In defense of Dark Souls 2

[Benpasko]

DS2 was made by a lazy B team who didn't know what the fuck they were doing.

What's that, you want that item? LOL farm till your game is so fucked up that its on like NG+48! That's not unreasonable at all. NEW GAME PLUS FORTY EIGHT.

If you wanted to have all the gear in the game? I wonder if NG+ caps at 99... at any rate, that's a lot of stupid farming, stupid mobs that stop spawning because the 'gaem too hard!!!1111 make mob not spawn so i can run 2 boss geez!!11214omg"

Crap game is crap... no, actually, iTS SUB-CRAP.

Such a big disappointment. It's not often that I stand in crapstop lines to buy a day-1 release.. in fact IVE NEVER DONE IT before DS2. And what do I get? a spherical representation of electronic dog shit.

Geez, what were you farming for that got you so riled up?

I've only had 4 enemies disappear on me in my first playthrough. They were Alonne knights that I liked testing new weapons against. I never found a reason to farm for anything until the enemies disappeared, and I definitely wouldn't do it multiple times.

There are a lot of rare drops off non-respawning enemies, so you have to ascetic the area a TON of times to get certain gear. The Shadow set, in particular. It's the worst change, worse than even soul memory imo.

 

[joest01]

DS2 was made by a lazy B team who didn't know what the fuck they were doing.

What's that, you want that item? LOL farm till your game is so fucked up that its on like NG+48! That's not unreasonable at all. NEW GAME PLUS FORTY EIGHT.

If you wanted to have all the gear in the game? I wonder if NG+ caps at 99... at any rate, that's a lot of stupid farming, stupid mobs that stop spawning because the 'gaem too hard!!!1111 make mob not spawn so i can run 2 boss geez!!11214omg"

Crap game is crap... no, actually, iTS SUB-CRAP.

Such a big disappointment. It's not often that I stand in crapstop lines to buy a day-1 release.. in fact IVE NEVER DONE IT before DS2. And what do I get? a spherical representation of electronic dog shit.

Geez, what were you farming for that got you so riled up?

I've only had 4 enemies disappear on me in my first playthrough. They were Alonne knights that I liked testing new weapons against. I never found a reason to farm for anything until the enemies disappeared, and I definitely wouldn't do it multiple times.

There are a lot of rare drops off non-respawning enemies, so you have to ascetic the area a TON of times to get certain gear. The Shadow set, in particular. It's the worst change, worse than even soul memory imo.

Don't know where to start with you. In then end it boils down to that you obviously feel entitled to playing the game you want to play. I for one do not give a hoot about how many times enemies respawn. I got by with the gear I got just fine. What I do care about however is better gameplay and I get that in DkS2. So that's what I'm going with.

Btw DkS1 had a much more vanilla fantasy feel to it than 2. 2 is almost barren in comparison to the t-rexes and crystal caves I hope I never have to lay eyes on again.

Funny too that you don't see Demon's fans freak out like that. We were disapointed by DkS1 but I don't remember an outcry like the one DkS1 fans had about 2. My interpretation is that you had found your niche in the gank fest that is Dark Souls 1. And you lost your status as a player completely in 2 because now you have to learn to play again. But I could be wrong.

p.s. of course a lot of good DkS1 players made the transition just fine and are rocking it in 2. I don't think they will throw hissy fits either.

 

[Benpasko]

Don't know where to start with you. In then end it boils down to that you obviously feel entitled to playing the game you want to play. I for one do not give a hoot about how many times enemies respawn. I got by with the gear I got just fine. What I do care about however is better gameplay and I get that in DkS2. So that's what I'm going with.

Btw DkS1 had a much more vanilla fantasy feel to it than 2. 2 is almost barren in comparison to the t-rexes and crystal caves I hope I never have to lay eyes on again.

Funny too that you don't see Demon's fans freak out like that. We were disapointed by DkS1 but I don't remember an outcry like the one DkS1 fans had about 2. My interpretation is that you had found your niche in the gank fest that is Dark Souls 1. And you lost your status as a player completely in 2 because now you have to learn to play again. But I could be wrong.

p.s. of course a lot of good DkS1 players made the transition just fine and are rocking it in 2. I don't think they will throw hissy fits either.

