>bribed
Anon, it's much much more funny than this.
Remember when DaS came out and journos hated it?
And then it became clear that it was a great game, people loved it and many youtube essays were written.
Then the sequel came out. The journo scum, not understanding why the first game was good in the first place didn't want to be left out. Superficially it resembled the first game. It was 'hard', it looked similar, it was more accessible.
So in the eyes of journalists it must be good. Because they simply don't know any better.
Das got jerked off hard by game journalists because the so hard marketing hit perfectly
Even Des was highly rated even if the actual text if the reviews basically told people to skip it. But it probably got a boost from being PS3 exclusive ratings wise
You forgot how actually shitty 2014 was for vidya both for AAA and indie, that people would rather praise a second rate dark souls game. It's a miracle we got Alien Isolation that year.
>the most linear level design in the series, with over half the areas being almost pure straight paths without so much as a single stray dead end >areas and traps are no longer well thought out experiences you can get through with caution and wit, instead devolving to gauntlets of a few tough enemies >completely abandons world design as a concept (no amount of cope about the windmill elevator will fix this) >regressing to level up b***h instead of leveling up at bonfires >above two factors made them give you full fast travel from the start >garbage lore awkwardly stuck between not having anything to do with darksouls and needing to crowbar in references anyway >basically nothing half as memorable as the grand high fantasy of Dark Souls, or even Demon's Souls >was supposed to at least have some interesting light mechanics but dropped them because 7th gen consoles >entirely broken covenants like the blue c**ts >horrifically terrible hitboxes that singlehandedly spawned the shockwave meme >poor general boss/enemy attack design even before the hitboxes being bad; where DS1 let you largely avoid enemy attacks by avoiding them, DS2 started the trend of only leaving i-frames as a reasonable method of not getting hit >shields are bad because lol why would you want any method of defense beyond i-frames? >hexes >adaption >soul memory
It is a terrible followup to every single thing that Dark Souls 1 did well. The only people who like it are autists who actually think r1 r1 circle gameplay is actually good and value a game's quality more on their fiftieth playthrough than their first.
But the Dark Souls 2 worship is entirely revisionism. It was near universally mocked on release by any actual people for good reason.
To hammer this home, because I fricking hate this eternal disappointment of a game and the morons that are too stupid to get why people don't like it, consider the final bosses of the two games:
Gwyn both felt like and literally was the central crux of the entire world. The entire game world is built around him and the people tied to him. He's the crux of the setting and so almost every part of the game's setting and lore can be tied back to him in some way, so you spend the whole game with the knowledge of him. His personal retinue that traveled with him to the game's final location are persistent minibosses that you shift from fearing to seeking out for their unique equipment. You meet his family and servants, you traipse through his buildings, you kill his generals. And then you meet him, at the metaphysical center of the world, and fight him to decide the fate of that world.
Nashandra is some b***h that fricked over the king of the land you happen to be in and is sitting at the bottom of a cave underneath a castle you cleared hours ago.
To hammer this home, because I fricking hate this eternal disappointment of a game and the morons that are too stupid to get why people don't like it, consider the final bosses of the two games:
Gwyn both felt like and literally was the central crux of the entire world. The entire game world is built around him and the people tied to him. He's the crux of the setting and so almost every part of the game's setting and lore can be tied back to him in some way, so you spend the whole game with the knowledge of him. His personal retinue that traveled with him to the game's final location are persistent minibosses that you shift from fearing to seeking out for their unique equipment. You meet his family and servants, you traipse through his buildings, you kill his generals. And then you meet him, at the metaphysical center of the world, and fight him to decide the fate of that world.
Nashandra is some b***h that fricked over the king of the land you happen to be in and is sitting at the bottom of a cave underneath a castle you cleared hours ago.
At release I loved Dark Souls 2
Now I still love Dark Souls 2
The only thing that makes me play DS1 over 2 is that I can beat DS1 in an afternoon, if I'm good to commit more time than that to a Souls game, it's always gonna be 2 that I turn to. It's BY FAR the most fun of all the games. There's nothing in any other Soulskiroborne game as good as power-stanced ultragreat weapons while fastrolling.
