Is Dark Souls 2 actually a bad game or do people just hate on it cause a youtuber said it was shit? also OG vs SOTFS

Is Dark Souls 2 actually a bad game or do people just hate on it cause a youtuber said it was shit? also OG vs SOTFS

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=-Th96wgegHw
youtube.com/watch?v=aIqMqzt0Af8
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

bumper

most people here probably hate it because of the youtuber
I wouldn't say it's a flawed game it's just doesn't have the brilliance of DaS1

-vast majority of the character/enemy/armor/environment designs are just much inferior and a lot less consistent-connected with each other.
-few places have interconnected level designs, it's mostly just branching paths which is also inferior to das1
-the enemy/boss behaviour /gameplay is also less varied

it's a good game on it's own though

It's objectively the best.

Scholar of the First Sin

also nobody but meme loving retards say it's actually a bad game. The criticism just makes it the worst Souls game, that's all. Compared to most AAA games, it's pretty fuckin good.

yeah, sounds like it isnt as bad as people make it out to be
fuck off

>fuck off
Btfo
Can't handle the facts KEK

It's like 40% memish youtuber bandwagoning and 20% resentment over the graphics downgrade carrying over to it being shitposted to death on launch, and the remaining 40% is down to its own flaws. It's far from a perfect game but when judged objectively it's the same for every other souls game.

It's probably my favorite after DeS, but I'm not delusional enough to think that it doesn't have flaws out the ass. It's a hideous game with a downgraded healing system, crippled matchmaking, the slowest combat in the series, too few interesting bosses, and generally bad level/world design. For some people, that's reason enough to hate it and consider it the worst game in the series, and that's fine.

Scholar and the 4 DLCs was top tier, worth playing for that lots of content

why is it your favorite after des if it has so many problems?

I guess it's ok standing on its own, but it was terrible compared to the first dark souls. And the 3rd

Dark Souls was never about the difficulty to me, it was about the atmosphere, and dark souls 2 didnt have it. Just took the fact that people found it hard, thought that was the reason it was good and focused on that, and pvp which I didn't really care about either.

DkS1 is broken-down garbage that literally only has one redeeming quality:
World interconnection.
That's it.

>uh it becuh a duh utoober

It's not bad, but it's the worst in the series.
It's a good game in a series of excellent games.

My main complaint was the artstyle.

it was this garbage cartoonish shit. Just awful. It's weird how rarely i see this brought up too. The DS1/Bloodborne engine is so much better its not even funny.

Well there's also the level design, level progression, bosses and characters that Dark Souls 1 does infinitely better than Dark Souls II. The combat isn't a floaty downgrade of it's predecessor like Dark Souls II, either.

>ruined the movesets of all my DaS weaponfus
>made faith useless
>old Greatsword isnt even in the game anymore
>removed red eye orb

Its like B team made this game to spite me.

It was bad long before Youtubers said it was bad

I thought it was great, put over 400 hours in it, did a SL1, bow only, shield only and whip only run along with multiple roleplay runs. It also has best girl Emerald Herald. SOTFS btw.

Something broke in everyone's heads when the graphics downgrades came to light. Bosses are generally uninteresting, zones don't reach the high points of DeS/DaS1 if you disregard the DLC. Low iframe roll memes just reveal what anyone who played the previous games at 50%+ equip load knew - the hitbox syncing on rolls and grab attacks is atrocious. Remained atrocious all the way through DaS3, as well.

IMO, the combat is the most rewarding of the four Souls games with regards to proper spacing and positioning; it's only outdone by Bloodborne on that front. Every stat being meaningful in some way, elevates the RPG aspect over DeS/DaS1/DaS3. The pace of combat itself being slower and more ponderous is not necessarily a negative, but does take some adapting towards.

Still the most replayable IMO, and my favorite of the four with DeS in second.

People were expecting another Metroidvania, but Dark Souls 2 plays more like a Megaman game.

You go to the main hub, select the boss you want to fight next and enter his linear stage. He'll be waiing for you at the end and then you'll go back to the hub.

It has a lot of questionable - at best - world design and gameplay decisions, but it's still a good game.