That was out of nowhere. Dark 2 is actually my favorite game in the series, did you quote the wrong person by mistake? All I said was that low droprates on non-respawning mobs is annoying, I think it should be EITHER a tough unique mob with a guaranteed drop OR a rare drop. Like if I wanted to get the aurous armor, I would need to keep burning ascetics in a zone where Rhoy invades me, and that's kind of annoying. I actually agree that the game should dictate how you play, not the other way around, but it's always a pain in the ass (as an item collector in games like this) when certain items are walled off behind needing to farm NG+8 No Man's Wharf over and over.

Also I was NEVER into pvp in Dark Soul 1, so yes, you are wrong. You made a whole lot of ranty presumptions about me based on one complaint about the game (my only post in this thread, even), it's almost like you're mad bro.

Back in Dark Souls 1 I was actually the worst pvper ever, my record is like 2 wins 30 losses or something equally hilarious as a darkwraith in that game before I gave up on it, and just farmed humanities off rats for the armor, because I never had the dlc and viability in pvp went way down without it.

I thought it was funny to see people freak out about some of the issues 2's online had, conveniently forgetting issues with previous games (OP dark magic in Dark 1 especially, one of my friends has done a bunch of youtube videos of oneshotting and other broken stuff, it's always been there) I'm glad they made the pvp not-terrible in 2. (Disclaimer: Pvp in dark 1 was fine or whatever I guess, I didn't like it, if you do that's fine)

 

[Lovely Mixture]

snip

You either haven't spent enough time with the game or your are winging it with your points above.

Throne duo revival adds a layer of complexity to the battle. You can't focus on one and then let loose on the second. O&S had the opposite dynamic as the second regained all health anyways. I think it is pretty obvious which is the more interesting mechanic.

I'd take O&S, because:

1. The bosses actually feel like they were designed.
2. I don't feel the battle is needlessly extended by having to tip-toe around the two.

I don't accept this "you have to kill them at the same time" as an mechanic that justifies a fight that boils down to a waiting game unless you've summoned allies for it.

The Gargoyles have the same thing going that they did in DkS1. Once one falls under 50% health another joins the battle. And with the numbers in DkS2 it becomes critical that you pick your shots and finish off one before inviting more to the party. In NG+ this is perhaps the best battle in the game. 4kings is similar in the sense that the clock is ticking before the next shows up. But again, which is more interesting?

Having to juggle enemies is not a new mechanic. It's not interesting to add more enemies to the fray continuously. What makes the battle any better on NG+? I did it on NG+ and I thought it was just as boring.

Nashandra's purple pillars curse you. They can be broken by rolling through just right. Something I have not seen in other boss fights.

...

So what? It's one attack.

Overall the bosses are diverse and interesting. DkS1 bosses were meh at best. (again, until the DLC. Artorias is da man!)

Gonna have to try harder than that to convince me.

 

[joest01]

snip

You either haven't spent enough time with the game or your are winging it with your points above.

Throne duo revival adds a layer of complexity to the battle. You can't focus on one and then let loose on the second. O&S had the opposite dynamic as the second regained all health anyways. I think it is pretty obvious which is the more interesting mechanic.

I'd take O&S, because:

1. The bosses actually feel like they were designed.
2. I don't feel the battle is needlessly extended by having to tip-toe around the two.

I don't accept this "you have to kill them at the same time" as an mechanic that justifies a fight that boils down to a waiting game unless you've summoned allies for it.

The Gargoyles have the same thing going that they did in DkS1. Once one falls under 50% health another joins the battle. And with the numbers in DkS2 it becomes critical that you pick your shots and finish off one before inviting more to the party. In NG+ this is perhaps the best battle in the game. 4kings is similar in the sense that the clock is ticking before the next shows up. But again, which is more interesting?

Having to juggle enemies is not a new mechanic. It's not interesting to add more enemies to the fray continuously. What makes the battle any better on NG+? I did it on NG+ and I thought it was just as boring.

Nashandra's purple pillars curse you. They can be broken by rolling through just right. Something I have not seen in other boss fights.

...

So what? It's one attack.

Overall the bosses are diverse and interesting. DkS1 bosses were meh at best. (again, until the DLC. Artorias is da man!)

