Is this the worst game ever made?

Is this the worst game ever made?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/ib9hyNNC8Yk
youtube.com/watch?v=RZZeMqCeP6A
youtube.com/watch?v=CAymNk_ePH4
youtube.com/watch?v=S2mEBYDDKaI
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

that would be Jak 2

>le "ds2 is le baddest game evar!!!11 xDDDD" MeMe again

No, this is.

Mentosmethtonisonis please go

No. Lost Izalith is not beautiful and yes you are still a potato.

Not when Dark Souls 3 exist.

Dark Souls 3 is way worse.

>2014 AA Game
>Worst of all time
I bet you're the type of guy who gives a game a 0 on Metacritic because it didn't work on your PC.

is more along the lines of "worst of all time"

If you think this is the worst game ever made then you haven't played or seen many games.

I feel like you're an underage faggot who's only ever played games within the past 5 years.
How right am I?

Not when DaS 1 and 3 exist.

Only if you're a sweet combination of stupid and incompetent.

Yes

The game last update it's pretty solid, i mean scholar of the bla bla. The base game alone sucks, but the changes and fixes made in scholar make it worth it, i got it on 50% disscount 2 years ago, and i really enjoyed it. It's not the best souls game but it's enjoyable, the multiplayer works perfectly, the downside is soul memory and boring bosses, but definetly is not the worst game i ever played, if this game is your worst then you didn't play lots of games.
So yeah, go fuck yourself with a rake, faggot.

I thought that was pretty good though, except for the final boss I had to cheese to all hell because I couldn't get anything except blaster ammo.

>le "superman is le baddest game evar!!!11 xDDDD" MeMe again

>Reminder that ADP is great and that iFrame fags can cry however much they want given the mechanic they love so much destroys the basics of spacing
>DS2 poise is the best implementation in the series
>Greatest build variety in the series
>Enemies that aren't complete pushovers even when you try to exploit them

You don't even play video games.

Any recommendation for the order I should go about doing the DLC? Just finished this thing because people said the DLC's actually makes the thing bearable and can't afford DSIII.

They cucked up the enemy placement.

It's the weakest in the series but still better than 90% of other games out there.

Would you guys check out this new series I'm starting for this awesome throwback to Castlevania with a Dark Souls twist?
S A L T A N D S A N C T U A R Y

youtu.be/ib9hyNNC8Yk
-

Second thread you've spammed this in, fuck off.

Also, have to say from someone who freshly finished the base game.
>Controls floaty as hell.
>PvP latency is shit
>Ambushing the player ever 2 minutes is not fun and makes things difficult for all the wrong reasons.
>Putting heavy enemies in a narrow hallway ""
>Environments and atmosphere, though not bleak like DSI, was still gorgeous
>Challenging you to duel the heavy hitters in Dragon Shrine instead of kill everything was really cool both from a gameplay and story perspective.
>Iron Keep was bollocks and it's only redeeming values is as a PvP arena.
>RPG elements were par for the course for as souls game, was annoying to have to bulk up a stat purely to role properly, though.
>Greater variety weapon-wise, played around with various weapons a lot more
>At no point was I exploring and came upon a shortcut that absolutely blew my mind like DSI
>Overall solid game but also a solid disappointment since I played the first and second back to back.

Not the worst game ever made but it's the worst Soulsborne game

I am playing Dark Souls 3 and all I can say is that you ate full of shit.

It blows 2 out of the water in terms of being a good game. Plus it got rid of the stupid adaptability bullshit from 2. One less stat I need to invest into

It's not even close to the worst game ever made. It's the worst Souls game by a far, far margin though. It doesn't even feel like part of the same series.
This. How the fuck does anyone think 2 is better than 3? 3 has great level design and combat that isn't mechanically slow, clunky shit compared to every other game in the series.

>This. How the fuck does anyone think 2 is better than 3?

Shitposters

>Is this the worst game ever made?
Not even close.Dark Souls 3 on the other hand is a prime contender for the worst game ever made.

Seems that shiposters have better taste, seeing as DS3fags are always trying to justify paying 60 bucks to play DS1 again.

