Red Liquorice
Member
If you thought DS3 was too fast, the slow, clunky, janky, jerky, unresponsive controls of DS2 should be right up your alley. 
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
If I hated Dark Souls 3, will I like Dark Souls 2?
- Thread starter Weiss
- Start date
Fried Food
Banned
have fun with all the generic bosses and bad hit boxes
ecosse_011172
Junior Member
What a pile of shit, the games are critically acclaimed because of the fantastic combat, variety, great level design, atmosphere and other things.
Not as much fun as people with sweeping generalisations and implying that hitboxes isn't an issue that all of the souls games have issues with lol.
If OP likes slow methodical combat DS2 might become OPs favourite imo.
KLoWn
Member
Ech... What a thread. People who are too stupid or lazy to try and understand the plot, and therefor it's bad. Spoon feed everything!
I hope fighting bosses aren't OP's thing if he goes with DS2, because most of 'em there suck royally, and is coming from someone who actually thinks Dark Souls 2 was great.
I hope fighting bosses aren't OP's thing if he goes with DS2, because most of 'em there suck royally, and is coming from someone who actually thinks Dark Souls 2 was great.
Yes, you will.
I've just completed a playthrough of all 3 games consecutively and I think DS3 is easily the worst in the series and DS2 is significantly better.
Mainly because it's much slower, I really dislike how fast everything is in DS3 compared to the other games. Can just roll around and spam attacks like an asshole because the stamina regen+usage is so insane and lenient. The almost instant Estus is absurd as well.
DS2 is not without flaw, but there are many things in it which are the best the series has to offer, from PvP, the amount of builds and playstyles, replayability, bonfire ascetics, etc.
It also has the best DLC.
I've just completed a playthrough of all 3 games consecutively and I think DS3 is easily the worst in the series and DS2 is significantly better.
Mainly because it's much slower, I really dislike how fast everything is in DS3 compared to the other games. Can just roll around and spam attacks like an asshole because the stamina regen+usage is so insane and lenient. The almost instant Estus is absurd as well.
DS2 is not without flaw, but there are many things in it which are the best the series has to offer, from PvP, the amount of builds and playstyles, replayability, bonfire ascetics, etc.
It also has the best DLC.
Ignoring the challenge areas.
Jimnymebob
Member
This is entirely why I get so miffed when I see GAF describing Soulsborne games as masterpieces. They're great games yes, game feel and all that is spot on, but they're far from masterpieces because the narratives are just complete trash. "Oh well they tell a story through the environment..." Okay, that doesn't tell me anything. That Dragon is dead and rotting over there why? Is it diseased? Did someone strike it down? Is this shit supposed to mean anything:
No explanation for it. It's just there, and the player is expected to fill in the blanks themselves because the developers know all they need to do is release a game that is brutally difficult and bam, critically acclaimed.
I sort of agree with you, in the fact I wish they confirmed more things. DS1 was good for that at least.
It's a good job that offscreen fighting the camera dragon boss number 5 or so of the series King of Storms on DS3 didn't have ridiculously huge hitboxes.
thetrin
Hail, peons, for I have come as ambassador from the great and bountiful Blueberry Butt Explosion
Bloated and convoluted is definitely not something I've heard someone use to describe the Souls games.
People on GAF sure love hating on shit. I see more people slamming on fantastic games then I ever see people venerating a game for doing something right.
Personally if you didn't like 3 you probably wouldn't like 2 at all. 3 has massive improvements in gameplay where it improved from the previous 3 games so going back to 2 will not only be annoying but make you struggle. Dark and Demon are still the best ones in the series imo, Demon might be harder to get into because it's oldest but I still find Dark 1 to be amazing. Dark 2 has a lot wrong with it too from hitboxes, to weird animations, to a weird stat that changes your invincible frames. The game also purposely ambushes you into fights you do not expect. Example:
Any souls game: Ok, I see Enemy A in the distance, Enemy B is to the left, Enemy C-F are waiting in this room for an ambush. Let me plan my attack
Souls 2: Hm, no enemies? around? Maybe up? nothing. Strange. Let me take 1 step forward and....