>the most linear level design in the series
That's just straight up not true. >areas and traps are no longer well thought out experiences you can get through with caution and wit, instead devolving to gauntlets of a few tough enemies
There's plenty of mechanical traps and there's plenty of areas that expect you to prove you can get past a number of enemies. Neither are hard, both are fun. >completely abandons world design as a concept
Only DS1 has "world design" anyway. DeS and DS3 didn't have it, it's a 1 thing. >regressing to level up b***h instead of leveling up at bonfires
That's an improvement >garbage lore awkwardly stuck between not having anything to do with darksouls and needing to crowbar in references anyway
Literally the best and most well developed story of all three DS games, and with more to it than DeS's. >basically nothing half as memorable as the grand high fantasy of Dark Souls, or even Demon's Souls
Manjula alone clears both of those, nevermind the Castle, every Dragon area, and each individual DLC >entirely broken covenants like the blue c**ts
git gud >horrifically terrible hitboxes
See above >poor general boss/enemy attack design even before the hitboxes being bad; where DS1 let you largely avoid enemy attacks by avoiding them, DS2 started the trend of only leaving i-frames as a reasonable method of not getting hit
Once again, we come to lies instead of arguments. >shields are bad because lol why would you want any method of defense beyond i-frames?
Shields are bad in DeS, DS1 and DS3 too. They're a noob trap in every game. >hexes
A great addition >adaption
Every single DS1 thread was full of homosexuals like you whining it had too many free iFrames, so they toned them down, and gave you a way to get them back with investment. And now you cry that they're gone... >soul memory
None of the Souls games managed to figure out how to handle PvP. 3's solution is just as bad, same as 1/DeS's laizee faire
>That's just straight up not true.
Yes it is.
What, were you off exploring every interesting little corner of Heide's Tower, Forest of Giants, Huntsman's Copse, or that fricking glowy worm hole just to name the ones off the top of my head. >Only DS1 has "world design" anyway. DeS and DS3 didn't have it, it's a 1 thing.
World design is not just things being interconnected you blithering moronic c**t. Yes DS1 was a masterstroke the rest of the series, but those games weren't abject failures the way DS2 was. >git gud
There's nothing to git gud about, it had covenants that literally did not fricking function and were famous for the fact that nobody ever got summoned with them. >Once again, we come to lies instead of arguments.
Stating a way that the game is bad and a reason that thing fails is an argument. Saying "nuh-uh" is not. >Shields are bad in all the games
No. They're functional tools that you can use for progression through a level or as a less effective method of defense for shit you aren't sure about. There's a reason the games were built with a quick-swap two-handing button in mind. But you're a mindless fricking drone that never comprehended anything but R1-R1-Circle. >A great addition
No, they were comically overpowered and gamebreaking, to the point of invalidating other options. That is a bad thing. >But DS1 had too many iframes so they decided to frick everything up
This means nothing. Adaption is bad because it means the game couldn't be designed around any single amount of i-frames which is part of why DS2's enemy design is so frickawful. >None of the Souls games managed to figure out how to handle PvP...
None of the other solutions are as bad as a sword hanging over your head threatening to leave you underdeveloped for the game's semi-consensual multiplayer if you mess around too much.
Every other point you made was more "nuh-uh" garbage because a DS2 fan is by definition incapable of any thought beyond "I like thing".
>when journalists and professional reviewers loved it?
They only pretended to like DS2 when they realized DeS and DS1 were popular. They initially overlooked those games.
I’ve played hundreds. I think DaS2 is shit and Ganker uses contrarianism as a shield from others because they lack a real personality, something so basic that toddlers have it by age 3.
>learned to pirate before learning to speak English (second language) >had a phase that lasted 12 years where I would run a game through, start to finish, in one sitting
A fair few more than 50, that is for sure. Not many mainstream titles if you can believe it.
I love ds2 but I don't want to "win" through fallout 3 gigachad spam
Eventually the world will beg ds2 for forgiveness and ds2 in its greatness will welcome rhem
i loved it when it came out, though mostly for the multiplayer + covenants
invading c**ts as the rats or bell boys at launch was endless fun
every souls game has a honeymoon period
I was just listening to Armored Core OST today and thought
Why the frick does anybody prefer DaS3 and ER slop OST to peak like Mr. Adam and Spilit of Motherwilll
Kota Hoshino was CHAINED to a WALL while gay finnish weeaboos in the indie game scene composed better shit than multi-million dollar studios (because he is cringe enough to be free) in a fraction of the time and all this fricking GOD could do was WATCH
I do not forgive Miyazaki the crime of putting Kota on the bench
>Shinning example of a beacon of hope for humanity are mentally ill homosexuals spamming, again, the same thread all year.
sure thing moron
The very moment I started playing dark souls 2 I knew something was terribly wrong with the animations, controls ( limited axis for some reason ), and theme park style worlds completely disconnected from each other. It was a neck snapping drop from dark souls 1 and I despise the contrarian morons organizing a cult around it.
