Dark Souls II is unironically the best Dark Souls game besides Dark Souls I
 It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
Dark Souls II is unironically the best Dark Souls game besides Dark Souls I
Dark Souls II is unironically the best Dark Souls game besides Dark Souls I
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
|
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
ok
>Verification not required.
Not RPG.
I agree, but remember, /vrpg/ isn't Gankerrpg/, it's /vr/pg/. No one here cares about actionslop.
>/vrpg/ isn't Gankerrpg/, it's /vr/pg/
If by "Dark Souls I" you mean Demon's Souls, I agree
One of the areas in the DLC pissed me off so much that I dropped the game. Maybe one day I'll come back to it, it had some good stuff going for it.
Assuming Frigid Outskirts, it's not that bad... and necessary to run through to get the Ring of the Living if you're a twink
No, it was the brume tower boss run on the way to the shitty reskin of one of the bosses from the main game. I heard that the frigid outskirts area was a pain in the balls too though, I never got to it.
Sir Alonne was cancer too. The poison dragon fortunately didn't have any bullshit.
I really don't know why these boss runs have to be designed so that the player has to run past enemies, because that's what it boils down to, and it's awkward. Like Fume Knight having those giants pop up, as if I'm going to stop and fight them for no fricking reason.
Most SotfS bosses can be cheesed by summoning one phantom and using bows
You unironically did not beat the game.
You unironically have no clue when to use the word unironically
You are unironically a homosexual, how's that :^)
(you)
hey hey HEY
that's no way to talk to anon
Fighting Sihn and going through Frigid Outskirts with dumb phantoms are one of the few instances in the game where it is more fun than playing solo
Dark Souls 2 has a special place in my heart because its the first Souls I beat completely blind without a guide. It does a good job of leading the player through the world without getting stuck.
The main point of DS2 is that the game hates you. The devs want you to die and honestly be miserable. DS2 is the epitamy of what people thought Dark Souls was, the ultimate gaming challenge. Dark Souls 2 was made to be the hardest game that people would actually beat and brag about.
The real issue is not Dark souls 2, It's the Scholar of the first sin.
Notice that you can't even find a copy of DS2 anywhere, you have to get it on console or pirate now. There is a gigantic difference between the games, and scholar is much much harder by default. That version of the game is why people hate DS2 so much.
The core game is long forgotten, but I do think it was the best one on release, yes.
Agreed, reminds me of an OG NES game like Ghosts and Goblins
What changed with sotfs? I only played the original, but at length, when it first came out and was going through updates and online was pretty active. Always did roleplay summons where I would suit my character up in a way appropriate for the area and hide my summon sign in a strange and unusual place near a boss. Often, people were at first unsure if my character was a person or NPC.
Not him but the most striking changes are the increased flux of gank encounters. Ffs the Iron Keep has TWICE as many Alonne Knights as the original game.
Well, I guess I can always just replay the original when I decide to go back to good old DS2. Good memories. Softs has no high points to balance it out?
The only reason to play SotFS is for the "challenge", because otherwise the only thing that changes are different enemy and item placements throughout, that and the new boss and ending. Multiplayer is also alive on SotFS if that matters to you at all.
Sotfs has two dlcs bundled and active multiplayer and mods. It's the superior choice.
I don't know who to believe. I'm going to do a handstand.
DS2 SotFS was my last souls game from the trilogy+bb to play and 100%, I can say I was expecting it to be a walk in the park like ds1 but it was its very difficulty that hit the mark, acting like "THE ultimate Dark Souls test", you need to be a good player to play and enjoy it, there's no cheese vs bullshit like in elden ring. Plus the DLCs legitimately add to the rating of the game
As an addendum, the extra boss/ending is truly conclusive to the game and its unique themes, going a step beyond le light and dark usual endings
Thank you, I can finally stop doing my handstand.
>Game is hard! Bravo! Masterpiece! 10/10!!!
DS2gays are such braindead morons.
Didn't ask, Reddit Black person.
eat my wiener homosexual
Consessecion Accepted.
This is the strangest take I see, DS2 is not any harder than typical souls or soulslikes (usually easier) and sotfs didn't make it noticeably harder
DS2 has a lot of the old fromsoft king's field style cheeky player trolling, like the successive hidden hollows that ring the bell in the crypt. Or obviously Maldron. But that stuff isn't really like "I had to fight this boss for 3 hours" difficulty, it's just being cute
These people complaining about sotfs with their one argument being too many enemy encounters must have either sucked until the very end or be a couple schizos with "le release version was better" rose-tinted glasses.
I beat this fricking game with a made up dual swords melee build (I didn't even know about life gems until halfway through my first DLCs) and I fail to see where it was unfairly hard outside of Frigid Outskirts. My hardest moment in the base game were the early game like heide knights' pool playground, and that was because I still sucked at getting a hold of rolling i-frames. After that, mob hordes became either easy to dodge (falconers/ alonne archers), escape (filler bastille/windmill mobs) or defeat (skeletons and trashy bosses). Weapon durability was a way bigger issue for me in mob infested areas like Huntsman's Copse
So much fricking this. Aside from struggling in the beginning I found this game to be a lot easier than DS1
You people are incapable of equating a game being absolutely shit to actually play to anything other than "le difficulty". Subhumans such as yourself don't even deserve to draw breath let alone pretenf to have any kind of valid opinion. You have people like
spouting out phrases used to make fun of moronic redditors while still using the game's difficulty to reinforce why it's good or bad.