Gonna have to try harder than that to convince me.

Oh i know better than trying to convince you. I write for the random readers that might take your drizzle at face value and i pretty much made my point.

I have no problem with you liking DkS1. Just listing the bosses as a reason is very hard for my brain to process. They were weak sauce.

 

[King Billi]

I like Dark Souls 2 alot.

It has its problems for sure but guess what Dark Souls 1 had problems too.
Overall I do like the original more for the same reason as everyone else that brilliant seamless interconnected world.

Obviously each specific area of Dark Souls 2 was created individually without any thought of how they would all fit together, I also wonder whether the areas were designed before the lore linking them together was decided upon and as such they could have been stuck together in a variety of configurations from the start.

I don't consider the enemies in Dark Souls 2 to be any different than those in the original, they both had some interesting types and designs. Although I'm curious why The Forest of the Fallen Giants felt it needed three different types of basic hollow soldiers? More armour sets I suppose.

I don't consider the bosses in either game to be all that different. (though Dark Souls 2 were a bit easier)

I don't consider the NPCs to be all that different in either game, especially considering they are all just recycled archetypes dating back as far as Demon's Souls. Alot of them are just as interesting as those in Dark Souls too, I mean come on! One of the merchants is a decapitated head.

To finish I guess I'll just say that I also preferred Dark Souls 2's weird singular ending over both the originals "take over" or "set myself on fire" endings.

 

[Lovely Mixture]

Oh i know better than trying to convince you. I write for the random readers that might take your drizzle at face value and i pretty much made my point.

How quaint of you to admit that you don't want to discuss.

I have no problem with you liking DkS1. Just listing the bosses as a reason is very hard for my brain to process. They were weak sauce.

It's not a reason I like the game. It's just something the game did well, and I think much better than Dark Souls II.

 

[My name is Fiction]

DS2 was made by a lazy B team who didn't know what the fuck they were doing.

What's that, you want that item? LOL farm till your game is so fucked up that its on like NG+48! That's not unreasonable at all. NEW GAME PLUS FORTY EIGHT.

If you wanted to have all the gear in the game? I wonder if NG+ caps at 99... at any rate, that's a lot of stupid farming, stupid mobs that stop spawning because the 'gaem too hard!!!1111 make mob not spawn so i can run 2 boss geez!!11214omg"

Crap game is crap... no, actually, iTS SUB-CRAP.

Such a big disappointment. It's not often that I stand in crapstop lines to buy a day-1 release.. in fact IVE NEVER DONE IT before DS2. And what do I get? a spherical representation of electronic dog shit.

Geez, what were you farming for that got you so riled up?

I've only had 4 enemies disappear on me in my first playthrough. They were Alonne knights that I liked testing new weapons against. I never found a reason to farm for anything until the enemies disappeared, and I definitely wouldn't do it multiple times.

There are a lot of rare drops off non-respawning enemies, so you have to ascetic the area a TON of times to get certain gear. The Shadow set, in particular. It's the worst change, worse than even soul memory imo.

Don't know where to start with you. In then end it boils down to that you obviously feel entitled to playing the game you want to play. I for one do not give a hoot about how many times enemies respawn. I got by with the gear I got just fine. What I do care about however is better gameplay and I get that in DkS2. So that's what I'm going with.

Btw DkS1 had a much more vanilla fantasy feel to it than 2. 2 is almost barren in comparison to the t-rexes and crystal caves I hope I never have to lay eyes on again.

Funny too that you don't see Demon's fans freak out like that. We were disapointed by DkS1 but I don't remember an outcry like the one DkS1 fans had about 2. My interpretation is that you had found your niche in the gank fest that is Dark Souls 1. And you lost your status as a player completely in 2 because now you have to learn to play again. But I could be wrong.

p.s. of course a lot of good DkS1 players made the transition just fine and are rocking it in 2. I don't think they will throw hissy fits either.

ARe you forgeting durgo's hat? Thats probably a textbook example of the worst farming ever done. First you need NG+ kings gate; thats the easy part. Now farm a one time red with a greatbow; not that tough. The problem is to get him to respawn again you got to "defeat the boss of this quarter". So fight the watchers and the final boss again, go through the unskipable credits AGAIN, and if you have not died of cancer at that point just repeat that cycle 5 more times and you will.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

DS2 was made by a lazy B team who didn't know what the fuck they were doing.