Downgrades generally mean a bad game. It's downgrades were too severe. AS always it's better to lower the res than degrade the graphics. They didn't, they went with more pixels. From impressive to worthless.
The only game I know that survived downgrades is The Division. Though it too would have been better at lower res with retained graphics shown in preview presentations. Rage wasn't bad either, but not one of the best games ever as it should have been.
Low res is fine, especially with effective antialiasing and upscaling. Even pixelated is preferable to everything downgraded. Even the N64 could do frame generation (double framerate) at 1% cost of it's cpu. Did it for the videos for RE2.
Doing great things and then undoing them is the worst kind of management. It would have been worth waiting for the next console generation, but simply lowering the res would have offered enough power. USB sticks and streaming in sprites for characters, using the hard drive as well could have allowed for more life, or more multiplayer if that was their excuse for turning everything to shit.
ds2 is the best in the series mechanically and pvp wise. >adds jump button >makes dual wielding useful with powerstancing >all weapons/builds are basically viable in pvp >extremely open and the least linear first half of any ds game >extremely replayable as a result, and allows builds to be made quickly >not rollspam, more methodical and rythmic in its combat
>extremely open and the least linear first half of any ds game
It is fricking not. Multiple linear corridors is not open. There's no exploration, no choice, no nothing. Just a few different paths you can choose the order of.
It's as open as a level select screen.
I played it after having this shit memed at me for a decade expecting it to feel like a Dreamcast game and it was perfectly fine and in line with every other souls game
DS2 does too many good things to be outright called BAD, but it also has some really weak points. The DLC is fantastic, yes, but it also takes a damn long while to get to it, so that isn't that good of a defense
Overall, i'd say it's very good, even with its flaws
I stopped at Shrine of Amana because I reached critically negative levels of fun. What are you even trying to do in DaS2? When I got to the castle after the killing the 4 frickers I had completely forgotten if there was even a plot.
The game is actually pretty easy save for a few of the dlc areas. >Strike damage is kind of OP and you could easily beat the game with just a mace. >the bosses are a fricking joke. There are many bosses I beat first try. >life gems make the game easier than having summons. >the amount of souls you get can easily have you over leveled.
2 was fantastic. I played through it tons when in the army back in vanilla trying to get the no death no bonfire rings. had a blast.
it looks like shit, but the gameplay is fun and janky which I love. I fricking love jank. You vanilla ass losers will never learn to love something that is flawed. PVP was incredible and reminded me of DeS. had a ton of fun running a full heide knight build with the spear/lance and just ramming dudes.
good times. you gays will never understand.
I loved DS2 on ps3 launch and played a ton.
then I kinda skipped DS3 for a few years. After I went back and played DS3, I loved it. I bought DS2 on PC since I had never tried the DLC.
The game feels like ass. I also bought DS1 on PC to make sure I wasn't imagining things and DS1 feels pretty much like DS3 and Elden Ring. DS2 feels like complete shit though. It also sounds like shit. There's a lot of neat ideas but I can't play it again.
>Clearly mogged demon souls and dark souls when it released with weapon variety, powerstancing pvp and gameplay >but the areas weren't put together as well
if they had more time to flesh out the areas better everyone would be singing its praises
mogged demon souls and dark souls when it released
It had worse gameplay, worse level design, awful movement, awful mocap animations, utterly shite story and worldbuilding, and so on
It was worse in everything. Even powerstancing was trash
DS2 is great, only homosexuals who watch 5 hour long internet autism videos hate it. "UHM THIS GAME IS SHIT BECAUSE... UH... Y-YOU TAKE A ELEVATOR TO A VOLCANO YEAH THAT IS IT, I REMEMBER THAT FROM THE VIDEO!"
troony souls 2
Unlike journalists I played through the game and wasn't bribed by scamco, so I can freely say it's hot garbage.
>bribed
Anon, it's much much more funny than this.
Remember when DaS came out and journos hated it?
And then it became clear that it was a great game, people loved it and many youtube essays were written.
Then the sequel came out. The journo scum, not understanding why the first game was good in the first place didn't want to be left out. Superficially it resembled the first game. It was 'hard', it looked similar, it was more accessible.
So in the eyes of journalists it must be good. Because they simply don't know any better.