Killing 8 of the same exact knights in a single room of the fricking lost bastille isn't riveting gameplay, nor is it difficult considering you can easily two shot them if your build isn't total fricking garbage, it just adds another layer of tedium for no reason other than to serve as some ceappy half hearted GOTCHA moment, in which SotfS has plenty. Oh golly gee I accidently died while light platforming in Dark Souls 2 because the jump feels like total shit I guess that really contributes to the game's objective quality because it gave the player a needlessly difficult time on something simple to perform
"People who played vanilla DaS2 having rose tinted perception" is rich for someone who is really going whole hog to defend such blatantly poor decisions. If they are wearing these rose colored goggles, all that proves is that Dark Souls 2 is a piece of shit that hasn't held up to scrutiny over the years, be it the shittier updated version of the game with DLC made by complete fricking hackjobs or the original mess
Eh, you can mass aggro the bastille flamberge guys, they're basically harmless even all together. You can't mass aggro the iron keep ninja knights and expect to be fine though
I said they are harmless. Outside of maybe the shock value of their sheer numbers the first time they are easy to dispatch. My entire point is that it's annoying and adds nothing
It would be annoying if you had to real option but to pull them 1 by 1 for a few minutes (which is why I hate iron keep) but it's like a 15 second encounter
It's not though because you have to wait of all of them to actually filter in every which way
I'm the guy talking before and not the other guy that replied to this, don't let morons on Ganker thinking everything has to be war propaganda get you down
>anon can't even deal with a measly 8 enemies in a building
I can imagine you backing straight into a corner and getting stunlocked. You must have thrown your controller and screamed to your mom how the game is bullshit and unfair.
>hurr I'm going to purposefully misconstrue what this anon said durrrrrrrr
All I saw was whining about a basic encounter.
>anon cant read or write
I can imagine you going home and getting grounded. You must have thrown your controller and screamed to your mom how your punishment for bad grades was bullshit and unfair
>Killing 8 of the same exact knights in a single room of the fricking lost bastille isn't riveting gameplay
>it just adds another layer of tedium for no reason other than to serve as some ceappy half hearted GOTCHA moment
Really, if your one complaint about the game are the occasional trashy mob encounters and "gotcha moments", you should stay away from other souls games. Never have I seen someone sperg so much over something that, just like swamp areas, is pretty much spread through every game the series. Like picrel there are a hundred examples I can also nitpick from either the prequels and sequels to DaS2.
But hey, you're relying on a double standards argument now that you can't bring yourself to admit that you actually found those weak mob fights to be hard, because that would out you as just some sucker who found the game too hard; But my point here isn't convincing you, it's just pointing out how inane this criticism is, and how hard it manages to fall flat.
Cope more.
>The devs want you to die and honestly be miserable
This unfortunately ends up being poor design. The ambushes get old and can be dealt with, but it just slows down gameplay in a way that isn't enjoyable. Multiple enemies is difficult on paper, but it just ends up testing the patience of a backpedaling player. Spending time to ruin the ambushes by aggroing one enemy at a time. Using a bow.
Does anyone have fun going through the Iron Keep?
>Spending time to ruin the ambushes by aggroing one enemy at a time. Using a bow.
the only time you might need to use a bow is during shrine of amana
contrary to popular belief online, the ability to deal with a group of enemies at once is considered a standard skill.
>ability to deal with a group of enemies at once is considered a standard skill
Yeah, the problem is that it's boring and repeated constantly.
Its boring because your idea of dealing with a group of enemies is to lure them one by one and kite them
Yes, or backpedaling for 10 minutes waiting for enemies to end their animations so I can get that one hit in before going back to backpedaling. How did you deal with the Prowler invaders in the Brume Tower?
I pancaked them all with my big stick
Kek that's actually why I switched from swords to the large club
The DLCs were pretty bad with FromSoft giving in to the "fans" (much like they did for the Artorias fight) and slapping on nonsensical elemental resists on everything: seriously, frost enemies with more than 50% fire resist?
But overall I agree, DaS 1 and 2 are the best of the series, DeS is also pretty good but a lot rougher and experimentals, and nothing From makes nowadays is good.
And even Shrine of Amana has plenty of room for a pure melee character, as long as you're not a guide tard whose only plan is to try and run past everything.
Iron Keep is uniquely shitty
Specifically the part between the bridge and smelter demon makes me not ever want to replay DS2 just thinking about it, even though I can do it and smelter in one attempt. Killing like eight of the samurai knight guys one after the other in one combo each as they aggro, standing in spots you can't get archer'd. Trying to speedrun it without fighting is almost always counterproductive. I really hate everything about it. Nothing else in DS2 is even close to that bad. It probably takes 10 minutes to do it and it still sticks out in my mind.
Yes Iron keep is the biggest wiener by far.
They also moved some enemies around so when you go to the spider blacksmith you can't close the door and can get her killed if you don't kill the mages.
There is also a message where a bonfire used to be before big black dragon boss after aerie.
They added super gay knight spawns in heides castle after you take out dragonrider. Just to make it harder.
Many extra invasions to drain your effigies.
Pursuer was made harder, from like 5 to 9 encounters and some of those became mandatory.
Also for anyone's first playthrough you will never have enough effigies as they are finite.
Imo the enjoyment of a souls game is not from bosses, its overcoming a 15 minute gauntlet of enemies and traps with 2 Estes. I always explore every map entirely and kill every last enemy at least once.
>Pursuer was made harder, from like 5 to 9 encounters and some of those became mandatory
I beat this game like 3 times last month and I don't remember any more mandatory pursuers than one.
Also ring of binding makes you less reliant on effigies and it's quite easy to get. And some enemies drop effigies too, like the weird lizard thingies in Amana
>Also for anyone's first playthrough you will never have enough effigies as they are finite.
