dont stick to your first impression, like so many people do.
For me personally, DS1 will always be THE souls game, which doesn't mean it is without it's flaws. The second half was notibly... less good, I guess (not really sure how to put it rightly, since it still was pretty good, when compared to anything else, not souls), the pvp was pretty much just backstab fishing, the framerate issues and so on. What really worked however, was the atmosphere. No game to date, souls or otherwise, came even close to that.
I never was one of the DS2 haters. I always thought it was a fun game, which in some ways was worse than DS1 (espacially the formerly praised atmosphere, as well as the overall asthetic) and in some ways improved on it. It is definitly the game with the best variety and viability in magic, hands down. Also, pvp is better than in DS1 and at least on par with DS3.
What stands out most however, is that they CHANGED things, they tried to improve from Dark Souls, as opposed to DS3, which is 'just' Dark Souls all over again. The whole game is pretty much all fan service, which was decidedly disappointing for me when the game came out. I still like it, but it's like Star Wars 7: the same old thing all over again.
This is why I still can't decide on a ranking of the souls games. DS1 is the game I most enjoyed, however that simply isn't objective since it was my first souls game, and nostalgia plays a big part in this. Still, number one. However, between 2 & 3
I can't decide.
On a sidenote: For some reason I don't really like bloodborne. When I first played it, I only had one or two playthroughs of DS1 under my belt and was more or less a 'filthy casul' who was mostly relying on a shield to stay alive and got hammered by BB. I went back to it recently though and finished it more or less effortlessly (-old hunters) and still, even though eldritch horror is right up my alley, I liked it the least out of all the souls games.
Maybe, but I think it mostly comes down to the fact, that I find the game... kinda ugly
MrMoepz my god.. I swear people like you don't understand the difference between a sequel and just putting shit in a game for the hell of it. Dark souls 3 is the CONCLUSION of the series, why the fuck would it be its own thing?
You're not necessarily wrong, but your not right. Miazaki is only on a "break" from Dark Souls. there could be a release for DS4 or BB2 tomorrow for all anyone knows.
I feel like no one can really say X souls game is the best, due to all of them having unique problems, and that will rub some people off the wrong way compared to others. I can't fucking stand how slow DS2 feels, and how cheesy some of the enemies are with hitboxes, I-frames, hyper armor which shouldn't be on certain enemies, etc. I do like how they made fashion souls great again, and actually tried to use more than the same 5 color palettes that is usually incorperated in these games
TL;DR: Nostalgia, and personal preference is what makes a good DSbourne game.
Easy there fella. As I said, I still like DS3 a lot. I just think that with DS3 they went the lazy route. They made pretty much exactly the same game as DS1, except with a few, well, maybe a lot of QOL improvements and even more fan service. Andre? Really? Come on... And that is not what a sequel is to me. A sequel does need to try some new things. If a series of books, or movies would be the exact same story every time, except with different character names, wouldn't that get boring really fast?
This worked once, and for now, I don't even begrudge them for it. Because in the end it is still a good game. I just hope that when from returns to Dark Souls (and let's not kid ourselves, they WILL return eventually), it won't be for Dark Souls 1.3.
MrMoepz I think that the fan service was done that way on purpose. DS3 is essentially a meta commentary on letting Dark Souls go and try exploring new worlds
Bruh what do you mean there’s no “finality” to the soul of cinder. He literally uses the power of Gwyn, takes his Moveset and his music and makes this last ditch effort to prevent you from linking the fire. I almost feel like it was more final than Gwyn, but I know that’s a stretch
Gael is true finality
This is true, Ds3’s ending felt way more final than Ds1 for some reason
Yeah Soul of Cinder is the final attempt of the First Flame to do something cause it fades out in every single ending of the game anyway so basically by killing SoC you finish it
Can't imagine something more final to this game even though Gael fight is the finale to the series
I never understood the dark souls 2 hate. In some aspects like customization I thought it was the best. I actually played ds1 ds2 bloodborne ds3 in that order. Ds2 feels more like a videogame-game version of dark souls if u know what I mean like each section was more like a level that one big world
Original ds2 was my most favorite dks game in the entire series until sots changed the way giant lord used to be a way to farm 1.2m souls per kill, it dropped 700 or 600k even with all that shit i used to use for the soul boosts.
Original ds2 is still superior to sots.