>seeing as DS3fags are always trying to justify paying 60 bucks to play DS1 again.

this is a sign of someone who has not played Dark Souls 3

the game is still above average in quality and is overall pretty good.

I played it after bloodborne and noticed how different it was in quality though.

It's a bad Souls game.
Bunch of stuff never appeared again like life gems and the look of the game was just ugly as hell.

Even if that were true, I'd much rather play a pure rehash of DS1 again rather than touch DS2
It's not though, it's honestly kind of bad. It looks bad compared to even Demon's Souls, the level design is terrible, the enemy placement is amateurish, the bosses suck, and the core combat is just not fun.

Oh I have. It's DS1 from A to B, with no poise. It's shit.

I agree though. I'm just saying, the game is still decent compared to a lot of the trash out there nowadays.

As I said, I played it after bloodborne and immediately noticed the drop in quality

>Muh poise
Poise was a shit mechanic anyway. I'm glad it's gone or disabled or changed to be meaningless or whatever.

Quads speak truth.

It's better than DaS3

wtf man

>Not playing SotFS

>The worst Souls game by far

Every time i've seen this posted i really wonder what people is talking about

Scholar of the First Sin is incredible and filled with content to the brim. Plays looks and explains its lore incredibly (if you actually finished it)

>It's DS1 from A to B

You're going to have to expand on that, because as much as I prefer DS1 to DS3, that doesn't sound like the issue I see with DS3's level design.

Quads confirm it, Myazaki dicks suckers can go fuck off.

I didn't like Poise myself, but along with armor crafting I think it's been a net loss for the game in DS3. I personally love my glass cannon builds, but others like to play high defense, slow, unmovable, resistance-based ones.

DS3 basically killed that aspect of the game wholesale, and it's all the poorer for it.

>It's DS1 from A to B

Just because one area is literally an area from DS1 doesn't mean the ENTIRE game is DS1

>same clunky gameplay
>onion bro quest
>anor londo
>gwyndolin
>ash lake
>catacombs
>izalith
>scaleless dragon for a boss
>duke's archives
>kiln of the first flame
>gwyn reskin

>one area
Miyazaki cucks, ladies and germs

But then DS3 plays pretty differently from DS1, so I don't see your point.

SotFS is shit. It doesn't fix any of DS2's problems.
DS2 has god awful amateurish level design and enemy placement, it looks bad, the combat sucks since everything is so slowed down, the enemy and boss variety is just awful, the world makes no sense, adaptability might be an alright idea on paper but it's implementation is laughably bad, and probably some other things I'm forgetting. It's the worst Souls game by far and it's a mediocre game by other standards too.
I don't. I think poise was a bad mechanic that just gave you another way to cheese the game. If they wanted to make heavy armor really viable, all they had to do was make defense matter more. And armor crafting being gone is actually pretty nice, since you don't have to dump a ton of resources into an armor set and can just wear whatever you want.

>the bosses suck
You're saying this as if the vast majority of DeS and DaS1 bosses are worth a damn. They're all trash, DaS2 just happens to have a higher amount of bosses total, so there is slightly more filler crap.
Overall, New Age Souls games (DaS3, BB) > Old Age Souls games (DeS, DaS1, DaS2). There is nothing particularly important that DaS1/DeS do better than DaS3 or BB.

>people like Oceiros, aka shitty Ludwig that has no lore or purpose

>There is nothing particularly important that DaS1/DeS do better than DaS3
Except provide a unique experience.

Oh, so you're talking content rather than game-design?

Oh, well, yes in that case I understand how it can be seen as a clone of sort, but I don't mind really. Don't care enough about it that much myself. It's more the game aspect I take issues with. And there's it's the differences that cause problem.

The difference is the vast majority of DeS and DaS bosses aren't big knights with an equally big weapon that all fight very similarly.
Bloodborne => DS1 > DS3 > DES >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DS2

Ah, yes, muhfeels and muhatmosphere sure do sound like compelling, objective arguments.

If you're talking game design, then it IS literally just DS1 with poise removed.

are you me? 100% agree with your souls taste user

That's pure bullshit. Have you even played the game? It's closer to BB combat wise than it is DS1.