Not really an issue
I beat the whole game with 70+ effigies remaining
Even if you run out the altar in shrine of amana exists
I know man I'm talking about people on their very first run of the game. And honestly I just don't like the ring of binding being mandatory it's a wasted slot.
I ended up with 70+ effigies on my first run of the game
There are a shitload more of them in SotFS IIRC, although there are still plenty in original
People complain about the so-called enemy spam in 2 but 3 is far worse about it and doubles down on it in the first 5 levels of the game.
Ignoring the fact that there are multiple ways to approach ambushes and not just the bow thing. What would be your alternative out of curiosity, standard and fair 1v1/1v2 fights in a sequence? I would argue that not having encounters like the ones you're criticizing is also boring and tedious in a different way, as you're either just wandering through meaningless levels fighting random guys that can't do much or you're just solely doing a mini boss rush the entire game without variety.
I can agree that 2 has many badly designed encounters and enemies on even fundamental levels, but I disagree with the idea that forcing players to approach situations using "scummy" tactics like they attempted is bad design.
He sees the levels as obligatory time wasters in between le ebin boss fights. So having to put any thought or strategy into them confuses and enrages him.
The funny part is that NG+ already adds more dynamic encounters, and it a much better way well suited towards the level and boss design. SotFS just decides to copy and paste a ton of enemies with no actual regard. Using shit like daggers which was plenty viable in 2 is downright impossible in SotfS because it is impossible to capitalized on exposed enemy weak points.
>That version of the game is why people hate DS2 so much
That's not true, OG DS2 was disliked on release, and while I don't think sotfs is really an improvement, the original isn't some vastly better experience, it's a mixed bag at best.
Main difference is enemy placements in areas are changed, heide knights are now in heide's tower of flame for example. There's a ring that stops you from gaining "soul memory", new npc invaders called "forlorn" and an extra boss and new ending if you complete all the dlcs. As far as I know the dlc is unchanged from the original though.
This.
Overall I think SotFS is a slight improvement over base 2, but it's not decisive, and is probably down to preference.
The game really didn't change all that much, and the extra stuff to do makes up for any gripes about making X hallway easier/harder, imo.
Dark Souls 2 is just it's own thing. You either like what it does or you don't, unrelated to your opinions on the rest of the series.
I like it, but then I usually play stat clusterfrick abominations for fun anyways.
Here is a list of changes for reference:
http://darksouls2.wikidot.com/scholar-of-the-first-sin
I don't think DS2 was miles better than SOFTS, but it's definitely less annoying to complete.
>That's not true, OG DS2 was disliked on release
Yeah if DS2 had another name / different company make it would be a 6/10
I played scholars of the first sin and used a giant club and had a great time.
>The main point of DS2 is that the game hates you. The devs want you to die and honestly be miserable.
This is a joke, right? I mean, it's definately true of Scholar but the original release isn't that bad unless you're a real scrub.
mate i bought the original dark souls 2 on pc not a few months ago, you can still get the og dark souls 2 on pc
Unironically yes, Dark Souls 3 outside of bosses is trash, while Dark Souls 2 is the opposite
What specifically does it do better than 3?
The PvP minigame matters little.
I dislike DS2, but it has more possible routes to choose from. FotFG or Heide, for example. DS3 is more linear in progression.
And linearity is bad because?
Also I guarantee most anons who say DS3 is worse for its linearity haven't beat Dancer before Vordt.
>inb4 game sucks bcuz i cant loot my build required greatswords even though similar ones are available in the first 15 minutes of play
Attempting to "branch out" of the single beeline route in ds3 with a short detour to Oceiros and Dragonslayer Armor fricks up with the player progression for the rest of the game though, leaving you absolutely overleveled and overgeared with +9/+10 weapons as you go fight Vordt, whereas in DS2 you need to go all the way to Iron Keep to max a weapon. Dark Souls 3 indeed had a more branched out world as seen with the datamined alpha shortcut from Undead Settlement to Carthus, but it was a rushed slop so none of that made it to the release version.
>leaving you absolutely overleveled and overgeared with +9/+10 weapons as you go fight Vordt
This is a good thing
beating the dancer before vordt doesn't do anything, you're still locked before the library because you need to do the rest of the completely linear game for the key to magically appear in front of that door
>he doesn't kill champ before vordt
>he doesn't kill gael before deacons and abyss watchers
Fricking casual
Don't reply to me again
I didn't play your shitty linear asset flip more than once in the first place moronic homosexual
>And linearity is bad because?
Because Souls is a series that offers breadth of options and no one likes the majority of relevant content (weapons, magic, rings etc.) being gated behind linear progression paths stupid homosexual.
But people love sekiro and bb
>no one likes the majority of relevant content (weapons, magic, rings etc.) being gated behind linear progression paths
>>inb4 game sucks bcuz i cant loot my build required greatswords even though similar ones are available in the first 15 minutes of play
It's like you people think a game is unplayable if you can't use your favorite spell on every boss in a NG+0 playthrough.
The only thing DS3 does well compared to any entry is that the bosses are consistently good quality. The linearity wouldn't be so bad if not for the fact that half the levels actually suck.
that implies Dark Souls 1 was good and not the unfinished trash that it is
Unfinished yes, but trash? Granted, Lost Izalith and Tomb definitely were, but the first half of the game is peak 3D Metroidvania design, it doesn't get more kino than that.
>but the first half of the game is peak 3D Metroidvania design
You don't know what metroidvania means
He’s not wrong. It’s a lot like a metroidvania but in 3d. What’s your argument?