Rolling is all messed up, hit boxes are all messed up, parrying & blocking and that lazy delay between pressing the attack button and the character hitting.. all of these things made me just wanna puke at ds2 it was never fun for me
What about Demon's Souls?
@@Alcatraz12m Just different, and not really that much
@DCaladbolg Are you fucking for real? Go watch MauLer video on this topic, he shows many examples of shit hitboxes, shit grabs, shit backstabs.
And if you ever played DS1 and DS2 you should have noticed that hitboxes in DS1 are pretty fucking good, they are not perfect, but definitely better than DS2 bullshit.
I feel like I always talk down to Dark Souls 2 , but I dont regret any of my time I put into the game.
EpicxNerd73 same. I bought sotfs a week ago and have already put in 50 hours and almost gotten the platinum. I still like 1 and bloodborne more, but its enjoyable.
i have like 250hrs in ds2 and SotFS combined, only 60 in ds3, cant really say why but ds2 is the chapter I enjoyed the most
Andrew Teller I started grinding it from sround SL 15 like 2 weeks ago, and I'm like level 230 now.
I like all Souls games. 1 is my favorite overall because I'm biased by nostalgia. I also really liked 2. But I don't think it feels like a Souls game. It feels a bit more clunky and you have less control over your character. Attacks have great and fluid animations but all the movements (aside from weapons) feel a bit slower. It definitely did some things better, like powerstancing is an obvious one. The way characters held weapons looked nicer to me. They were at a downward angle like in Bloodborne. 3 falls somewhere between 1 and 2 for me, and Bloodborne is the one I enjoy the most, nostalgia aside. It's got everything I want, and damn is it a gorgeous game.
Now, time to actually watch the video.
Maybe the less control over your character is a PC thing, because I play on Xbox One and have never felt like I told my character to something, and they didn't do it.
We need more people like you. People who like all the games, but just to varying degrees.
Angus Jameson The less control is just how the game works. You can't immediately turn around in Dark Souls 2. You can't switch directions while attacking, your character slowly changes that direction. You may not know what I'm talking about but here's an example: you roll, then decide to attack opposite direction you attacked with a roll attack. In 2, your character either attacks to his left or right, trying to turn around. In DeS, 1, 3, or Bloodborne, you immediately attack exactly where you wanted. But yes, I love DS2 for what it is.
Its just my opinion, but I feel the slower turning is more realistic. Yes the instantaneous turning does give you more control, I will not deny that, but does look a little odd when your does an instant 180 with moving their legs.
Thanks for explains that to me, though, I understand your thinking now, and I can respect your opinion.
Angus Jameson It is more realistic for sure! Same wirh DS2's rolling. It's a lot longer, slower, and when you roll backwards you actually turn around, instead of doing what's physically impossible like in DS1 or 3, which is rolling opposite the direction you're facing.
I really enjoyed ds2 it was around the time when I was depressed and very far away from people and when I was depressed I played this for the first time and i was so enveloped into the story and I was so mesmerized by the design and story It really changed me after this one memorable experience of a game.
I don't know for some reason I'm drawn too Dark Souls 2. I find it fun and entertaining. This reason it's kind of my favorite and I guess I really just enjoy the atmosphere I don't know but I keep coming back to it.
Shouldn't the official title of this video be called "In defense in defense in defense of dark souls 2?"
mark walker XD
The problem is some idiots succeeded to spread some cancer and hate over DS2 and every weak minds listened. And after, more people got poisoned. DS2 is my favourite Souls series. And yes, I started in 2009 with demon's Souls and platinum all the games no exception.
I MISS MY POWER STANCE WITH MY 2 ULTRA GREATSWORDS!!!
I did a powerstance crypt blacksword build once that did 1400+ per hit
Dark Souls 2: SotFS is my favorite in the series simply for the PvP and customization. I still like to coop and invade to this day to try out different builds. Yes the enemies and bosses were underwhelming and the story and level design was very vague and sometimes made no sense. But after really thinking about, the story, your quest, and the level design all fit the central theme of the game. None of it is suppose to make sense and everything is genuinely meaningless because there's nothing you can do to change the cycle of the curse. You're losing your mind as you grow closer to your hollow state, the world and time itself is collapsing and overlapping, taking the throne will only make you another Vendrick, another Gywn prolonging the inevitable of humankind's extinction. This cycle of trying to Kindle the flame has been done SO many times, so many kingdoms have risen and fallen with the same outcome. You're just another wanderer slowly going hallow like everyone else and there's nothing you can do. The story may not be as obvious and somewhat lacking, but it is deep and fits the theme of Dark Souls. I respect the game for what it is and that it tried to be different.