>rehashing is alright because feels and atmosphere are for faggots
Holy fuck go back to Call of Duty or Assassin's Creed, or whatever the fuck you play.

Except for far better, non-linear worlds which make consecutive playthroughs enjoyable. Also build/weapon variety and lore that isn't one big nonsensical clusterfuck.

Probably.

>It's a good game just not a good Souls game

>The difference is the vast majority of DeS and DaS bosses aren't big knights with an equally big weapon that all fight very similarly.
Only half of DaS2 bosses (more or less, depending on what you actually count as a "big dude") are actually humanoids though.

>And armor crafting being gone is actually pretty nice, since you don't have to dump a ton of resources into an armor set and can just wear whatever you want.

It's both a positive AND a negative, depending on where you're taking it from. I personally find it's more a negative than a positive. Losing the whole defense-focus aspect and the sense of gear-investment wasn't worth it, especially when the end result was trivializing armor choice really.

>I don't. I think poise was a bad mechanic that just gave you another way to cheese the game.

I don't either, didn't even use it myself, but as I said, I do think the game is poorer for it. Less ways to tackle things.

And if we're going to talk cheese, that over-focus on attack over defense in DS3 means you're much more likely to defeat a boss on a stroke of luck, which I can't see as a good thing either - worse than the poise "cheesing" if anything.

youtube.com/watch?v=RZZeMqCeP6A

youtube.com/watch?v=CAymNk_ePH4

youtube.com/watch?v=S2mEBYDDKaI

BB > DaS > DeS > SOTFS > DaS2 >>>> DaS3 > most other recent games tbqfh

Even he said that DaS2 is a good game, just not as good as DaS1.

And he did his review before the DLCs.

What you want me to blieve
> Dark Souls > Dark Souls 3 > Dark Souls 2
When it is actually
Dark Souls 3 > Dark Souls 2 > Dark Souls

Best PvP in the series still

>No bone fists in DS3

DS3 is the worst.

>as linear as Call of Duty
>no poise means everyone plays the same way
>pvp does not exist because invaders are never dangerous

The only good thing about DS3 are the graphics and the bossfights. DS3 and Bloodborne both succeed there but DS3 just lacks idenity and balance in every other part.

Okay that was a slight exaggeration but it's still not exactly the same as DS1. DS3 is definitely faster paced
>DS2 better than of the others.
That's a good one.

Also nothing important happens in this "grand finale", except the identity of the Firstborn is revealed, and he's just a secret boss in a secret area.

>DS2 is bad because
>it sucks
>I hate it
>It's hard

Those are just opinions and not really factual. Neither the slowed down opinion, the boss variety opinion, the graphics opinion, or the standards opinion.

You're just full of opinions. And opinions like that make the game a worse place.

It's the worst case of bait and switch in recent gaming history at least.
I'm still mad at the horrifying downgrade they pulled off.

BB > DS2 SotFS > DS3 > DeS > DaS 1

factual truth, no need to reply with your shitty opinion

Agreed, DS3 made me appreciate DS2 far more, especially in its current state.

Not at all. The level design is pretty different, with loads more of shortcuts to reach the bosses, switching the focus on getting through the level to an over-focus on the bosses.

Add teleport from the start and DS3 is far less about mastering space than DS1.

At its best DS1 works like a mix of old school arcade games and RPGs. It's about long term resistance, mastery of environment. Aggregation of small mistakes kill you as often if no more than big one. Bosses wer just an element of the overall space, which is what you had to master.

DS3 levels are made to be traversed once and then forgotten. Hell, for most of them you're not even expected to get through them before the bosses, which are now tha main focus.

Those changes were made kinda mandatory by another gameplay change we've mentioned in this thread: the change of defense mechanics and the sudden focus on active/attack builds other passive/resistance ones, which were basically removed.

DS1 nd DS3 may use the same bases, but they're very different beasts.