He is wrong.
Being "a lot like" something isn't the same as being something.
Metroid powerups center around movement abilities to open previously inaccessible areas. Not simply finding 'keys' to open 'doors'.
Dark souls is literally 3d castlevania.
Go play any Castlevania, even on GBA.
Pitiful.
Oh, when everyone says metroidvania they mean super metroid and symphony of the night.
Only the first dark souls was
And also the second, maybe the 3rd. And possibly Bloodborne. Also Sekiro. Definitely Edlen Ring.
Bro did you know Doom is actually a metroidvania too
>the first half of the game
>tomb of giants is bad
Kek, these morons every time
I like Dark Souls 2 because it runs almost flawlessly on my dell laptop from 2014
What's your reasoning behind this? I had the least fun in DS2. It's the only one I never replayed. What do you like about it?
not op but:
>Most replayability for a variety of reasons (build variety, world openness, NG+ differences)
>Best attribute system (Adaptability was the best thing dark souls ever did and I'm sick and fricking tired of pretending it was a mistake)
>Best level curve
>Most genuine customisability (ds3/er push you into one viable playstyle as you progress, bb and sekiro don't even pretend you have options)
>Powerstancing/weapon ambidexterity
>Healing consumables + less estus uses makes you think about long term item management rather than just going back to bonfire and resetting whenever you feel overwhelmed
>Best deprived experience due to item placements
>Majula is the best hub they've ever done
>Best characters
>Actually tries to stand on its own feet rather than being ds1wank like 3 was, mostly relegated nostalgiabait to easter eggs and NG+ stuff
>Best armours
>Best boss variety, "dudes in armour" meme is the dumbest false narrative to ever exist and whoever started it probably didn't get further than the first few bosses
>Adaptability was the best thing dark souls ever did and I'm sick and fricking tired of pretending it was a mistake
Look I fricking love DS2 and defend it all the time but what
An addition to my post below
No, adaptability was the most moronic thing on the planet, I can't believe I forgot about it. Tying I-frames from rolls to a stat was an objectively moronic idea that makes no fricking sense. Frick that.
Aesthetics/vibe, POISE, combat/weapon combos/options especially PVP (mistakes have consequences), massive replayability in terms of progression options and challenges (very fun with agape ring to limit to SL30 and see what you can do), DS2 tried new things, DS3 onward is just way to conservative and cookie cutter money makers for the masses, same shit happened with Diablo.... no surprise 2 is the best there and we all know what happened with 3, just dumb everything down
DS3 > Bloodborne > Elden Ring = DS2 > DS 1
Not true.
It's the best fromsoft game period, no "besides".
When DS3 came out I realized I had been playing a bootleg sequel. Which was very unfortunate because neither of them are great sequels.
DS2 is big but also bloated. It has the least responsive controls and feels the worst to move around in. It was great at the time, it aged the worst.
Everyone who shits on scholar of the first sin is a fricking liar. Not only does it actually make several areas easier, but the enemy placement, particularly in late-game areas is much more deliberate and tactically interesting instead of the dull mmo-like experience of vanilla. It's literally the opposite of what you're saying.
Let's look at brightstone cove - they added a shitload of spiders, yes. Only, that takes the form of two big horde battles against them, which are still pretty easy - it's an easy enemy type suited for dispatching with giant AoE pyromancies or great weapons, and it's much more memorable than breezing through two-three of them at a time in the vanilla experience. This is kind of the trend - less trash between set-piece battles.
Dragon aerie is more interesting. Aldia's keep is more interesting. Undead crypt is much, much, much more interesting. Heide's tower is more interesting. Most locations get new npc invasions and summons, some with amusing scripts.
They fricked up the tutorial area a bit for first-time players and added an unnecessary dragon rider and a questionable flexile sentry miniboss or two. They possibly overtuned no-man's wharf, though they also added more explosive barrels and npc summons, so you can deal with it. Iron keep was always and continues to be cancer - the dudes there had bugged super-fast animations at 60fps and I don't remember if they fixed that eventually. Some items were made next to impossible to get, golden lion chestpiece for example, which is clearly an oversight. I am straining to think of things scholar does worse in an attempt to understand you people and this is the best I can do.
You wrote so much saying so little
>many spider instead of few
>this place is more interesting
How are those places more interesting exactly? You didn't explain because they're not. They are a goddamn bother to play through. I had to learn speedrunning strats to skip the boring, annoying bullshit they have.
>I had to learn speedrunning strats to skip the boring, annoying bullshit they have
Not him, but
>I had to learn speed running in order to skip the game
Doesn't that make sense?
The point is that the game made me want to skip parts of it, because those parts weren't enjoyable.
DS1 had a part like that. Demon ruins had multiple capra demons one after another and I never felt like fighting them, I skipped them. But other than that, I generally enjoy dealing with the encounters in DS1. DS2 has a lot of parts that just aren't worth the time.
>Killing 6 spiders in one attack is more interesting than killing 3 spiders in one attack
lol no. All it does is makes certain builds more obnoxious to play and makes players gravitate towards other builds. One of my favorite builds to do in Vanilla DS2 was a "belmont build" with use of throwing knives, holy water STR+Faith with the Old Whip and a Regular Whip, in scholar of the first sin because the enemy bloat is stupidly high and durability was and still probably is bugged the whip was impossible to use, not because its shit against multiple enemies, but because the amount of enemies ended up as such that if I stopped to fight them the absolute drain on both durability and my consumables was just too fricking annoying to put up with. "BRUH JUST USE REPAIR POWDER BRO" homie you only have so much fricking repair powder to use and the whip itself is made of fricking wet toilet paper.