I'm talking about where it stands in all 5 games.
Yes, the level design is better then Dark Souls 2, sure. It's equitable to Demon's Souls, but strictly worse then DkS3 and BB.
DkS2's DLC bosses surpass anything in Dark Souls 1, and the first 3 games (DeS/DkS1/2) all have pretty shitty bosses compared to anything from Crowns DLC/BB/DkS3.

Worst-of-all, it's combat is a strict downgrade of Demon's Souls, without question. Although not "floaty", it's much worse in other ways.

I'd say it's overall the worst of the bunch and there's some truly retarded things like ADP stat or half-assed shit like hitboxes, but still worth playing and the DLC areas (aside from few lackluster bosses) were genuinely great. Go with SotFS, it's basically the same as the main game but with all the DLC included and a handful of other added things.

There's also some smaller things DaS2 does best but weren't retained for the subsequent games
>Non-instant Estus heal. In other games your bar filling is just visual, the heal is actually instant the moment the chug animation completes, whereas in DaS2 Estus is just a very fast heal over time, meaning it can be outdamaged before its full effect, thus you need to time chugs better. No tanking through bosses with Estus chugs.
>More weight level breaking points (with smaller gradual roll changes) than other games, somewhat heavyweight build is actually pretty good.
>Defensive stats actually matter, especially elemental that can be raised ridiculously high with the right gear and spells.
>Weapon stats screen shows relevant information like catalyst cast speed, poise damage, counter multiplier etc.
>Removal of gamebreaking non-scaling weapon infusion paths that allowed you to forgo offensive stats altogether while still dealing endgame tier damage.
>Poison and toxic effects last a short time but deal fast DoTs, meaning they're both actually good damage sources in both PvE and PvP.
>Weapon durability actually matters.
>In comparison to DaS3's linearity the world is really open from the start: you can start proceeding forward in pretty much any Great Soul boss' direction, stuff like purchasing a fall damage ring to enter the Majula well before getting the NPC who sets up the ladder from other route first.

>I'm talking about where it stands in all 5 games.

at the very bottom

Dark Souls > Demon's Souls = Bloodborne >> Dark Souls 3 >>>> Dark Souls 2

found the DaS baby

it's trash
>shitty art direction and atmosphere
despite the fact that it's newer than DkS1 and DeS, it's still looks uglier than them and more disneylandish, the dark fantasy was weak in it.
>shitty world design/layout
though it at least is still better than DkS3's world. the star shaped world design/layout in DkS2 is a downgrade from its predecessor's complex metroidvania-like world.
>Soul Memory.
>teleportation from the start
the thing that ruined the series for all games to come.
>floaty and unsatisfying combat
fake omni-directional rolling, lack of feedback when you hit or get hit by an enemy, crappy animations...etc, the combat doesn't really have a good hefty feel to it, it's like you're fighting underwater.
>generic and unoriginal bosses
some of them could be beaten simply by circle strafing, basically a lot of the bosses and other elements in the game aren't as imaginative (weird, bizarre, fucked up) as the ones in games directed by Miyazaki, they're a bit more generic.
>Agility
this is one of the main reasons why combat felt shitty, you'd time your roll correctly but then notice your health mysteriously turned yellow and went down.

Go back to neofag hcuntfaggot

>thread #1874618746187461876 asking if das2 is bad
I wish I could press a button so you would die the same fucking second.

>and the DLC areas (aside from few lackluster bosses) were genuinely great.

don't listen to this memeing fuck. The DLCs are just as bad as the base game

literally seething

Dark Souls is a scenic a bike ride
Dark Souls 2 is a stationary bike
Dark Souls 3 is an elliptical that's on fire also your mother is a whore

Feels amazing to like the best game the best.

Yeah, but you're missing my point; Dark Souls isn't at the top with some of the worst combat in the series, loads of busted levels, busted mechanics, shit bosses/enemies etc.
BB > DeS > DkS ≥ DkS3 = DkS2.

It's only that high because its a lot of game reviewers first Dark Souls

It's the best dark souls game, Sup Forums hates it because it's not DS1

>some of the worst combat in the series, loads of busted levels, busted mechanics, shit bosses/enemies etc.

except all of that applies more to Dark Souls 2 than Dark Souls 1

>meme meme they're bad because I said so meme
They were great. The fire and poison DLC areas had lots of verticality and especially the former with the elevator system activation opening up additional areas and shortcuts was clever design. Though there were few exceptions (like the run before Sir Alonne boss fight looking visually absolutely horrible), overall they were still a good step-up from from the base game.