>DS1 lets you ring two bells and visit the big holy city before you need to collect 4 big souls to enter the final fight
>DS2 does the same but adds more between the 4 big souls and the final giving the game a far better pacing
>DS3 falls back into the DS1 hole

DS3 really dropped a lot of neat shit that DS2 introduced. Like that or NG+ that is worth playing.

No but it is the best Dark Souls hands-down

The game actually is slowed down though. That one is a fact. Every attack has more start-up and much more cooldown that you can no longer cancel, your roll is slower, healing is a lot slower and it's a fast regen rather than an instant health regain, and even enemies attack slower. DS2 is one slow ass clunky game friend.
The level design and enemy placement is also objectively bad in the grand scheme of game design, ESPECIALLY compared to the other games in the series. Yeah sure you could try to argue this as opinion but if you think DS2 has good level design, well, I don't know what to tell you
>It's hard
I love how DS2 fags always rush to this defense. No one ever said that. In fact I think it's easier. People only think it's hard because they try to play it like the other games, but you can't because of the shitty slow combat.

I got significantly more hours of gameplay out of 2 and sotfs

I think it's more enjoyable to play since there's no bullshit and some neat mechanics and stuff that you can play with.

There's also actual viable build variety.

It's a meme by this point.

Loved Demon's Souls
Finished Dark Souls
Finished Dark Souls 2
Couldn't get into DaS3

I mean, DaS3 is Miyazaki again and all that noise but it's not really interesting in the end.

DaS3 is super lineal like Demon's Souls and the enviroments are really bland looking. No DaS game is bad by any means, but DaS2 got me hooked until the DLC endings.

Can't say the same for DaS3 right now. Maybe with the inevitable DLC.

>>DS2 does the same but adds more between the 4 big souls
quality > quantity user

>and the final giving the game a far better pacing
what finale? nashandra? or aldia? because they're both horribly repetitive bosses that seriously drag the end of the game down

that said das2 did introduce some really neat mechanics that 3 dropped, RIP power stancing

The Sup Forums cycle. Whenever a new game is released in a series it is automatically shit and the previous entry's crimes are forgotten in the name of saying it's better than the new version

Only DS3 and Bloodborne have good final bossfights.

Gwyn in DS1 is a joke.
Nashandra and Aldia are both easy and unfun
And lets not talk about Demon Souls.

>didn't live up to Dark Souls
>automatically the worst game in existence

...

i hated DS2, it felt like a huge downgrade in quality for a soulsborne game. come at SoTS fags

>objectively bad in the grand scheme of game design

Saying utter nonsense doesn't make your point seem any more valid. There is nothing objective about game design

>"hurr, das2 is shit, like, enemies are placed in a way you would die"
>"god das3 is such a good game, it's so good, and smart, and it plays on the players because every chest is a mimic, trully brilliant"

face it: das2 is just the hardest soul game and you're all shitters

But why any of those things make the game bad?

Like really going in depth of the mind of a videogame hater

I'm actually interested on hearing the experiences of the DaS2 haters at this point, considering DaS3 is already out and it's the same. what makes it really different if they're so similar?

I don't agree

>Giving the game far better pacing
Yeah I love how the game completely falls apart after the halfway point too, even worse than DaS. Great pacing there. Hell, let's just not even have a final area! The final new content should be the terrible giant memories!

Bloodborne is harder.

>if you think DS2 has good level design, well, I don't know what to tell you

I do think, among the more mediocre ones, it has some *really good* examples of level design... only for another genre. If this was a King's Field game, Shulva would be grand. Most of the DLC levels would be really.

For a DS game? There definitely is gameplay to level-deign adequation issue. Which is sad.

No.

Even matthewmatosis in his DaS2 review said
>It's still one of the best games around

2 has the least amount of nonsensical bullshit.
There's also no shitty swamp level.
Nor is there a giant lava cave full of dinosaur butts

2 is less of a major ball ache.

>let's just not even have a final area! The final new content should be the terrible giant memories!

???

and you don't have to. DaS2 is the worst of the 3 so far, can't speak for DaS3 though.. haven't gotten to it yet

The final area is the Throne of Want which is the Kiln of the First Flame.

Did you really play the game?

But why?

Like, why you say that?