Instead of sticking to this, I respcced into the winged spear and halberd because I couldnt be fricking assed to make a meme build work. It trivialized the game at the cost of me enjoying playing some of the varied builds I had in the past, and that variety is hailed as one of the game's strong suits and it was all done for the purposes of making the game "harder" because that was the criticism a lot of people had on release. You can definitely tell they tried to do this given that most of the DLC boss runs are a gauntlet of complete and total nonsense, be it the kings pets, sir alonne, the blue smelter demon, you name it. All of these areas are rife with obnoxious hazards and stuck with well over 10 enemies in a relatively small space. The amount of times this type of shit happens is far more than the people who think scholar of the first sin is the best god damn thing since the lord jesus christ himself would want you to believe. These problems you had initially were more or less addressed in Vanilla's NG+ with far better design principles in mind instead of "COPY AND PASTE"
Why does everyone shit on Iron keep so much? I didn't find it particularly hard, but I've been sunbroing there for days and noticed that more than half the players died all the fricking times because they couldn't memorize the enemy placement nor have the patience to let them come to you since they aggro on sight from the moon
>they couldn't memorize the enemy placement
That entire phrase is just why its inherently wrong. If you have to "Memorize" where the enemies are placed or when knights just drop down and start running at you it amounts to trial and error. SotFS relies a lot more on unseen hazards over stuff you can easily visualize and approach. Its not like there are occasional curve balls for you to react to, there is just excessive amounts of dogshit meant to be "gotcha" moments.
Yeah, the game starts being more about careful agroing than combat itself. It takes time and there's no fun in that.
Its ironic when people say Vanilla Dark Souls 2 is more like an MMORPG when making sure you dont pull an entire room full of enemies is what you do in an ACTUAL mmorpg. None of the games prior to SotFS be it vanilla DaS2 DaS1 or DeS had to rely on these gimmicks to provide a compelling challenge
That's definitely not true. I'm hard pressed to think of an rpg that doesn't have split pulling. Most of them are so easy that you don't have to think about it, though.
>I'm hard pressed to think of an rpg that doesn't have split pulling.
Im saying MMORPGS have split pulling. You cant pull entire rooms of enemies in moronic shit like Runescape (lol) Classic Warcraft without the right comp (have no idea how the frick it looked like after TBC) etc. You only pull entire rooms at a time like in FFXIV
already trying to do revisionism over dragon butts of demon ruins huh
I hate it because I let the ninja knights come to me one at a time (where you can easily kill them in one stunlock) and carefully screen myself from archers and it takes 10 minutes and is excruciatingly boring
this. and theres always a chance you die on the bridge anyways. Then back the the 4 intro knights, now you can attempt the slow platforming part again.
What do you mean you dont like garbage platforming with a jump+roll that is way too long and only 8 directional movement?
You must have really hated the gutter and the gulch too then
I mean no one like gulch right, but you can run through that to the bonfire in 30 seconds even if you're staggered by poison shots constantly
For whatever reason I kinda like gutter, having it be all lit up from you turning on all the torches makes it feel nice and dynamic. And the darkness hides the ugly DS2 texture/material work. I don't have that "oh god if I replayed it I'd have to do that again" sense of disgust from gutter (or shrine of amana, another area people seem to hate)
The gutter is actually well realized crafted level design instead of " let's copy and paste a frick ton of enemies
Bloodborne > DS 2 > DS 3 > Eldin Ring > DS 1 > Sekiro (I just hate rythm games)
Fite me
You hate rhythm games but your favorite entry is the one that removed the defensive options that didn't rely on timing?
And what's your reasoning behind this? It's my least favorite souls game. The only one I beat once and never touched it again. Genuinely curious what you liked about it.
Ds2 SotFS unironically ruined any prospects for this game's memory
>worse graphics
>added on matchmaking latency
>10x more enemies
>bullshit boss fights in ng+ like double pursuer
>unnecessary price hike
>shit final boss
You are a dishonest fricker if you claim you "went" through the game without needing to summon which is pretty much obligatory in areas like Shrine of Amana and DLCs. Just quit comparing it to
proper souls games like DS3 and DS1 and start calling it Artificial Difficulty: the slop at this point.
>summon which is pretty much obligatory in areas
>Shrine of Amana
Really homie? Just get a bow homie. Just shoot the priestess.
I think the issue with DS2 criticism is, while there's lots of valid points, most people just lack creativity when solving problem and call "muh game design"
>most people just lack creativity when solving problem and call "muh game design"
I think it's mostly because game is more about raw action. With enough patience/autism, you can bruteforce almost everything souls game tend to throw at you. So you not really rewarded for preparing in advance or changing your playstyle to adjust. But yeah, if I died to an enemy this is "muh game design". God, I really fricking hate shit they pulled for DS3/ER. I guess Bloodborne really gave From some advanced form brainrot.
I enjoyed Dark Souls II's atmosphere. I've seen other people say the same, but it's definitely the most "comfy" of the trilogy. My main complaint is the movement. It's not as tight as in 1 or 3. It's very difficult to describe, but if you've played it you know what I mean. That, and some absolutely atrocious level design at times, that makes the catacombs in DS1 look like Anor Lando. Bowser's Castle in particular was the one that got me stuck the most. Like a HUNDRED or so fricking knights, just everywhere, sniping you, jumping you. Thankfully, DS2 has a mechanic where if you kill an enemy enough times, it won't respawn- but that's just a bandaid over a gaping wound in design. That said, aside from Elden Ring it's the most breakable as well. Dark Magic is OP as frick. My first time I struggled playing a melee only knight with swords and maces, second time I spammed Dark Magic and decimated everything like a DBZ character. I enjoyed the game and think it has the best in terms of experimentation but its level design and patchwork Frankenstein mechanics hinder it immensely.