Das got jerked off hard by game journalists because the so hard marketing hit perfectly
Even Des was highly rated even if the actual text if the reviews basically told people to skip it. But it probably got a boost from being PS3 exclusive ratings wise
You forgot how actually shitty 2014 was for vidya both for AAA and indie, that people would rather praise a second rate dark souls game. It's a miracle we got Alien Isolation that year.
>the most linear level design in the series, with over half the areas being almost pure straight paths without so much as a single stray dead end
>areas and traps are no longer well thought out experiences you can get through with caution and wit, instead devolving to gauntlets of a few tough enemies
>completely abandons world design as a concept (no amount of cope about the windmill elevator will fix this)
>regressing to level up b***h instead of leveling up at bonfires
>above two factors made them give you full fast travel from the start
>garbage lore awkwardly stuck between not having anything to do with darksouls and needing to crowbar in references anyway
>basically nothing half as memorable as the grand high fantasy of Dark Souls, or even Demon's Souls
>was supposed to at least have some interesting light mechanics but dropped them because 7th gen consoles
>entirely broken covenants like the blue c**ts
>horrifically terrible hitboxes that singlehandedly spawned the shockwave meme
>poor general boss/enemy attack design even before the hitboxes being bad; where DS1 let you largely avoid enemy attacks by avoiding them, DS2 started the trend of only leaving i-frames as a reasonable method of not getting hit
>shields are bad because lol why would you want any method of defense beyond i-frames?
>hexes
>adaption
>soul memory
It is a terrible followup to every single thing that Dark Souls 1 did well. The only people who like it are autists who actually think r1 r1 circle gameplay is actually good and value a game's quality more on their fiftieth playthrough than their first.
But the Dark Souls 2 worship is entirely revisionism. It was near universally mocked on release by any actual people for good reason.
To hammer this home, because I fricking hate this eternal disappointment of a game and the morons that are too stupid to get why people don't like it, consider the final bosses of the two games:
Gwyn both felt like and literally was the central crux of the entire world. The entire game world is built around him and the people tied to him. He's the crux of the setting and so almost every part of the game's setting and lore can be tied back to him in some way, so you spend the whole game with the knowledge of him. His personal retinue that traveled with him to the game's final location are persistent minibosses that you shift from fearing to seeking out for their unique equipment. You meet his family and servants, you traipse through his buildings, you kill his generals. And then you meet him, at the metaphysical center of the world, and fight him to decide the fate of that world.
Nashandra is some b***h that fricked over the king of the land you happen to be in and is sitting at the bottom of a cave underneath a castle you cleared hours ago.
At release I loved Dark Souls 2
Now I still love Dark Souls 2
The only thing that makes me play DS1 over 2 is that I can beat DS1 in an afternoon, if I'm good to commit more time than that to a Souls game, it's always gonna be 2 that I turn to. It's BY FAR the most fun of all the games. There's nothing in any other Soulskiroborne game as good as power-stanced ultragreat weapons while fastrolling.
>the most linear level design in the series
That's just straight up not true.
>areas and traps are no longer well thought out experiences you can get through with caution and wit, instead devolving to gauntlets of a few tough enemies
There's plenty of mechanical traps and there's plenty of areas that expect you to prove you can get past a number of enemies. Neither are hard, both are fun.
>completely abandons world design as a concept
Only DS1 has "world design" anyway. DeS and DS3 didn't have it, it's a 1 thing.
>regressing to level up b***h instead of leveling up at bonfires
That's an improvement
>garbage lore awkwardly stuck between not having anything to do with darksouls and needing to crowbar in references anyway
Literally the best and most well developed story of all three DS games, and with more to it than DeS's.
>basically nothing half as memorable as the grand high fantasy of Dark Souls, or even Demon's Souls
Manjula alone clears both of those, nevermind the Castle, every Dragon area, and each individual DLC
>entirely broken covenants like the blue c**ts
git gud
>horrifically terrible hitboxes
See above
>poor general boss/enemy attack design even before the hitboxes being bad; where DS1 let you largely avoid enemy attacks by avoiding them, DS2 started the trend of only leaving i-frames as a reasonable method of not getting hit
Once again, we come to lies instead of arguments.
>shields are bad because lol why would you want any method of defense beyond i-frames?
Shields are bad in DeS, DS1 and DS3 too. They're a noob trap in every game.
>hexes
A great addition
>adaption
Every single DS1 thread was full of homosexuals like you whining it had too many free iFrames, so they toned them down, and gave you a way to get them back with investment. And now you cry that they're gone...