10 enemies jump from behind you, 10 from in front and they all sandwich you.
I always loathed that design from 2.
Any souls game: Ok, I see Enemy A in the distance, Enemy B is to the left, Enemy C-F are waiting in this room for an ambush. Let me plan my attack
Souls 2: Hm, no enemies? around? Maybe up? nothing. Strange. Let me take 1 step forward and....
10 enemies jump from behind you, 10 from in front and they all sandwich you.
I always loathed that design from 2.
eot
Banned
The hyperbole is strong with this post...
Not to mention DS1 loves the placing an enemy around a blind corner for you trick.
Must be interesting to loathe design that only exists on your mind.
It honestly reminds me of those that tried playing DS1 as a mindless hack and slash of God of war game and then complaining how the game was cheap honestly.
Magic is decent in it and the lore isn't riding DS1's dick as hard as in DS3.
The enemy and boss design is horrible, but if your definition of good methodical combat is doing a slow 1 second roll and a slow 1 second hit with dodgy animations and hit detection then I guess that aspect is fine too.
The enemy and boss design is horrible, but if your definition of good methodical combat is doing a slow 1 second roll and a slow 1 second hit with dodgy animations and hit detection then I guess that aspect is fine too.
HungOverOnATues
Member
You could, depending on your starting class and with the caveat that your roll won't be as good as a typical melee character. A Sorcerer with 25 ATT for instance gets you 92 AGI/10 iframes during your roll - not great, but fine if you're focused on ranged combat. With ADP being worth 3 times that of ATT though, in most cases you'd still want to put some points into it.
Here is the page on agility and iframes and down below it references the iframe values in Dark Souls 1 for comparison. Something to keep in mind when comparing the two is that the actual roll mechanics between the games differs in that DS2 only has 2 roll speeds (for under/over 70% equip load) and varying roll distance which is all independent of the number of iframes you get from agility, while in Dark Souls your roll speed and iframes are tied to different equip load tiers. Here is a character planner that shows you how much ADP/ATT you'll need for your class to hit those breakpoints.
Dark Souls built a rich world where every place and every person had meaning. Not to your quest, but to the world and its inhabitants. That's what makes the setting one of the best in the medium. If you don't like it, that doesn't say a thing about the quality of its writing; it simply isn't for you.
DSII and III lost that richness and nuance. The worlds felt forced and contrived. In II especially, the geography make no sense, and its characters outside of Vendrick, Nashandra and the scholar have no purpose. Again, not a purpose for the player, but a purpose within the world itself.
DSII and III lost that richness and nuance. The worlds felt forced and contrived. In II especially, the geography make no sense, and its characters outside of Vendrick, Nashandra and the scholar have no purpose. Again, not a purpose for the player, but a purpose within the world itself.
Utter bollocks.
I enjoyed DS2 waaaaaay more and I think DS3 is the worst soulsborne game,period. My biggest disappointment of 2016 as far as games go.
If you want slower combat,more build variety and better magic system then DS2 is something you should enjoy. All 4 magic classes are fun.
Also Demon's Souls is very good,you should try that too sometime.
If you want slower combat,more build variety and better magic system then DS2 is something you should enjoy. All 4 magic classes are fun.
Also Demon's Souls is very good,you should try that too sometime.
JudgmentJay
Member
No. That's absurd.
Jimnymebob
Member
You can also reach the necessary 105 agility in the first half hour of the game if you grind against the first knight at the NMW bonfire until it stops spawning in, then fight the boss there (who is really easy), you'll have enough to have your agility sorted for the rest of the game.
family_guy
Member
Plot in the games feel like Destiny's "I don't have time to explain why I don't have time to explain." Well at least Dark Souls left the item descriptions in the game and didn't direct you to a website. However many people are just accepting whatever their favorite YouTubers interpretation is as canon. No one really knows what the writers intended.
Any time I run into the usual Souls narrative praise I feel like I'm taking crazy pills. And if you dare to criticize any of it you get the same tired "you want to be spoon fed exposition in 1 hour cutscenes?" rebuttal which pretty much entirely misses the point of the criticism. I think the way Souls games deliver lore and narrative is amazing, but the actual execution of it leaves much to be desired.