What's that, you want that item? LOL farm till your game is so fucked up that its on like NG+48! That's not unreasonable at all. NEW GAME PLUS FORTY EIGHT.

If you wanted to have all the gear in the game? I wonder if NG+ caps at 99... at any rate, that's a lot of stupid farming, stupid mobs that stop spawning because the 'gaem too hard!!!1111 make mob not spawn so i can run 2 boss geez!!11214omg"

Crap game is crap... no, actually, iTS SUB-CRAP.

Such a big disappointment. It's not often that I stand in crapstop lines to buy a day-1 release.. in fact IVE NEVER DONE IT before DS2. And what do I get? a spherical representation of electronic dog shit.

Geez, what were you farming for that got you so riled up?

I've only had 4 enemies disappear on me in my first playthrough. They were Alonne knights that I liked testing new weapons against. I never found a reason to farm for anything until the enemies disappeared, and I definitely wouldn't do it multiple times.

There are a lot of rare drops off non-respawning enemies, so you have to ascetic the area a TON of times to get certain gear. The Shadow set, in particular. It's the worst change, worse than even soul memory imo.

Don't know where to start with you. In then end it boils down to that you obviously feel entitled to playing the game you want to play. I for one do not give a hoot about how many times enemies respawn. I got by with the gear I got just fine. What I do care about however is better gameplay and I get that in DkS2. So that's what I'm going with.

Btw DkS1 had a much more vanilla fantasy feel to it than 2. 2 is almost barren in comparison to the t-rexes and crystal caves I hope I never have to lay eyes on again.

Funny too that you don't see Demon's fans freak out like that. We were disapointed by DkS1 but I don't remember an outcry like the one DkS1 fans had about 2. My interpretation is that you had found your niche in the gank fest that is Dark Souls 1. And you lost your status as a player completely in 2 because now you have to learn to play again. But I could be wrong.

p.s. of course a lot of good DkS1 players made the transition just fine and are rocking it in 2. I don't think they will throw hissy fits either.

ARe you forgeting durgo's hat? Thats probably a textbook example of the worst farming ever done. First you need NG+ kings gate; thats the easy part. Now farm a one time red with a greatbow; not that tough. The problem is to get him to respawn again you got to "defeat the boss of this quarter". So fight the watchers and the final boss again, go through the unskipable credits AGAIN, and if you have not died of cancer at that point just repeat that cycle 5 more times and you will.

And you need that because...?

No seriously, there's no reason to farm for that item, it's not particularly good. It's kind of ugly (my opinion), and all it does is extend bow range. If you really need to extend your bow range you can always just use the hawk ring, which is available pretty early in the game, or use the hunter's black bow, which already has ridiculous range built into it.

I'd understand going through that and farming for that item if it was gamebreakingly good, but it's not. There's literally no point to farming for it. There's actually tons of items like that in the game, ones with super rare drop rates that are just not worth getting (old Mirrah greatsword being another one).

Seriously, there's no point in raging that you can't get a fairly mediocre item.

 

[Mahorfeus]

*snip*

Frankly, this is irrelevant. There is really no reason why so much of the equipment in the game (i.e. the red phantom gear) has to be such a huge pain in the ass to get. Besides which, if you're even halfway decent at the game, you can wear whatever the hell you want and still perform well.

Also, Durgo's Hat is amazing and the game is called Fashion Souls for a reason.

 

[Kukakkau]

Not dismissing your opinions here, merely stating mine. Here we go:

1. The world design:

Dark Souls 2 had a completely different design philosophy in that most of its areas were not interconnected, and this created a much larger and more sprawling layout of levels and areas. Most people have criticized this as "lazy" and have said that the reason for this is because From Software's "B team" couldn't be bothered to figure out a way to make the areas as interconnected as they were in Dark Souls 1. I on the other hand think differently. The fact that the areas are so spread out makes the world feel larger, it feels like your journey is taking you through the entire Kingdom of Drangliec rather than just a small corner of it, and I think that makes the game feel more "epic" in scope, especially on a second and third play-through.