Demon's Souls, Dark Souls 2, and BB are the only games From made after 2009 that I still play
Dark souls 2 vs elden ring?
After replaying them all again very recently, I actually agree. I had Demons Souls in second place before, but I've bumped Dark Souls 2 up. Demons Souls is too damn short and features grinding which I don't really think fits this sort of game. Dark Souls 3 also bumped well up in my estimation, though it is still well below 2, which is now in second place after 1.
Nobody cares about your ranking by itself. What do you like and dislike about them?
I just explained why Demons Souls isn't that good. I like the gameplay and world, but there's only 2 real stages per archstone. If it were a more substantial game, it would be right behind 1, which even with the subpar post Lordvessel stages, is by far the best Souls game. Everyone will cite the same thing, the interconnected world design, and more effort put into challenging stage design rather than autistic bosses.
Dark Souls 2 just has a cool vibe. The "land forgotten by time" theme is pulled off perfectly. It also have nicely challenging stages, tons of build variety, and the DLC is fantastic.
Honestly ignored that because I never played DeS. It looks like a prototype and I feel like I would just rather play any other Fromsoft game instead.
This. Whoever asked for a DeS remake? The bossfights are almost entirely experimental jank and every area is brainrot easy due to how Fromsoftware was unsure about their difficulty design at first. Can't understand why anyone would put it in top game lists instead of another DS
The only brainrot here is people like you now saying the original Souls games are bad because they are "too easy".
Indeed, a game being the first of its IP automatically makes it good. Now go be a mentally stable individual and start your ng100 demon souls run.
I like to think I'm mentally stable. Bought a PS5 just for demons souls and barely touch it.
true and straight etc
If Scholar is "hard" the original release must have been boring. No wonder they revamped it.
Ds2 had the comfiest Souls hub besides the Roundtable Hold from Elden Ring, change my mind.
Roundtable isn't comfy at all. It is one of the least comfy, along with 3's.
Majula is the comfiest, though, yes.
exactly
Roundtable was the comfiest of the "castle hubs", and I stand by that.
Agreed on DS3 tho, essentially a worse version of the Nexus in every way.
I doesn't feel like a safe refuge.
Roundtable isn't comfy for the single fact that it feels less like a hub and more like an errand. It's out of the way and even fast travel takes more effort to get too because it's all the way in the corner disconnected from everything.
Ds2 had the best levels.
>roundtable
>gideon's murderhobo bodyguard invading you in you second visit or so
>dung eater literally sitting on the room to the side
>some spooky shit on the first floor
>lack of windows and natural light making the place more like a claustrophobic cave
>theres fire everywhere during the late gand
Exactly, it is a dump and feels like enemy territory (it is). On further thought, it IS less comfy than any Souls hub.
Majula (supremely comfy) > Firelink Shrine (1) (comfy) > Nexus (somewhat comfy) > Firelink Shrine (3) (A fricking tomb).
3's firelink shrine is fricking soulless
>oh heres your item vendor that sells everything
>oh heres your blacksmith that does everything
>oh heres your spell vendor that sells everything
its like a mod of a game except not even the mods for DS3 are that soulless
>hub has things that a hub should have
wooooow
Dark souls ruined video game combat. Before dark souls everyone was a damage sponge, you enemies NPCs, everyone. After dark souls everyone is invincible but the MC dies in two hits. I never build tanks anymore because all that armor and health will maybe protect you for one extra hit because "realism", but you can dodge roll 10 feet in a full set of heavy armor on hard stone in 2 seconds flat multiple times in a row. I'd like to see a dark souls player dodge roll around on grass in hockey pads, you'll find shit like that doesn't work irl. there's the gif of the Renaissance fair guy rolling around in aluminum foil armor on soil, he looks like he trained and it's still embarrassing. More issues: invincibility frames should never be in any video game, ever. if someone nabs you in the middle of a dodge roll you should get hit, it shouldnt be a magic invincibility button like super smash brothers. 3rd person combat is easy for all the wrong reasons, kc:d shows what fighting multiple enemies would play out like. And look, I know the AI rendering 3d models of children's monster drawings was neat, but I'm not looking to play an entire game where they're the main bosses. some of them look like piles of randomized Eldritch body parts under a layer of diarrhea.
This.
In it's own vacuum Dark Souls is fine, but it's overall a negative impact on game design.
People want to copy it because it's successful, but miss that the main thing Dark Souls has going for it is autism.
Putting a Dark Souls boss in the middle of the game for your boss fight is just shit because it's usually just fake difficulty; to say nothing of how hard it has gotten to point out and complain about design flaws, if the flaw makes the game more difficult because Git Gud.
>miss that the main thing Dark Souls has going for it is autism.
lmao
>Putting a Dark Souls boss in the middle of the game for your boss fight is just shit because it's usually just fake difficulty
dark souls bosses aren't difficult in the first place, its from a time where westoid shit was removing bosses from video games for being "too videogamey"
>removing bosses from video games for being "too videogamey"
As it should be. You should sit the frick down and play real games, weaboid.
shut the frick up homosexual
You mad? What are you gonna do, gaylord? Shit and cum on your tranime pillow? LMAO at your life.