It's that high because it's the best game.
Stop grasping at straws.

I really enjoyed playing through DeS a few times, but I've tried to get into each of the DaS games more than once and none of them ever clicked for me. I guess the magic only struck once for me.

I rated Dark Souls 2 at the bottom because of this.
But yeah, is this the mind of Dark Souls 1 apologists?

>missing the higher Bloodborne score

Have you tried BB? The atmosphere and faster pace might do the trick.

somewhere between "decent compared to most AAA games but fairly bad for a souls game" and "mediocre"

Animations are a huge step down from Dks1

youtube.com/watch?v=-Th96wgegHw

there's quite a lot of places where they put "hurtboxes" several frames after the end of the swing. Basically, the boss will swing their sword full speed, you'll dodge it, and then while the sword is sitting on the ground slowing to a stop so they can pick it up, you take full damage at the end of your roll

this ties into ADP and AGI as well, which is a shitty idea

Some enemies clearly not finished or just put in place to be annoying, i.e infinite stam mace man

youtube.com/watch?v=aIqMqzt0Af8

or the fucking .... extra boss in the bottom of sinner that you have to fight in waist deep water for no reason

All in all, can get very tedious to play because of things like this, but also has some nice DLC and some challenging and enjoyable fights there.

I greatly enjoyed Sinh and running my ass off after him, and figuring out the mystery of the ghost lizards

Not a souls game.

It's fine. All the souls games are equal parts enjoyable and unpolished shitty messes.

>Yes, the level design is better then Dark Souls 2, sure. It's equitable to Demon's Souls, but strictly worse then DkS3 and BB.

Agreed, if we're talking about plain level design and not world design.

>DkS2's DLC bosses surpass anything in Dark Souls 1

They really, really don't. Ivory King is one of the best fights in the series, yes. However the rest aren't that special. Sinh is outdone by Kalameet, Alonne by Artorias they felt like poor rehashes of better bossses from Dark Souls I, which is a theme of a lot of the game. Stuff like the Belfry Gargoyles and Royal Rat Authority are just shittier versions of DS1 bosses.

>and the first 3 games (DeS/DkS1/2) all have pretty shitty bosses compared to anything from Crowns DLC/BB/DkS3.

It depends on what your measure is for a good boss fight. If you mean difficult agility tests that screech and have screenwipe attacks, then yes Bloodborne and Dark Souls 3 have better bosses. But personally, whilst I prefer most of the bosses in Dark Souls 3 to 2 and 1, Demon's Souls still has the best bosses purely for the fact that they were unique, memorable and I had fun fighting nearly all of them. A lot of the bosses in the later entry of the Souls series became very forgettable, even though they were more challenging.

>Worst-of-all, it's combat is a strict downgrade of Demon's Souls, without question. Although not "floaty", it's much worse in other ways.

Disagree. Dark Souls to me felt like a natural evolution of DeS combat. It's a little weightier and it's got more variety. DeS felt very "cushioned" and removed at times. It didn't have the same feeling of impact as combat in DS1, Bloodborne and 3.

I intend to try it but only if I see it for dirt cheap, I know it's different to the souls games but since I'm not confident I'll like it I don't want to risk feeling like I wasted money. I feel the same about nioh.

People dislike it because its not as good as DS1, but they're the same people who will praise DS3 even those its also not as good as DS1.

Play OG.

$20 new at your brick&mortars, the last time I saw. It's definitely more refined than any of the DaS games. Imagine if 3-1/3-2 was expanded into an entire game, and you'll have a rough idea of it.

It's got a bunch of ups and downs, and most of the ups are from a PvP players perspective from what I remember, so I couldn't give half a shit in a hailstorm.
The game managed to look both graphically better and aesthetically worse than Dark Souls, and the overall level design and enemy placement, and boss design was far worse. Enemy placement carried over to the DLC's, but the aesthetic surpassed Dark Souls, along with the boss design, apart from several exceptions.
Dark Souls 2 is an extremely divisive sequel, I hated it, I think Dark Souls and Dark Souls 3 are clearly superior, despite Dark Souls having a terribly mediocre final third and Dark Souls 3 feeling weirdly bland.
It's not a bad game, but depending on your thoughts and feelings about Dark Souls, it may be a bad Dark Souls game.