Fuck it took a long time for the community to realize this shit. Welcome to the circlejerk, brother. Fightclubs on the bridge :^)
You played this game without wiki and skipping dialogs for the first time? Are. You. Fuckin. Serious?
I mean...really?! What are you? A casual? This is what Souls and Bloodborne is about!
Mischu Wischu You can play BB and DS while skipping dialogue, it's not really that hard.
Austin S sure it's not hard but why someone does that and scores a game bad because of that is just beyond me. The lore is one aspect which made this game so special. That he changed his mind after following the dialoges etc. shows exactly this.
Mischu Wischu
Lore is interesting, but it's not the game. If it was, it'd be a visual novel.
grimbldoo, "lore is not the game"? what does this even mean? so every game either needs to be a visual novel or have no lore whatsoever? lore/narrative/dialogue is what fleshes game worlds out and makes them feel interesting and lived in. that's fine if you want to play a game by skipping all the dialogue, but its certainly not the way its meant to be played...
Misko 1023
It means what it says, lore is not the game.
I've always had a hard time describing how Dark Souls and DaS2's stories are different, while neither being truly "better" than the other. But I think I've found a description that fits pretty nicely. The story of the first game relies heavily on the characters to get the history across to the player. Many characters are very significant to the plot, and are talked about extensively in-game. But Dark Souls 2 focuses far more heavily on the politics of the universe first and foremost. I feel this works because the main theme was already so well fleshed out in the first game, so it lent to the notion that they can now flesh out the WORLD more in the second game. People are less talked about, while locations and events take center stage and become the focal point of a lot of dialogue in 2. I've always loved this about DaS2. I've always been more invested in lore aspects involving geography, historical events, and how the world itself is being affected, rather than a story that focuses more on individual characters. I know I'm a minority in that sense, and I can see how it would be odd to some. Most people want characters to relate to and fall in love with.
For me, DS2 is the best in the series. The gameplay isn’t as fast as DS3, but the journey through the world feels epic. I’m talking about the scholar of the first sin edition. After completing a play through of the game you feel like you have been through hell lol. There is such a great tone and feel to the environment of the world. It’s the same feeling of desperation to overcome as the first game, but you know more about the world like you said. The story feels fleshed out, and what I love about DS2 is that you get more time to enjoy the journey rather than just the end of the story. In DS1 It was so heavily emphasized that you would be Gwyn’s successor that you almost forget you are your own character. In DS2 it feels like there’s more of a choice in a way. I don’t know how to describe it. The covenants are very interesting to me, and I really enjoy the ways that they can overlap. DS2 is special in its own way. Don’t get me wrong, I still love DS1 so much. Im playing it currently, but I don’t think DS2 gets the credit it deserves
Personally, I think Dark souls 2 is the funnest in the series to replay. While I haven't played Bloodborne or 3 yet, Dark Souls 2 is nice because starting a new game in it actually has encouraged me to try new play styles that I never would've tried. NG+ is a lot more fun in other souls games but new games in 1 and demon's can be very punishing if you're not used to what you're doing, Dark souls far more so.
*cough* kamikaze mummies *cough*
Casual Apple Ey now, kamikaze enemies are a tradition in the DS series. I vaguely remember getting my ass roasted in the cathedral of the deep a few times by them.
The Ethereal Apple
*I'm gunna blow up!*
Just want to point out how beautiful DS2's intro cinematic is compared to all the other three. The lighting, realism, and especially the rain in the forest I find incredible
Ds2 is the best for me not for the bosses or the pve in general but the feeling. The windblowing atmosphere matches so well with your character and other characters that are forgetful, without purpose in this hopeless place of Drangleic that does it for me.
I always thought people were pretty unfair to 2, but I also recognize my own bias. It was my first one and my friends who played the first one talked me into pre-ordering it and we spent all of spring break in a small room with all our Xboxes and slammed through it. I was the new guy so I thought it was super challenging but I had dudes in the same room to play with (when soul memory wasn't being admittedly idiotic). There's a lot of the same type of nostalgia people have for 1 that I have for 2. That might skew my opinion of the game a bit, but in other ways I had no expectations or baggage from 1. I was able to judge it completely on its own merits. Also worth noting I've never bothered with SOTFS.
i just dont like pivoting , maybe im stupid, but i hate how enemies can pivot mid attack animation to hit me after i moved out of range but i cant do that. idk. in DS1 the only enemies that came close to being able to do that to me were just giants in anor londo but wayyyy less than most enemies ive met in DS2. that and enemy placement. maybe if i played with mods to remedy those two things it wouldnt leave such a sour taste in my mouth.
most of those are justified by realism, when you thrust a sword in real life you can change it's direction at the last second. You can also do it yourself by turning the analog stick as you attack.