I had no issue with the idea that areas aren't directly connected (lost bastille requiring a boat/flight was fine), the main reason people don't like the way areas link is that the ones that are directly connected are such a fast change between setting type. Prime example is the Earthern peak and Iron Keep, you go from a poison misted run down windmill tower to outside a lava moated and filled castle. While this is strange it's the location of the Iron Keep that's just plain silly - to get to it you climb up the Earthern PEAK and take an elevator up. That's right you go higher than the mountains peak, that you can see coming into the area is an open topped roof leading to the sky. Did we take Willy Wonka's glass elevator or something?

2. The bosses:
Now I don't disagree that Dark Souls 2 has a lot of bosses that are very similar, but I don't think that's necessarily as big a tragedy as people are making it out to be. There are over 30 bosses in Dark Souls 2, whereas there are 20 in Dark Souls 1. Of the 20 in Dark Souls 1, 3 of them were basically the same repeating boss (the Asylum Demon, Demon Firesage, and Stray Demon) and 5 of the bosses were just minor enemies from later levels (Taurus Demon, Capra Demon, Moonlight Butterfly, Bell Gargoyles, and Pinwheel). So of the 20 bosses in Dark Souls 1 only 12 are unique. Even if you take out all instances of fighting "human with shield or big weapon weapon" in Dark Souls 2 you still have 23 bosses that are unique.

Now sure, not all the bosses are winners, Prowling Magus and Skeleton Lords are a total joke and shouldn't count as boss fights at all, but there are still lots of fun and interesting fights in Dark Souls 2. Pursuer, Chariot, Looking Glass Knight, Lost Sinner, Belfry Gargoyles, Ruined Sentinels, Mytha, Demon of Song, Dark Lurker, Throne Watcher and Defender, are all interesting bosses that have interesting mechanics behind them. How many really interesting bosses were there in Dark Souls 1? Belfrey Gargoyles, Quelaag, Priscilla, Gaping Dragon, Sif, Ornstein and Smough, Nito. That's about it. Dark Souls 2 might have a bunch of bosses that aren't that interesting, but so did Dark Souls 1, but for Dark Souls 1 we forget the bad bosses and focus on the really cool bossfights, like Pikachu and Snorlax, and I think that Dark Souls 2 has just as many interesting boss fights as Dark Souls 1 did, if not more.

Honestly I found the bosses in Dark Souls 2 very bland and soulless, we didn't know any of them leading up to them, we just walked in and they picked up a weapon. Even after the fights we find very little on their character and who they were, which Dark Souls 1 did an amazing job of, even making people feel bad for killing some bosses.

But yes the actual fight is more important, and in that regard it was mostly just person in armour with a moveset of 3 hit combo, overhead and a running attack. And the bosses that don't use this formula get a set of single heavily telegraphed attacks (both giant bosses, ancient dragon etc)

Another thing is you give the first game some flak for having bosses that are standard enemies - these bosses were at the start of the game, by the time you fight them as standard it's a lot later on and you feel like you've become stronger in your journey. Also dark souls 2 does this as well with the ruin sentinels, pursuers, guardian dragon and the rat boss in the Grave of Saints. You also said all 23 bosses are unique which is really not true - you fight dragonriders twice, the standard enemy fights I just mentioned, old dragonslayer and gargoyles (besides the number at one time) are almost completely identical to DkS1 and I would argue that the Lost Sinner and pursuer are the same fight besides one unique move each.

Other than that it felt like a lot of bosses... weren't bosses - skeletal lords, prowling magus and gargoyles were just like standard group combat, Mytha was just an enemy that you had to work out how to remove the poison, Chariot was just a gauntlet then a standardish enemy after, demon of song was just a standard big enemy attack bait and the covetus demon... I don't even know if that thing can actually attack.

Something I really wanted to see in the sequel was more speed to the bosses (like Ornstein, Artorias, Manus and Gwyn had), for the most part their movements felt slow and heavily telegraphed. Other than that it just felt like a boss every corner with how many were stuffed in.