>What are you gonna do
play games while you ride your dragon dildo jerking off to your gay sex simulators
absolute state of westoids
anon are you moronic? saying 'this is the best one beside the first one' in a series of only three games is stupid
>Play Dark Souls 1 for the first time in ages after going through scholar of the first sin
>doing any kind of action feels better short of jumping which has never ever felt good
>kick feels responsive for guard breaks
>the encounters in the undead burg feel carefully crafted and the player can actually fricking visualize them such as "3 hollows above pelting you with shit and 3 below do I go up the ladder and try to deal with the projectile spammers before the other 3 climb up or do I deal with the 3 down there and try to dance around the projectiles" as opposed to "oh look this player entered this crack shack time to throw 8 royal knights that dont even respond to your attacks at him LOL"
this game is already so much better its un fricking real lol
This is a very commonly held opinion. Dark Souls 1 is the best Souls game. It has the best level design, the best vibe, the best world design, and the best graphics.
Except that only holds up for like the first half of the game. Every one of those aspects you listed besides graphics (Which isn't even the best in the series btw, gtf outta here with that bait) falls to shit after Anor Londo.
Tomb of the Giants isnt that bad and is at least appropriately scary, and unironically a better use of light than dark souls 2 in setting an atmosphere. Duke's Archives is great as well. Its only really the fiery areas
>Tomb of the Giants isnt that bad and is at least appropriately scary, and unironically a better use of light than dark souls 2 in setting an atmosphere
>Tomb of the Giants isnt that bad
its literally everything what people mock dark souls 2 for doing
>enemy spam in tiny areas
>completely empty level with nothing in it
>long boss run with multiple ranged attacks spamming projectiles
Black folk will whine about shrine of amana and then go on to praise tomb of giants
homie you can see every encounter you are going to get into strictly on the floor. Compare it to a place like Brume Tower where you are literally expected to memorize what kind of enemies are going to pop up out of the ash
The "Souls" series is Demons Souls and Dark Souls 1-3. Dark Souls has the best graphics of the 4. Dark Souls 3 could have had better graphics if even a single area was lit properly, but they aren't and it doesn't.
The weak latter part of Dark Souls is still standard for the other games, and arguably a bit better than them generally.
>Dark Souls has the best graphics of the 4
Wrong again, fricker. 2 has the advantage of having dynamic lighting, something none of the other games have tried since, and unironically looks better than 99% of the RTX slop that gets churned out nowadays.
Dark Souls 2 has some great looking areas. It also has some shockingly ugly ones, far worse than anything in 1 or even Demons. As a whole, it doesn't look better than 1.
>far worse than anything in 1
lmao
nothing in DS2 comes close to the orange goo of izalith, the shader effect vomit of blighttown or the PS2 geometry of seathe's "forest"
Funny you should mention looking like a PS2 game.
even out of bound areas in dark souls 2 look better than playable areas in DS1
While that is out of bound in the sense that you can't get down there, that's not some distant detail. That's just looking down in the dragon arena in Aldia's keep. Dark Souls 2 is full of billboard trees in clear view that they just forgot to obscure or limit visibility to.
>Dark Souls 2 is full of billboard trees
Is that supposed to be a criticism?
Would you prefer that the trees were fully 3d modeled causing it to drop to 10FPS like DS1 did?
Or would you prefer the trees not be there at all?
Calling DS2 worse looking than DS1 is peak delusion that only a fromdrone can muster
No, you idiot. I'm saying they should limit the viewing angle, use depth of field, or other obscuring details so you can't tell that the 2-axis tree billboard looks like it is out of Vice City.
>I'm saying they should limit the viewing angle, use depth of field
and you should have a nice day
Do you have anything of value to add to this thread? You probably don't even like or play Dark Souls 2, you just wandered into this thread to shitpost like half of the worthless posters on this board.
If you're going to consider Demon Souls and Dark Souls 3, then Bloodborne also is on that list. The only metric that Bloodborne can be not on a list both Demon Souls and Dark Souls 3 are on, is literally just having Souls in the name. Dark Souls 3 is more like Bloodborne than it is like Dark Souls
I hate the level design of Dark Souls 2. They have all these great ideas intended for the player to use, but they are so awful and inefficient that nobody in their right mind would use them. The gameplay just feels stiff and slow, where as Dark Souls 1, while not perfect, simply felt stiff.
Comparing the common gank hotspots of Dark Souls 2, vs a common gank hotspot in the entirety of undead burg/parish in Dark Souls 1 is a world of difference
I will preface this by saying the shield slap is fricking ass. What the frick were they thinking? You can maybe say "duhh nobody used the kick much" but for me the kick was snappy, and had plenty of intuitive uses. Replaying through Dark Souls 1 has made me appreciate the kick even more for simple guard breaks distancing and creating openings. The level design has also allowed me to kick otherwise meddling pricks off the cliff. There are a lot more areas to move, take advantage of, and exploit. I won't defend the Capra Demon as a boss even if it is funny, but the areas themselves are great
Meanwhile Iron Keep fricking blows until maybe the last like 3rd of it imagine if you were allowed kick shit in Iron Keep how much better and more dynamic the enemy interaction would be. Instead the Alonne Knights are a shit enemy type that hardly react to anything that you do, so you can either exploit the crummy AI pathfinding and hope they walk their way into the lava, or just fight them as normal with either buffed to shit weapons or the kidn of hit and run tactics that would make the Mongolians proud. The shield slap is slow, clunky, and shitty, only really suited for solo scenarios
They changed the kick because no one was using it? My guess was that they changed it because it's pretty op against any normal sized enemy that's not a silver or black knight
I dunno why they changed it. They turned a normal natural action into a slow Jerry mess
kick was changed because everyone was just backstab fishing in the game making shields useless
go look at how people fought havel the rock in DS1, how many of them kick his greatshield?