@@Ghorda9 Also for game play it kinda seems to suck the suspense out of fighting a trained knight who's rendered completely powerless by you drifting slightly to the left.
Ghorda9 Then whats the point of adding a dodge mechanic when enemies can nullify it by Ista turning. This is A Game and Compramize needs to be made over 'realism'.
If i wanted realistic sword combat, i would practice HEMA.
@@jazzmaster909 1st, they can't if you actually get gud and learn to dodge at the right time instead of just roll spamming like a noob. Second, the tracking was so bad in the first game that you didn't HAVE to roll to avoid it, you could simply just walk slightly to the left to avoid attacks.
The enemy tracking in DS2 is pretty horseshit. It takes away all the depth from the combat and forces you to approach everyone in the same way. The lousy hit boxes exacerbate this usually.
The more you play this game, the more you like it.
Just recently played through all 3 within a few months and I love all of them and have something unique about each of them.
I should by doing uni work right now but instead I'm watching this. I have no will power.
O.O. Same here....
Same. Have a fuck ton of law books to dig into and here I am watching Mitch.
He really had to say "by Gwyn" 😂
"bosses don't require a change of strategy"
as you get dumped on by the dragonriders because you're using a slow weapon, and get dumped on by the demon of song because you're overencumbered lol
Just get a rapier and you have practically won
Toxically Masculine using an op wep isnt a change of strat,its being a puss
well speak´d ma skeleton @@m4sch1nom29
After fighting The Rotten I found out I did way better without any armor on, just a shield and a weapon was enough.
@@TheThor219 I'm always naked and longsword through whole the game heavy attack of the longsword here are the same moveset as rapier
Dark Souls 1 feels mysterious to me. Dark Souls 2 feels Large
Dark Souls 3 feels epic
Bloodborne feels Dream like
Talon134 And Demon Souls?
Imposing perhaps?
My favourite build I've ever had in ANY of the three souls games came from Dark Souls 2. Dual wielding blue flames with crystal magic weapon, soul greatsword, and some ranged spells was the best. I feel like the sheer amount of different weapons and how you can build around them really helped keep the games longevity for me personally. In 1, I always seem to fall back on some variation on Pyro+Dex or Giantdad, same for 3 (minus the poise face tanking of course). The DLC weapons and spells in 3 helped keep things interesting too, but 2 was always the game I was able to come back to whenever I was bored.
Dark Souls II may possibly be my favourite in the series. However, in descending rank order, these are what I feel are the big stains, without which I think the game would be hugely more popular:
8 Shrine of Amana
7 Backtracking to Executioner Chariot
6 Brume Tower
5 Black gulch
4 Iron Keep
3 No man’s wharf
2 Backtracking to blue smelter demon
1 Backtracking to Sir Alonne
Ds2 had a a much bleaker, darker atmosphere than the other games. You are isolated in its world. I love it
It's a great game. It just isn't the best dark souls :D
Dying much when platforming? I have the solution for you
Plunging attacks
It's the most reliable move in the game!
@@ZlatkoTheGod I see, a man of culture as well.
I started out by playing bloodborne and fell in love with it (never played dark souls before at the time) i loved it so much that when dark souls 3 came out i decided to buy that game because i heard it was "simular to bloodborne" and i ended up loving that game also. I decided to try dark souls 2 after that and something just seemed alittle off but i still played it but definetly nowhere near as much as the other 2 games. And then i just recently got dark souls remastered and i dont know i think its my favorite out of all of them something about the world and how it all connects is amazing you can tell they really put some time and patience into that game. i wish they would just keep making more dark souls games, we nees darks souls 4 damnit!
I don't think decent amount of armor and weapons are enough to describe the insane level of customization in ds2. So many weapons and armors are there that look unique and astheticly pleasing.
I just hate how the running animation in ds2 makes it look like you are skipping through the decrepit continent... it freaks me out +Mitch L
Steven Holt Drangleic, tis a silly place
Pros:
+Heide Knights are cool
Cons:
-Hitboxes
I never had hit box issues. Then again, I leveled the shit out of ADP.