>soul memory
None of the Souls games managed to figure out how to handle PvP. 3's solution is just as bad, same as 1/DeS's laizee faire
>That's just straight up not true.
Yes it is.
What, were you off exploring every interesting little corner of Heide's Tower, Forest of Giants, Huntsman's Copse, or that fricking glowy worm hole just to name the ones off the top of my head.
>Only DS1 has "world design" anyway. DeS and DS3 didn't have it, it's a 1 thing.
World design is not just things being interconnected you blithering moronic c**t. Yes DS1 was a masterstroke the rest of the series, but those games weren't abject failures the way DS2 was.
>git gud
There's nothing to git gud about, it had covenants that literally did not fricking function and were famous for the fact that nobody ever got summoned with them.
>Once again, we come to lies instead of arguments.
Stating a way that the game is bad and a reason that thing fails is an argument. Saying "nuh-uh" is not.
>Shields are bad in all the games
No. They're functional tools that you can use for progression through a level or as a less effective method of defense for shit you aren't sure about. There's a reason the games were built with a quick-swap two-handing button in mind. But you're a mindless fricking drone that never comprehended anything but R1-R1-Circle.
>A great addition
No, they were comically overpowered and gamebreaking, to the point of invalidating other options. That is a bad thing.
>But DS1 had too many iframes so they decided to frick everything up
This means nothing. Adaption is bad because it means the game couldn't be designed around any single amount of i-frames which is part of why DS2's enemy design is so frickawful.
>None of the Souls games managed to figure out how to handle PvP...
None of the other solutions are as bad as a sword hanging over your head threatening to leave you underdeveloped for the game's semi-consensual multiplayer if you mess around too much.
Every other point you made was more "nuh-uh" garbage because a DS2 fan is by definition incapable of any thought beyond "I like thing".
It's a souls game so it's shit.
Simple as. Them's my rules. Don't care what reviewers say, they outed themselves as utterly incompetent yonks ago.
>when journalists and professional reviewers loved it?
They only pretended to like DS2 when they realized DeS and DS1 were popular. They initially overlooked those games.
>Why does Ganker hate Dark Souls 2
I played it
because it's fricking shit
>Ganker
>quality source of video game mastery
How many anons ITT can say they've played at least 50 videogames?
I’ve played hundreds. I think DaS2 is shit and Ganker uses contrarianism as a shield from others because they lack a real personality, something so basic that toddlers have it by age 3.
>learned to pirate before learning to speak English (second language)
>had a phase that lasted 12 years where I would run a game through, start to finish, in one sitting
A fair few more than 50, that is for sure. Not many mainstream titles if you can believe it.
if you haven't beat at least that many you don't really belong here.
I don't think the average poster has beaten at least 50 games.
then you shouldn't wonder why most opinions here are trash these days amirite?
A lot of games takes like less than an afternoon to beat
I love ds2 but I don't want to "win" through fallout 3 gigachad spam
Eventually the world will beg ds2 for forgiveness and ds2 in its greatness will welcome rhem
i loved it when it came out, though mostly for the multiplayer + covenants
invading c**ts as the rats or bell boys at launch was endless fun
every souls game has a honeymoon period
If your post has a Chad or wojack in it, it is automatically worthless.
Frogs are also likely to make it worthless unless said frog is Apu
I was just listening to Armored Core OST today and thought
Why the frick does anybody prefer DaS3 and ER slop OST to peak like Mr. Adam and Spilit of Motherwilll
Kota Hoshino was CHAINED to a WALL while gay finnish weeaboos in the indie game scene composed better shit than multi-million dollar studios (because he is cringe enough to be free) in a fraction of the time and all this fricking GOD could do was WATCH
I do not forgive Miyazaki the crime of putting Kota on the bench
I do not like Action RPGs.
Mentally ill moron spamming the same thread all year around about the worst souls. Yay.
Your defect is deficiency in output. Those you deem ill are the best examples of humanity.
>Shinning example of a beacon of hope for humanity are mentally ill homosexuals spamming, again, the same thread all year.
sure thing moron
The very moment I started playing dark souls 2 I knew something was terribly wrong with the animations, controls ( limited axis for some reason ), and theme park style worlds completely disconnected from each other. It was a neck snapping drop from dark souls 1 and I despise the contrarian morons organizing a cult around it.