So how exactly did the shield type shield slap fix that issue?
the slap is an instant knockdown if the enemy is blocking
from there you can do the canned animation or set up a combo
DS2 is good, not great, but SotFS is the worst Fromsoft game and it's not close. I've played lazy knock off souls clones that had their shit together more.
Sotfs is so bafflingly designed. It's like someone went out of their way to find all the flaws with the game, fix none of them, but redesign the game to highlight these flaws.
The combat is sloppy, which makes the absurd enemy density unfun and tedious. Almost no enemy placements feel deliberate, shit feels random and amateurish, which is exacerbated by the awkward behavior of the AI.
If your only experience with 2 is Sotfs, please, play the original, and understand the sheer dogshit that this shitty remake is.
I keep trying to like Elden Ring but I just can't. I've tried different classes, weapons, I've built up spells and ashes and summons but I always just feel so listless. It's not like I can't figure out WHERE I'm going the game points you in the direction but I just don't care. And I've never really cared about any of the stories in these games but the others didn't add a commute so I'm not left with my own growing sense of apathy as I trek between dungeons.
I just finished a hexer playthrough
for ng+ I wanna change to powerstancing longswords like the watcher and defender swords but also have some miracles to make it more interesting so 50 faith
is that gonna work? wear decent armor, powerstance the swords and throw some lightning spears
I mean anything can work.
You might run into some awkward damage resistance matchups here and there if you're insistant on those being welded to your hands, but generally good hybrid builds are great.
I don't know longswords off the top of my head, but poke around to see if there's any that synergize with the idea. Anything that scales off Faith or covers a damage type or something.
Playing Dark Souls 1 again after playing 2 and 3 and holy frick the level design is far and away better than 2 and a bit better than 3 as well. Its interesting that I can go to Darkroot Garden, visualize the hazards on the ground between the tree men and old rusted giant guys and act upon it properly
3's levels sucked
This
The Undead Settlement and Cathedral of the Deep were pretty good, Archdragon Peak was decent, everything else was bleh.
DS3 lives and dies by its boss battles... which are mostly just Bloodborne bosses.
Except the dogshit ones.
I really hate that every Souls boss suddenly turned into a spastic lawn mower with 35 hit combos. The whole battle system now is dodge roll city waiting for a 2 second window and then dodging again.
Again, it was basically BB with a new coat of paint.
BB allowed for more opportunity to attack, because combat as a whole was more fast paced and you could get a cheeky hit in during boss combos, and it just doesn't work in DS3 and ER
They are far better than 2's
No.
Dark Souls 2 gays can barely form a cohesive argument, and will argue that seeing the 9 painted world ninjas in plain sight below the anor londo rafters constitutes as a "gank encounter"
if DS1 had not had tightrope walk sections and DS2 did you would piss and scream about tightrope walk sections for the rest of your life
>Tight Rope section with Dark Souls 2 design
>you dont get to properly assess the threats until you're half way through the tight rope
>would be assaulted by knights that dont actually react to being hit half the time unless you are powerstancing great clubs
Yeah I probably would
>would be assaulted by knights that dont actually react to being hit half the time unless you are powerstancing great clubs
kek, get filtered.
samegay lol. See in Dark Souls 1, you are presented with plenty of hazards that you can easily visualize and figure out a plan on action based on that. Painted World Ninjas dont just suddenly fricking drop from the ceiling right behind you and you could easily do something as simple as kick the ones on the rafters off, pick them off one by one with ranged attacks, etc.
Dark Souls 2 Scholar of the First Sin design would dictate that there HAS to be hidden enemies ready to simply jump out. On top of that, they are always going to be dudes in armor with 500 poise ready to no sell your attacks like they are senator armstrong
>On top of that, they are always going to be dudes in armor with 500 poise
Huge exaggeration, but if that's your recollection of the game then it's ok kek
>attack royal knights (famous for ganking) with a larger 2h weapon like a Halberd
>they no sell your attacks
>attack Alonne knights with something like that
>they also no sell
>attack brume tower knights with twin spears or halberds
>they ALSO no sell
Idk it's a pretty common scenario bro want me to mine out their exact values???
>attack Alonne knights with something like that
>they also no sell
Yeah, mine them out, I don't remember Alonne Knights to be particularly resistant except the rare huge bowmen types
Just tried it out, both variants of Alonne knights stagger when hit by a halberd
They literally do not stagger mid swing
Assuming you're not just wrong about this too having different poise thresholds during an active attack is nothing special in souls
Oh yeah, then I must have hallucinated and you're not a total moron
Damn bro same I guess I just had a different version of the game where the alonne knights suddenly decide to act differently compared to your 14/10 KINO version of it
man how can you still hatepost ds2 10 years after it came out and just be baldfaced wrong about shit like this
Not samegay, you moron. Not my fault the idiot below me copied my greentext.
>would be assaulted by knights that dont actually react to being hit half the time unless you are powerstancing great clubs
Literally what? Lmao
Rope section with Dark Souls 2 design
>your character controls like a wet noodle
yea imma pass on that
I feel like this type of game is not going to be the future of video games
"I prefer Dark Souls A over B" is just splitting hairs
developers who actually care about video game balance are not going to follow Miyazaki's design philosophy
it's basically just throwing enough bullshit around and hoping you have some dumbass who sits down and bruteforces your game
or someone that is skilled at video games and walks all over your game but the the average normie is neither of those
Believe it or not, some people don't give a shit what "the average normie" thinks or wants and want to play games designed for people who play video games instead of watching interactive movies.