@@phoenix8984 Even then, it's is a glaring issue. Especially if you don't level ADP.
@@BigFry9591 Yeah it is. But at least the game gives you enough souls to compensate. But the issue makes SL1 brutal.
@@phoenix8984 Yeah, I suppose. And New players have no idea about it (unless told about), given that the description on ADP is pretty awful.
@@BigFry9591 Ι think i was one of the few that i leveled up ADP even if i had no idea what it does. I always tend to focus on mobility and i thought ADP (with AGILITY) made me faster or leveled up my attack speed (lol xD) so i leveled it up first and paid more attention there. After noticing no different i looked up in youtube and i saw it was about s lmao
the ONLY things that ds2 could've done without was the enemy vanishing after so many times killing them, then the soul memory. other than that ds2 was well designed, especially the DLCS . the 3 were amazing. then the use of red phantoms after so many ng+ kept things interesting. which still leads me to believe the series isn't over. Mr M. said HE wasn't going to work on a souls game now but doesn't mean his team wont. I hope they do cause it's just 1 of those games thats, that good it could survive many sequels. think about it & let the feast begin
It's certainly annoying with enemies stopping to spawn if you're farming them for stuff (Frickin Heide Knights...) but there is 2 built-in ways to alleviate that, Covenant of Champions (available in Majula) and Bonfire Ascetics.
completely agree, those where two of three issues i had with the game, third issue was how long it's been and they never fixed Faith after they fucked it raw, but tbh it ain't so bad once i trained myself to play more passive i guess...
I'd be so fucking happy if 'B-Team' made another DS game if it was like DS2
steve guff DS2 wasn't well designed if we're going by Souls standards. Levels were bland and lacked the creativity of 1, combat and rolling felt clunkier, the bosses weren't nearly as memorable or fun to fight, and there were way too many gank squads of enemies. It did improve on several things though, like PvE, Co-op, performance, and the UI.
NG+9 is the highest difficulty I'm pretty certain, and the damage enemies do doesn't become all that significant with each increase after the first, so I highly doubt that.
This makes me want to play dks2 again. I really loved it.
DS2 was way more fun than DS1 imo, the bonfire placement was extremely consistent and the environments were so different and engaging (some of the best in the series), each one offering new mechanics and tools to overcome the areas. An underrated and overhated gem
Ds123 were all amazing. Feels good to know I lived a life enjoying these masterpieces.
The idea of drug addiction also crossed my mind when I first started.
You'll lose everything when branded the symbol of the curse...your very light (serious addicts tend to lose their family/friends, possessions, and even their personality and spirit, and they become lost) hence they go "hollow" and lose their "soul".
Over and over they try to "light the fire" (rid their cursed addiction by various means, seeking other ways to find happiness and regain spirit) and over and over they relapse.
There's more interpretation that would support this symbolism further.
That is very interesting, to be honest!
Started the Series with Ds2 and it still stays my Favorite Game,especially for the Heavy Melancholic Feeling.
The World somehow felt more Connected and Deeper to me,even if its the Game of the Series with the lesser connected World from a Technical Point.
But i love them all and every Game of the Series has something uniqe on its own and can stand good on its own Feet.
I found Majula was an incredibly depressing hub, but not by being dark and gloomy. The music design was utterly perfect, I always felt at ease in majula but also found the area kind of eerie. Hard to explain but I’m sure there are others who know what I mean.
People just forget that Dark Souls is a full blown trilogy story and try to judge the second game as a stand alone story/experience. It's the middle bit of a trilogy story that takes place over an impossible to say for sure, but for a fact several hundred if not at least a thousand years. Dark souls 2 was the middle bit of that trilogy and it was just meant to portray the world as it was in continuation of the cycle, the futility of fighting fate. You're meant to stop and say "Hey wait, I did all of this before, is my entire hero's journey pointless?" Dark souls 3 then comes along nicely and wraps up the story that the first game started and the second game expounded upon. Long story short, we're all fighting against our true natures out of fear of what we don't know, and that fear can drive us to ruin worlds for countless generations, but fighting our nature out of fear is ultimately pointless and makes us suffer far more than simply resigning over to the reality of the world.
John Leonhardt
They treat it as a standalone because it is. It's design is drastically different from 1 and 3.