>Best level design
DS1
>Best bosses
DS1
>Best story
DS2
>Best gameplay
DS2
>Best Pvp
DS2
>Worst Game
DS3

SOTFS was the best DLC in DS history. But the vanilla game was trash.

It's fine for the first part and then after a while it just become a chore.

Dark Souls 1 feels like an adventure

Dark Souls 2 feels like you have to do planning to win and it's formulaic. You go through a hallway and get fucked in every arena and there's not that much strategy to it. In dark souls 1 there were stairs in the way and pillars in the way and oh shit i cant run down that way because pots.

basically dark souls 1 was better thought out and the maps themselves had things you could use to your advantage.

people don't like 2 because you have the difficulty without the variability and strategy.

>>Best story
>DS2

now this is bait. You never break the cure and the game never explained why you had to sit on the damn chair

dark souls 2 sucks and the original version was better. scholar does stupid shit like putting a fucking branch statue everywhere for no reason other than for you to back track.

I love invading in this game. Could do it for hours a day

>never explained
Nothing is explained in Dark Souls

>best gameplay
>its literally just an inferior DS1
>but DS1 has the best bosses :B

I hate this fanbase. It's so obvious that Dark Souls 1 is better in most aspects but you fags still try to have a different opinion just for the sake of it.

Every time.

T.brainlet

>running backstab cheese on every enemy
>4-way rolling
>retarded animation cancels that never got fixed from DeS

spot the DaS baby

You have the different opinion for the sake of it m8.
The masses have already confirmed that.
As seen here.

...

>The masses have already confirmed that.
>As seen here.
>

it does not have the User Scores, therefore the claim of "the masses" is irrelevant

Really? I liked Sinh and Alone a lot better. Kalameet was a cool fight, but the whole fight was pretty much Kalameet doing a forward lunge a few times then flying up to breath fire at you, then repeat. I can't even remember the Artorias fight because it was too easy to leave any kind of impact on me.

sunken king was better than most of what the base game of 2 had to offer though. iron king wasn't as good but had better bosses. the snow place dlc is fucking ass besides the burned king but his fight is just long winded in secondary playthroughs.

Stay in the denial you contrarian fuck.

>shows objective evidence
>still refuses
I think you're the one who's in denial

it's a very flawed game but there's some very good bits if you look into things

>"Y-you can't possibly thing Dark Souls 2 is better than 1! C-contrarian!!"
C'mon now.

This sentence has got to be the most frequently spouted phrase on Sup Forums that is also purely, objectively wrong

It's just Sup Forums being retarded.

>has better mechanics
>almost all of the weapons are useful
>fixed most of the bugs from DS1
>literally just an inferior DS1
DS1 is a better game, but DS2 clearly has better gameplay

>sunken king was better than most of what the base game of 2 had to offer though.

as someone who played both, that is bullshit

be gay

>but DS2 clearly has better gameplay

and ADP negates that claim

>it improved the game but it's worse because of one stat
fuck off

there's literally nothing wrong with adp

Why is ADP bad?

>boo hoo I actually have to invest souls to get iframes in a fucking RPG

I love Dark Souls II more than anyone I know, probably, but every time I start it up to play through it again I forget just how hard it is to make a good looking character and I usually stop midway through that step.

The lore in DaS2 is a lot better than people usually give it credit for, specially compared to the dumpster fire that was DaS3 in that regard. The problem is that until SotFS it was presented in a 2deep4u way thanks to the terrible item description and the lack of Aldia.

The whole point of DaS was that no matter what you did, everything was going to shit and the fire would fade all the same. DaS2 had to justify a sequel in such a scenario, and they did the cycles thing. They upgraded the message to tell you that no matter what you did, everything was going to shit, the fire would fade, but then some retard would restart the cycle only for everything to go to shit again and all the great deeds of the past to be forgotten. Then you have to figure out that Vendrick did all that shit because he was mad at the cosmos and cope with the fact that he had stuck his dick in crazy.

Also everything was Gwyn's fault as per usual.