3. The Lore:

I'll be making a different thread about the Dark Souls 2 lore a little later because I still have to get a lot of thoughts unscrambled and down on paper, so for now all I have to say is that it's not a bad thing that Dark Souls 2 built upon the lore of the first game. A lot of people are treating the game like it took the easy way out by including so many references to Dark Souls 1, and by including the chosen undead from the first game as well as the lord souls in the plot of the second. To this I say "it's a sequel". Sequels are meant to build upon the plot and lore of previous games, that's the entire point of having a sequel at all. There's also a lot of really interesting lore in Dark Souls 2, both in the way that it connects to the first game, and original lore that's interesting in its own right. Maybe people will be singing a different tune about the lore once vaatividya and epicnamebro do their lore videos for the game, just like what happened with Dark Souls 1.

Now the lore is something I felt really let down by. The first game gives you a setting and shows you the lord souls hosts with what they are capable of, giving you this sense of coming up against these badasses. I loved hearing about Gwyn and his heroics and sacrifice to the fire, got all ready for a dramatic cutscene entrance and instead I got none, just him as a hollow walking towards me as tragic piano music played. Items had paragraphs of information and backstory in them and you could find out about bosses you killed and your fellow NPCs stories. Being able to find out Queelag just wanted to save her dying sister, Sif just wanted to save you from the darkness and Ceaseless Discharge just wanted to protect his sister's body are all experiences I loved and wanted to see more of.

And now we move on to the sequel, where you don't have an antagonist to be marching towards. You instead are merely walking forwards "without knowing why" (Emerald Herald and the crone in intro) because you are told to become the new liege and it turns out you are just following the cycle of the world a la DkS1. Which feels really disappointing to not be about breaking the cycle of the world and causing a big change, which is something I'm pretty sure vaati has said as well. Enemies never really had much story to them either, with the main bosses being a case of them finding a part of the lord souls from the first game. In terms of NPCs as well it felt a bit lacking with only a handful having much of a story behind them such as Lucatiel and Benhart. And then in terms of bosses there weren't really any I could feel anything for - at most the Last Giant for being, well the last, imprisoned and tortured and Vendrick for being hollow and mindless as his kingdom fall down around him.

 

[Chaos Isaac]

Dark Souls 2's largest fault is that it's a sequel to the wrong game. Dark Souls 2 is a far cry from one, and follows Demon's Soul's much more closely I feel. (This includes gameplay.)

Secondly, Dark Souls 2 design is fucking terrible at times, and mediocre at best. (Not to say it's bad, but just somtimes... ugh.) Seriously magic is so poorly implemented it seems they changed everything at last second. Not to mention sorcery to pyromancy to hexes and to miracles typically have such contrasting power differences that 2 out of the 4 were useless to casters, with Pyromancy only useful to peeps with low magic 'cause flame swathe was laughably OP. (Not to say there wasn't similar problems with one. But one didn't exactly have the same pre-made standing stones to start off of.) And who honestly thought that having lightning spear be almost as strong as soul spear with four times the cast and infinite purchases was a good idea?

Then there's the poor lore, and I mean very poor lore. There's no longer really any subtle story telling, through gameplay and items and locations. Things are thrown about willy nilly and hope that people end up liking it, as well as the unnecessary connections to one that actually hurt the lore. The worsening of the PvP system by removing humanity. The poor implementations of covenants. (Sure, they were very static in one, but even in lore they had a point and added to the game overall. I find the Blue covvies and BoB to be nothing but pvp for the sake of it.)

And you know, most of this wouldn't be so bad if it was called Cursed Souls, and didn't have all of Dark Souls to stand there above it, clashing with what it's trying to do every step of the way.

 

[Mahorfeus]

1. The world design:

For me at least, it is not so much the world design as it is the geography. Yes, understandably, the bonfire warp system mitigates the need for ridiculously convenient shortcuts. The world does spread out more, which does indeed give the impression that Drangleic is ultimately larger than Lordran. But the problem is, the game fails to immerse you in the fact that you have to be traveling miles and miles across this continent. It tries to create this illusion of you crossing an immense distance, but fails, resulting in nonsensical area transitions - the Earthen Peak to Iron Keep one is the most notorious.