S.M. grimbldoo thats becuase ds 3 is basically ds1 miyazaki ignored ds2 becuase he wasnt apart of it so he just made ds1 again
Mason Wolfe
There’s a ton of DS2 references in DS3. Miyazaki just made it play like Dark Souls, DS2 played like an other game.
S.M. grimbldoo all three games play way different. That's just silly if anything ds2 plays more like ds1. Ds3 plays more like bb and frankly I never played bb before so when I went into ds3 after the other two games being completed multiple times it was vastly different and resulted in me hating the game for the first few weeks till I got the playstyle down. Frankly I hate bb after playing it and would have hated ds3 if it wasn't for a friend encouraging me to play it more. All in all this ds3 plays like ds1 and ds2 plays nothing like them is bullshit. It's an easy transition from ds1 to ds2 and a nightmare of a transition from those two to ds3.
Cuttlefish
That is just simply not true, and it’s not a matter of opinion. 2 and BB have drastically different systems while 1 and 3 are nearly identical. I didn’t even notice the slight change to my play style in 3 until after I went back to 1. Maybe you just got used to 2, but the only similarity between 3 and BB is the speed, and the only difference between 1 and 3 is the speed.
Personally, I’ve yet to beat either 2 or BB, but I’ve finished 1 and 3 many, many times, and I routinely switch between the two because there’s very little difference in combat.
DS2 was a great game, wife and I as well as some good friends spent many hours on it, great memories.
I don’t hate this game I actually like playing it from time to time it feels way different than the other souls games. Which gives me a different challenge But I think it is the worst of the series for the main fact that the level design and all the mob enemies that swing faster than you kinda force you to play as a defense build. But me personally I like playing more aggressive but it just doesn’t feel as satisfying as bloodborne or ds1 or ds3. Also I found the bosses really lack luster honestly the only ones I liked were in the dlc’s besides lost sinner.
Always been my favorite souls game
Mine too
As an early adopter of this series I have the most love for Demon's Souls. Each game had its own pros and cons, but Demon's was my first love and I have to stick by it. I seriously believe it was the best game of the series. It had the least convoluted attributes, it was short, which made NG+ a more relevant mechanic, and it had the greatest build variety without feeling like a broken game.
You could be a true glass cannon in that game with a bow or magic, or be a survivable faith spec. Sure, there were some broken mechanics (infinite stunlock, running firestorm), but those came later in the game's life, whereas Dark Souls pvp felt broken to me within the first week and mostly stayed that way. Each game felt like an improvement over the previous, but each one had some glaring flaws as well.
Here's the pros and cons of what each sequel brought to the table/changed in my opinion since Demon's Souls.
Dark 1:
PROS - Connected world and creative shortcuts. Estus. Attunement. landmarks were visible from across the game world and everything in the world felt connected.
CONS - Armor upgrades. FAP ring. Farming upgrade materials. Parts of the game felt unfinished. No attempts at improving PvP. Game felt too long to make good use of NG+ features. Many broken mechanics and glitches at launch. Covenants and pvp felt largely broken.
Dark 2:
PROS - attempted to combat smurfing (though ultimately failed with soul memory). Dual wielding/weaponization, and off-hand move sets. Arena. Fluid animations/canceling. Overall balance of weapons and strategies (poison, bleed, acid, etc. all useful). Central hub/home base. Slow estus recovery. Backstabs no longer instant. Covenants were creative, fun, and rewarding (at least at launch). Bell Keeper and Rat covenants were well done.
CONS - Soul Memory was absolutely horrible the way it was implemented. Many animations were too slow/varied in speed. World felt connected superficially, zone connections didn't feel right, couldn't see other parts of the world like in DkS or DkS 3. Limited invasion orbs.
Dark 3:
PROS - (some) anti-twinking. Item box limited your consumables on-hand. Charged strong attacks. Covenant equipment slot.
CONS - Mana. Estus allotment (and at the blacksmith?!?). The game should have brought back spices/grass with limited on-hand, and removed estus altogether, then mana would've worked well. Lack of strategies (poison, magic, frost, etc. are garbage). Anti-twinking mechanics only factored weapon upgrades and not estus, ring, spells, etc. Off-hand weapons had a limited move set. Estus chugging. Covenants were less interesting. PVP-only balance adjustments. PVP is dominated by curved sword and straight sword.
As you can see, I gave DkS 2 the most pros because, quite honestly, it did the most to take the series forward in the right direction and corrected many flaws of the previous entries. DkS 3 was awesome, but it took many steps backwards, likely because of all the criticism that DkS 2 received from DkS 1 fanboys.