ADP would be an issue if levelling was actually slower like in 3
but it isn't
you get levels and souls insanely fast
it's a non-issue

>it improved the game
it did not. DaS2 was a downgrade. Why else would none of its features be brought back in 3?

>there's literally nothing wrong with adp
>Why is ADP bad?

because ADP is a stat that looks useless on paper but turns out it's fucking vital to beating the game and you only knew that if you looked online.

Having a stat tied to I Frames is a bad ides when the game doesn't even tell you that it boosts your I Frames.

>The lore in DaS2 is a lot better than people usually give it credit for, specially compared to the dumpster fire that was DaS3 in that regard.

>b-b-b-b-but DaS3
every fucking time with you DaS2 apologists.

>Why else would none of its features be brought back in 3
Because Miyazaki is a hack and acts like DaS2 never happened, he's jealous best DaS is not his. DaS3 is literally DaS1 mixed with BB, he can't create new things

>agility is bad because you don't know what it does unless you do some research
no?
the game clearly shows that increasing adp increases your agility
agility says: "Boosts ease of evasion and other actions."
hence: it increases your ability at rolling (and other stuff)
you don't need to look up anything online to figure this out

>vital to beating the game

lol no, git gud you fucking scrub

>Having a stat tied to I Frames is a bad ides when the game doesn't even tell you that it boosts your I Frames.

literally tells you exactly what it does through in-game help text, but you didn't rtfm

>Why else would none of its features be brought back in 3?
because 3 is a rushed messy linear rehash that doesn't do anything new

>Because Miyazaki is a hack and acts like DaS2 never happened

good because it was a bad game

Is it me, or does Dark Souls 3 feel more streamlined than the rest?

Artorias is probably the most overrated boss in the series and Alonne and Fume are both better by miles just for the introduction of phases and each having minor interactive bits (Alonne's hari-kari and Fume's phase skip), having more moves, having better moves, etc.
Sinh and Kalameet are both dull and ugly fights, so there of no consequence.
Although most of DkS2's fights are shit (like all of Dark Souls' "Demon" boss fights), DkS2's highs are above DkS1's.

Demon's is probably my favorite game, but the bosses are probably it's worst feature aside from Monk which was incredible. Most are very novel but very broken and simple, and although they have a certain charm to them, the only one that stands out still as a decent fight to this day is Flamelurker. Although novelty is nice and gimmicks can be great when pulled-off properly, most people will agree less is less and more is more with boss fights. DkS3 and BB give more in terms of moves, phases, and even proximity mix-ups and they protect their nuts (unlike any boss in DkS1).

The combat is worse, because the weapons are worse. DkS1 has the worst weapon movesets in the series in fact, and how they downgraded them so greatly is amazing. Here's an example:
DeS Estoc had 4-hit unique target combos (not R1 infinites). It had a hyper armor reverse pirouette. It had combos in both stances and with off-hand katanas. It had a superb self-projectile gap closer. It had better rewards for more dangerous moves. It is without a single doubt the best weapon in the series.
DkS Estoc had zero combos. It had zero hyper armor moves. The moves were garbage. Dumb-as-nails shit like Ricard's R2 not actually comboing despite it being a single move. People only mash R1 for the frametrap.
This trend continues for great swords, falchions, great axes, short swords, polearms, etc. Everything but claymore-style swords.

There is also the absolute nightmare that is poise.

I just completed DaS for the first time, should I skip DaS2 and go straight for 3?

I don't own a playstation so I will never be able to play BB.

>and Alonne and Fume are both better by miles just for the introduction of phases and each having minor interactive bits (Alonne's hari-kari and Fume's phase skip), having more moves, having better moves, etc.

game they are locked behind DLC of the worst Souls Game

>I just completed DaS for the first time, should I skip DaS2 and go straight for 3?

play DaS2 at least once so you can see how bad it is compared to DaS and then see how much DaS3 improved things

if you're not a miyazaki fangay and cry like a bitch just because best dark souls game is not made by miyazaki, then there's no reason to skip DaS2

>because ADP is a stat that looks useless on paper but turns out it's fucking vital to beating the game
You don't need ADP to beat the game.

That doesn't detract from the fact they're much better then Artorias.

Is this guy retarded?He is so much of an underage that he cant even convey his superficial thoughts without relying on buzzwords or made-up words.