In the game's files the full model of Drangleic actually shows that areas literally loop into one another, literally overlapping to save space. Which would be fine, if they had done a good job of hiding it. But as you can clearly see after taking the ship to the Lost Bastille, you can see the entire damn thing floating in the skybox. It comes off as lazy, and without the immersion, the illusion of distance being traveled is completely shattered. From just about every area you can see Castle Drangleic in the distance, but it's just a rendering - not an accurate portrayal of how far you are actually traveling.

2. The bosses:

I would do a boss by boss analysis, but that would be far too time-consuming. Instead, I'll say that for the most part, Dark Souls 2's bosses are all right. I do wish there were more bosses that had exploitable mechanics, like with Mytha and the first Dragonrider, but as far as I could tell, just like with the first game, there were ups and there were downs.

While people do love to put Demons' Souls on a pedestal (and I do love the game), a great many of that game's bosses were great in presentation, but terrible in execution. Almost all of them could be cheesed with a decent bow and a ring that you get near the very beginning of the game.

3. The Lore:

The lore is convoluted, as is time and space, but that is a given for the Souls series. I do think that it is all very interesting, but I do think that the lore feels a tad underwhelming. A large portion of it calls forth the mystery of exactly how everything in this game is connected to the last. Is Drangleic an incarnation of Lordran? Are the Giants the same ones that the first game spoke of? How long has the cycle been going on? The problem for me, at least, is that none of these questions are really answered. Unanswered questions are a staple of the Souls series, but these questions feel important.

 

[80sboy]

Honesty from what I've heard most people seem to be in favor of DS2 over 1. I personally liked the first one more, but every time I see people put up a poll asking which they liked more, everyone of them I've seen the second game had won out. My guess is you just been paying attention too much to the small group of very vocal haters. Because the game has generally been loved.

 

[MrDumpkins]

I think Dark Souls was a really great game and definitely my favorite over the sequel. Dark Souls 2 improves a lot mechanically but world design is different (some like it I don't) but worst of all are the characters. The characters aren't as great (why don't they leave... a support squad is actually cheery). I loved in dark souls that you met characters, then they went to firelink for a while, then left again. They aren't your shop slaves or whatever, they are just people that will trade with you if they see you. They all have their own personal quests and journeys. In dark souls 2 they just come to majula and sit there all kind of sad, but it's not really, majula feels too safe for a souls game. Firelink felt safe, but never comfortable, because you always had memories of people that are no longer there. Majula on the other hand I feel like I could hang out there all the time, just hanging around with a bunch others. In firelink I just felt well rested but with the need to move on, nobody stays here forever, neither should I.

Majula and Firelink are both cores to their respective game, but firelink just conveyed the theme so much better than majula.

 

[Guy from the 80's]

Dark souls is of course better, but that doesnt mean DS2 is a bad game.
Its blatantly obvious that it was made by different people.

 

[Riotguards]

Dark souls is of course better, but that doesnt mean DS2 is a bad game.
Its blatantly obvious that it was made by different people.

i've not checked the credits nor feel like doing that anytime soon but i'm pretty sure that there's still a few developers who did work on the original dark/demon on the team, surely you don't need miyazaki that much in order to make the souls games more functional / less cheap

the last two games had amazing mob AI, none of this record spinning mobs, horribly placed mobs with more expertises on artificial difficulty than interesting layout (its definitely artificial, best example of the walkway to the undead asylum)and the downright broken poise system

along with other things, its strikes me as a lot worse than just half assed attempt but more as a downright failure to learn what the past games had going for them


the first DLC so far has been good, i'm pretty happy (minus the ganksquad boss, seriously two bosses with adds, we've had enough of those can't you guys come up with anything original) i hope they continue the trend with the next DLC

and yes i'm a sucker for anything related to souls lore

 

[Alhazred]

I'm currently replaying Dark Souls and running through Dark Souls 2 NGP for the DLC, and my opinion of which is better is going back and forth like a see-saw.

The one thing that I'm 100% certain of is that DS1 is a far more coherent game than DK2, and note that coherent does not strictly mean better designed. By coherent I mean that the game's areas fit together as part of a whole, and since Dark Souls relies on telling it's story through the environment, this means the story is fairly coherent too. The inverse is true of DS2; the levels feel disjointed, and thus the story feels vague and incoherent.

With that said, I'm pretty sure DS2 doesn't have any areas as hysterically poorly designed as Demon Ruins/Lost Izalith.