Other thoughts: Weapons/infusions that don't scale with attributes should be removed (raw, dragon). They break the games too much and make no sense.
Dude, another pro for dark souls 2 would be the back-dash actually worked and was fun to use unlike dark souls 1 and 3.
I have to combat your perspective on Dark Souls 3 having grasses as a healing mechanic. I played through Demon’s Souls, as the second game in the series that I played (Dark Souls 2 being the first.)
Firstly, grasses and blood vials will ALWAYS be seen as a negative for me. I understand that you can buy them and hoard a shit ton of them, but it’s overly punishing in the early game when you can’t amass a large enough amount to properly continue rerunning a boss or an area you’re stuck on without having to take a break in order to get more grass/vials.
In other words, the grass and spice system fucking sucked, even when I could buy 99 of them to ez mode most bosses in the game.
Generally, I think that Dark Souls 3 is actually a pretty good game as far as the combat system goes. In PvP it definitely falls into a simple button mash/defensive spam contest, but those criticisms also go right up against Demon’s Souls, but in PvE the combat feels fluid, fast, and fun, while still retaining a sense of thought. Demon’s Souls’ combat never felt great to me, although I enjoyed the game enough to nearly 100% it on PS3. My problems with the game mostly focused around the disjointed difficulty spikes in some areas and the extremely lackluster bosses. With the exception of flame lurker and corrupted king, I can’t really remember a boss that wasn’t more than a speed bump in Demon’s Souls. Maiden Astrea was a sick lore boss, but I don’t really consider her a memorable fight since all you end up doing is killing her knight and then she just ends herself. None of the bosses really pushed you to do much differently or better than a previous boss. Then, there’s the disjointed PvE experience with running some of the world’s. World tendency was a fascinating mechanic, but it oftentimes resulting in a heavily weighed negative experience towards the player when you started to escalate towards negative world tendency (a particular invader in the poison bog comes to mind. You know, the one with Bind; the sword that does damage through shields so helpfully found in a poison swamp that makes it impossible to roll)
I can remember a lot of instances in Demon’s Souls where the encounters were not only challenging but just outright unfair/unfun. It resulted in a lot of just dashing through areas and ignoring enemies when certain areas had some overtuned fights.
In Dark Souls 3, there aren’t as many instances of blatantly unfair encounters where you don’t have some way around them.
I think that your nostalgia heavily changed your opinions on the other games. Don’t get me wrong, I loved Demon’s Souls as a game-but it’s nowhere near flawless, and generally every change made in the series after it has been a great improvement upon it (with the exception of the lore and characters. I think the characters in Demon’s Souls feel the most lively even if that doesn’t say much.)
I love how DS2 handles Hollowing. It was a nice middle ground between how DS1 did it and how Demon's Souls handles Soul form. DS1 hallowing was barely a problem at all and in Demon's it was too harsh.
In regards to the world of Dark Souls 2, am I the only one who kept tackling the wrong area because the game didn't quite guide you to where you needed to go properly? I'd go places where I feel like I was meant to go later first, because that's where I felt the world design was leading me. Then after I'd beat that area, I'd backtrack and try a different path and find that this new area was too easy because I was meant to go here before I went to wherever else I went.
Some examples are:
I went *Forest of Giants* > *Lost Bastille* > *Belfry Luna* > *Sinner's Rise* . That's the order the world's paths lead me.
From there I backtracked to *Heide's Tower of Flame* > *No Man's Wharf* > *Cathedral of Blue* (All of which were too easy because I beefed up while dealing with *Lost Bastille* )
Next I went to the *Shaded Woods* . For once I felt like I was in the rights spot, but there was still uncertainty.
After this I found *The Pit* , *Grave of Saints* , and *The Gutter* . I felt like I may have ended up here prematurely, so I exited and tried to find somewhere else to go.
I ended up finding how to get to *Huntsman's Copse* > *Harvest Valley* > *Earthen Peak* where I currently am.
I have no idea if I'm on the right track, or if I'm tackling things too soon. This, for me at least, makes part of the game enjoyable and parts of it unenjoyable because when I get there, I breeze right through.
I could easily look up a guide online to see which order I'm supposed to tackle the areas in, but that defeats the whole purpose of exploration. In Dark Souls 1, I felt like I was where I was supposed to be, or in instances I found myself in an area I wasn't supposed to tackle yet, the game let me know me know with subtle (or sometimes not so subtle) hints and clues.
