Your biggest problem with Dark Souls II

[bartholen_v1legacy]

I think it's widely accepted that Dark Souls II is the weakest in the Souls series. Lots of people list different things why it failed where the others succeeded, and I thought we'd compile the big ones in this thread. List one, and only one, main reason why you think DSII was weaker than the others, ie. what you thought was the game's biggest flaw, and elaborate on it.

This didn't hit me until I was playing through the DLCs about 130 hours into the game, but to me the biggest problem with it were the environments, and to be more specific, their visual design. Compared to both Demon's and Dark Souls, they're empty, lifeless, unimaginative and boring. Just boxy, empty, grayish/bluish/brownish corridors after another. There's next to nothing in most areas that would indicate anything having happened or lived there, just generic, typical RPG filler assets like barrels, shelves and boxes. The environments aren't telling a story, they're just something for you to get through. No interesting murals, decoration or architecture to look at. You could show footage of people playing through the Lost Bastille, the Dragon's Sanctum, Drangleic Castle and the Undead Crypt, and not really be able to tell the difference unless you've played the whole game. It was especially strange to have this notion while playing the DLC, because in those the level design improves drastically over the main game, but the visual design just stays the same. Some areas where impressive in the grand scale, like Brume Tower's chains or Shulva's aztec-esque temples, but their interiors were completely interchangeable with the rest of the main game.

So, your picks?

 

[Sniper Team 4]

Er...you stole mine. I love Dark Souls II. I played it to no end. When the DLCs came out, I bought them as soon as they were available. I even played the game multiple times afterward, even though I got the platinum (which is kind of rare for me when I have so many unplayed games). I even bought the PS4 remake and played the snot out of that
Whereas Dark Souls, I got the platinum and haven't touched it since. I don't know what it is about II, but it just was more enjoyable to me, despite the fact that I acknowledge that nearly everything was done better in Dark Souls. I have no idea why this is.

Anyway, I guess I'll just expand/repeat yours. The levels don't really pop. They are mostly just straight paths, with no real shortcuts to unlock and nothing interesting to explore. Despite the fact that there are more NPCs in Dark Souls II--or maybe it just feels that way since the vast majority all end up in one place--the world of II just feels...empty. In Dark Souls, you got the sense that there was a civilization in these areas at one point. Izalith, Anor Londo, New Londo, Olacile, and even the Undead Burg all felt lived in. That there was a history to these place, albeit a very tragic one. I felt like I was exploring a world. II has none of that outside of Eleyum Loyce, and that's only because you can see the town down below. The feeling of the world being an actual world is gone from Dark Souls II. There are a few times where it comes close--Shrine of Amana, when you first enter and hear that song comes to mind--but it never reaches the level of even the Asylum from the first game.

 

[White Lightning]

How am I supposed to only pick one? That's like telling a kid they can only have one delicious candy from the big box of candy that has a sign on it saying "You can take as much as you want no matter what anyone says".

The whole damn game was a mess. That's the thing I picked.

 

[baddude1337]

My main problem that was that at times it was completely and utterly unclear on where you were meant to go

 

[stroopwafel]

Ehmm..I replayed both these games recently and both are very good in their own way, but there are some key differences. The original ofcourse had the supreme map design with all the shortcuts and elevators connecting the entire world, not to mention the environmental design that told a story of its own. Dark Souls 2 however had more vibrant use of colors, smoother animations and felt more technically competent overall. It's true Dark Souls 1 had a lot more detail in the environment but so did the early build of Dark Souls 2 which they unfortunately had to tone down on due to performance issues(something that is again more prevalent in the first game *cough*Blight Town*cough*).

Would Darks Souls 2 have been a better game if it had Miyazaki on board and/or was solely made as a next-gen game? Absolutely. However I think with the first game people mostly remember the brilliant standout levels like Undead Burg/Parish, Anor Londo, Izalith and the Painted World; and not necessarily the comparatively more underwhelming levels like Tomb of Giants, Demon Ruins or the near unplayable mess that was Blight Town. I think budget constraints, time constraints and technical constraints are apparent in both games with each making trade-offs. Dark Souls 2 felt better in some ways but what it missed was Miyazaki's touch which really put the original game(or most parts of the original game) in a league of it's own.

Dark Souls 2 is still a really good game though and when it comes to moment-to-moment gameplay I think I even slightly prefer it over the original. Infact I'm tempted to get the Scholar remaster of the game. If Dark Souls 3 however mixes the best parts of the original and the sequel with Miyazaki as the director, then damn, this is going to be the absolute best Dark Souls game.

 

[Sleepy Sol]

Too vague on story bits. Just slightly too vague, honestly, considering it's not far from par for the course anyways with the Souls games. The giant memories were some nice elaboration on what happened to Drangleic, but I think the game could have used more of them. Except not as horribly infuriating gameplay-wise. And I know that game like the back of my hand, so I wasn't really trash at playing it either.

I don't really agree with levels not telling a story. I just think a few of them are placed rather oddly, and that was noted pretty soon after the game came out, so eh.

I'm a heretic that actually kinda likes Dark Souls II more than the first one, so I dunno. I'd probably put it down as one of my favorite games of all time. I never even tried the DLC or SotFS though. Though I suppose one day I should give either a go.

 

[Aerosteam]

The bosses suck compared to the previous ones - I'm sure everyone agrees to that.

 

[Darth Rosenberg]

Just one? Man, that's hard... DSII was a colossal letdown for me after DS, and I've still not finished it.

Being glib (and yes, subjective... ), my biggest 'problem' was: everything I loved, admired, and respected about DS had changed - and changed for the worse[footnote]Yes, the combat system's improved slightly, but a Souls game should be more than just mechanics.[/footnote]. Story, characters, bosses, hideous world design, terrible hub/leveling system, etc.