It's shit.
aye but it's still miles better than dark souls 3
Downgrades generally mean a bad game. It's downgrades were too severe. AS always it's better to lower the res than degrade the graphics. They didn't, they went with more pixels. From impressive to worthless.
The only game I know that survived downgrades is The Division. Though it too would have been better at lower res with retained graphics shown in preview presentations. Rage wasn't bad either, but not one of the best games ever as it should have been.
Low res is fine, especially with effective antialiasing and upscaling. Even pixelated is preferable to everything downgraded. Even the N64 could do frame generation (double framerate) at 1% cost of it's cpu. Did it for the videos for RE2.
Doing great things and then undoing them is the worst kind of management. It would have been worth waiting for the next console generation, but simply lowering the res would have offered enough power. USB sticks and streaming in sprites for characters, using the hard drive as well could have allowed for more life, or more multiplayer if that was their excuse for turning everything to shit.
ds2 is the best in the series mechanically and pvp wise.
>adds jump button
>makes dual wielding useful with powerstancing
>all weapons/builds are basically viable in pvp
>extremely open and the least linear first half of any ds game
>extremely replayable as a result, and allows builds to be made quickly
>not rollspam, more methodical and rythmic in its combat
SAUL?
>extremely open and the least linear first half of any ds game
damn, you got two paths to lost bastille and a hole, so many paths
>extremely open and the least linear first half of any ds game
It is fricking not. Multiple linear corridors is not open. There's no exploration, no choice, no nothing. Just a few different paths you can choose the order of.
It's as open as a level select screen.
Ds2 is kino kys you shit taste having morons
is it cinema fr fr tho?
look at this horseshit and tell us it's okay
I played it after having this shit memed at me for a decade expecting it to feel like a Dreamcast game and it was perfectly fine and in line with every other souls game
DS2 does too many good things to be outright called BAD, but it also has some really weak points. The DLC is fantastic, yes, but it also takes a damn long while to get to it, so that isn't that good of a defense
Overall, i'd say it's very good, even with its flaws
DS2 has terrible combat, exploration, textures and awful bosses. But its still a good game, its an unpenetrable mystery.
I stopped at Shrine of Amana because I reached critically negative levels of fun. What are you even trying to do in DaS2? When I got to the castle after the killing the 4 frickers I had completely forgotten if there was even a plot.
Shrine of Amana is kinda awful if you don't use a bow or those skulls that attract aggro.
I never played the original version with higher tracking on the magic shots, but the current version is nbd
The game is actually pretty easy save for a few of the dlc areas.
>Strike damage is kind of OP and you could easily beat the game with just a mace.
>the bosses are a fricking joke. There are many bosses I beat first try.
>life gems make the game easier than having summons.
>the amount of souls you get can easily have you over leveled.
2 was fantastic. I played through it tons when in the army back in vanilla trying to get the no death no bonfire rings. had a blast.
it looks like shit, but the gameplay is fun and janky which I love. I fricking love jank. You vanilla ass losers will never learn to love something that is flawed. PVP was incredible and reminded me of DeS. had a ton of fun running a full heide knight build with the spear/lance and just ramming dudes.
good times. you gays will never understand.
I think DS2 is the best souls game in the series to be honest. I played DS3 but didn't like it. I always drop it early, never finished it.
Only thing that I didn't like in Dark Souls 2 was the lifegems, that made the game much easier.
I loved DS2 on ps3 launch and played a ton.
then I kinda skipped DS3 for a few years. After I went back and played DS3, I loved it. I bought DS2 on PC since I had never tried the DLC.
The game feels like ass. I also bought DS1 on PC to make sure I wasn't imagining things and DS1 feels pretty much like DS3 and Elden Ring. DS2 feels like complete shit though. It also sounds like shit. There's a lot of neat ideas but I can't play it again.
>Clearly mogged demon souls and dark souls when it released with weapon variety, powerstancing pvp and gameplay
>but the areas weren't put together as well
if they had more time to flesh out the areas better everyone would be singing its praises
mogged demon souls and dark souls when it released
It had worse gameplay, worse level design, awful movement, awful mocap animations, utterly shite story and worldbuilding, and so on
It was worse in everything. Even powerstancing was trash
My main gripe with DS2 it how ugly it is.
DS2 is great, only homosexuals who watch 5 hour long internet autism videos hate it. "UHM THIS GAME IS SHIT BECAUSE... UH... Y-YOU TAKE A ELEVATOR TO A VOLCANO YEAH THAT IS IT, I REMEMBER THAT FROM THE VIDEO!"