Anyone else have the same gripes? I'm still not finished with the game and I don't expect this problem to remedy itself anytime soon.
The thing about your experience is there are multiple pathways to reach the same areas, like you killed the pursuer to go onto lost bastille at the top of Forest of giants. But you could also start the game going to Heide's(which is what i did) to No man's warf THEN to Lost Bastille, which are both acceptable pathways.
From there you have access to either Shaded Woods or Huntman's Corpse for the progression, which i find admirable about the game.
As Dark souls 1 if you didn't find the pathway to undead burg(which I didn't and went to the cemetery first) you fight monsters much to powerful for your current gear.
the people who say dark souls 2 is linear is semi correct but also wrong, they are linear but you also have multiple paths to take.
Randcarte I went to the cemetery first too, and after getting whooped many I realized maybe there's probably somewhere else I need to go.
I don't mind multiple paths. In fact, it's great. The problem I have is going through certain paths and being rising to the challenge of those areas makes other areas far too easy. I would have preferred a more streamlined level design with clever and hidden ways to get to different areas early, mainly so that the difficulty stays relatively consistent.
If they're going to give you different paths then I feel they should find a way to scale up paths you didn't take so when you finally get to them it isn't a cake walk. Some areas were fun and challenging and other areas were too easy and boring.
subseven treasure this feeling. no other game does it like dark souls 2 did. and it's at it's best during your first playthru
Benis I didn't like it, though.
subseven Somehow my path after i got to the Iron Keep was *Iron Keep, Belfry Sol, The Brume Tower, Iron Passage*. The Iron Passage at lvl 67 was the worst experience i've ever had.
Dark Souls 2 will always be one of my favourite RPGs. It expanded on it's arsenal so much. You could literally play as any character type and have a great time. In Dark Souls 3 everything seems to point to a dex build. As a mage I got crucified and a theify build didn't do anywhere near enough damage.
I highly recommend playing dark souls 2 how you mentioned near the beginning: "Trying a type of build I wasnt comfortable with."
I've always played through souls games as a hybrid Dex pyro, but when I went back to DkS2 I tried out a STR/FTH build for the first time and had a tons of fun, but then again maybe that's because dks2 is the only souls game that has fun to use miracles.
tbf i recently replayed ds3 in coop as cleric/paladim type of characeter, lightning longsword, lots of healings, lightning arrow, lothric banner, paladin-like look. it was tons of funs to support people in both pve and pvp and being very tanky and dangerous due to poise-casting miracles like stake
DS2 does a lot in terms of allowing different magic bases strats as all 4 (sorc, pyro, miracle, hex) are very strong both on their own and as a pure caster build.
I like the magic in Ds2 since you don't have the meta stat to do actual damage in comparison to Ds3. as a sorcerer you can kill the beginning enemies at the forest of giants in 2 hits. most offensive magic is ranged focust, but with the right amount of casting speed can be fired at melee range with a small change of trading hits. that being said, the fact that that the casting speed in Ds2 is tied to attunement makes a pure caster build waayyy more viable. I also like the buffs in ds2, all types of magic have some sort of buffs. though sorcery and hexes have one of the best pvp buffs, the sorcery one trading HP for an incredible increase of magic damage. the hex an almost melee damage nullifying buff with the cost of tunnel vision, literally. even though all magic has potential in Ds2, with the right build and great magic barrier, you can nullify magic in pvp. leaving casters running and crying for help... also in ds2, you can complete the game with 1 spell in pve. in pvp if, you parry someone, you can finish him off in one spell.
why wouldnt you play every dark souls like that though lol. ds 1 reign supreme!
Then go to a ds 1 video and let the people who like ds 2 have there fun.
I loved playing through 2 just as much as any of the others
I still miss power stance, real poise, and non-instant estus. I think ds3 is a better pve experience than ds2 but, ds2 had a better combination of mechanics for pvp; if you don't mind losing a ring slot to counteract soul memory.
i actually think PvP is way more interesting at higher sm in ds2 anyway. People experiment more because they can (without having to go and use a soul vessel). Sure there is lots of cancer, but there's also a ton of people who find creative uses for weapons and systems that just isn't possible when most of your stats are effectively nothing.
The most memorable boss in the series to me is oceiros the consumed king in DS3. I remember fighting him multiple times to try and figure out what was going on with him.