DS felt like an auteurs work of art. DSII felt like franchise filler made to release another entry in a series. In short, it had no--- soul...

 

[Silence]

The invisible castle on top of a windmill.
Elaborate: The game world should make sense. At least some. That's just a no-go. Incredible.

Aside from that I actually genuinely like the game. Gameplay is better than Dark Souls I.

 

[Drops a Sweet Katana]

For me, it was the feel of the combat and the implementation of certain systems that killed it in my eyes. First off, none of the weapons felt like they had anywhere near the amount impact and weight of the first game, making them very unsatisfying to use. Rolling also felt off. There seemed to be a delay when you rolled, which made it feel sluggish and unresponsive, plus the different rolls were incredibly hard to tell apart. I know some people were not fans of the tiered rolls in the original, but at they were distinct. The animations in general just seemed to generally lack definition, in the sense that several animations were hard to differentiate. For example, it was hard to tell if you landed a backstab with many weapons because the animation is so similar to a normal attack.

If I could choose more than one thing, the fanfic story, the crap bosses and the shittily designed levels with their bug-fuck insane connections to each other would all rank highly.

Edit: I also didn't appreciate the many unfair bullshit deaths the game threw at you. The unseen ogre behind the door in Aldia's Keep and the crossbowman in range of the bonfire in Sinner's Rise being two particular pains in the nadgers. It kinda showed the seeming 'hard cos' Dark Souls' mentality permeating the game.

 

[the_dramatica]

Being unclear on routes is supposed to be pseudo freedom, and also supposed to help create a dire theme the games love. I do believe it pays for this, but I don't think it's a core problem.

The much larger amount of regen makes the game much too easy and makes certain builds mundane. The boss fights also just where not as good in either immersion or moveset.

 

[gigastar]

Level design, above all else. From the simplicity and linearity of some areas to things like Iron Keep apparently being located above Earthen Peak.

The much larger amount of regen makes the game much too easy and makes certain builds mundane.

Still wasnt as bad as Demons Souls in that regard. You might be able to carry 800 or so healing items, but none of them are as fast and effective as Full, New and Dark Moon Grass.

 

[BytByte]

For me it had to be hit boxes. The amount of times the Smelter Demon's sword flattened me on the ground despite me being feet away from it never stopped infuriating me.

Even worse were the rolls that you still took damage for. I know that adaptability increases invincibility frames on rolls, but the game had a bad habit of hurting you at what seemed like arbitrary times. There was no feedback as to why sometimes you got hurt or not, so you couldn't improve your roll timing.

That and the magical enemies that would stay locked onto you, making it impossible to not get hit.

 

[Darks63]

The whole stamina system all together. The annoying if you zero out no running for 3 seconds. The soft cap being at 20 vig putting you at 120 stamina. The crappy stamina regen items when compared to the ones from DK1. The amount of stamina attacks burned through vs Dks1.

The worse part is that despite its many mechanical flaws the game is still super easy compared to DKS1 and Demons. Aside from a few good bosses like Fume and Alonne and Cheap ones like Ancient dragon, Elana, and Royal Rat Authority the game is a cakewalk. If it wasn't for the annoying multiplayer or gtfo to NG ++ spells I would have platinum the game already.

That and the magical enemies that would stay locked onto you, making it impossible to not get hit.

You mean the stupid amount of tracking attacks in the game? If so couldn't agree more.

 

[King of Asgaard]

Boring and linear level design, forgettable environments, artificial difficulty, nonexistent lore, nonsensical world design, unimaginative boss mechanical and aesthetic designs, floaty controls, ridiculous hitboxes, poor texture quality, downright stupid matchmaking systems.... The list goes on and on.

Essentially, you can boil it down to "Like Dark Souls but worse". Blame it on Namco not knowing what to do besides throwing money at it and promoting it to stupid degrees, blame it on the inexperienced director being unable to follow in Miyazaki's footsteps, it's up to you. All I know is that I played Dark Souls 2 for about 150 hours, but I played Dark Souls for 3 years.

 

[jademunky]

The bosses. There was no boss that terrified me and made me hesitant to approach in DS II like there was in I. For example, early on in DSI, i went to the darkroot basin way underlevelled, started wandering through the forest and in the distance.......... the Hydra. Eight giant heads looming from a huge ways away, then they started bombing me from long range, forcing me to get closer and I began to realize that the game actually expected me to wade into the water and tangle with that thing!

DS II just had nothing comparable that pushed my phobia buttons.

 

[SomethingWorse]

I'm a little biased, because I was unable to play online on the first game, but was for the second. So that made a pretty big difference, as I love the online. But I will say that some enemy layouts felt significantly more cheap this time around, with ambushes or completely hidden enemies happening all the time. There's no justification for that, ever. Having snipers in a ideal positions early on in the game comes across as more frustrating than legitimately challenging to me to. The game is filled with stuff like that. So I don't know, it was easier for me because I team up so often, both helping and receiving help.

 

[Adultism]

Mostly that I suck at it, yeah I can't even dark souls.

 

[Redryhno]

Biggest problem? Level design could've been better, specifically how they don't intersect all that often, you've got your hub that you get to everywhere else from with Majula, and that's about it. Honestly my only real criticism of DS2, well, that and I'd prefer having less 5 on 1 boss fights.

But hey, what do I know, I don't really care for the combat of the Souls series, dodging's my natural response and it was easy once I figured out where my i-frames were on any given attack and it just made the series a bit of a breeze. Haven't played Demon's Souls though, so I could be wrong completely.