People in this thread claiming you can just spam attacks and rolls throughout DS3.
Just stop spreading bullshit 'facts'.
As in Bloodborne, enemies in DS3 are designed with the bigger stamina in mind and they will play accordingly.
This isn't as if they put DS1's enemies there and gave you double the stamina. Look no further than the silver knights. They are a joke in Dark Souls 1 compared to 3.
If the game was as slow as DS1 people would be complaining it's too easy.
There's still a million times more thought, design, strategy and 'method' in DS3's encounters and enemies than the NES level AI of the enemies of the 'slow and methodical' DS2 and its amateur, cheap encounter design.
Also try to spam rolls and attacks around Old Demon King or Sulyvahn (or any boss for that matter), let's see how far that gets you.
The fact that it's faster doesn't mean it's mindless, stop with that bullshit.
Just stop spreading bullshit 'facts'.
As in Bloodborne, enemies in DS3 are designed with the bigger stamina in mind and they will play accordingly.
This isn't as if they put DS1's enemies there and gave you double the stamina. Look no further than the silver knights. They are a joke in Dark Souls 1 compared to 3.
If the game was as slow as DS1 people would be complaining it's too easy.
There's still a million times more thought, design, strategy and 'method' in DS3's encounters and enemies than the NES level AI of the enemies of the 'slow and methodical' DS2 and its amateur, cheap encounter design.
Also try to spam rolls and attacks around Old Demon King or Sulyvahn (or any boss for that matter), let's see how far that gets you.
The fact that it's faster doesn't mean it's mindless, stop with that bullshit.
bashing Souls for storytelling is a nonstarter because it isn't a narrative based game and the story can be more or less ignored. so it's kind of hard to deduct somebody criticizing from that angle doesn't want a curated "AAA rpg" experience and shouldn't be wasting time with the game anyway, as it's 99% combat and stat management.
I can't really see how you would hate DS3 bosses and expect to like DS2 bosses. DS2 bosses are the worst in the series there are only a handful of good base game bosses, the DLC ones are very good though. Except the two tigers from ivory king, the gank squad from sunken king and Smelter Demon 2.0 from iron king, fuck those three optional bosses.
Peroroncino
Member
Preach.
I love Souls games, played them all, platinumed some, but whenever I hear that story is good I instantly cringe.
Literally does not happen a single time
Heckler456
Banned
I loved the story in Bloodborne. Made me actually feel like something "bigger" was going on behind the scenes.
zenspider
Member
This is entirely why I get so miffed when I see GAF describing Soulsborne games as masterpieces. They're great games yes, game feel and all that is spot on, but they're far from masterpieces because the narratives are just complete trash. "Oh well they tell a story through the environment..." Okay, that doesn't tell me anything. That Dragon is dead and rotting over there why? Is it diseased? Did someone strike it down? Is this shit supposed to mean anything:
No explanation for it. It's just there, and the player is expected to fill in the blanks themselves because the developers know all they need to do is release a game that is brutally difficult and bam, critically acclaimed.
Haha wut
Bloodborne is one of the most interesting narratives in gaming for not only it's content but how it's told. Dark Souls is less taut and concise because it has so much more in-game history and lands that mean almost nothing to the story, but still.
You're not filling the blanks, you're putting together the pieces - especially in Bloodborne's case. There's no "wise one" who narrates the story and leads you by the nose to every significant plot point with hackney exposition dumps and ham-fisted dialogue.
Pyromancy is legit good in DS3 and probably would be your cup of tea if you like more methodical fights as a caster. Plus you can switch to dark at any time. Unfortunately, even the toughest bosses (Friede, Gael, Midir, Pontiff) have easy attack patterns with wide-open ATTACK ME NOW openings for spells. You might have trouble with Oceiros and Demon Prince if underleveled. That's about it.
In DS2, on the other hand, every single boss is even easier as a caster except Burnt Ivory King if you go solo, in which case, hoo boy, get ready for some bullshit.
In DS2, on the other hand, every single boss is even easier as a caster except Burnt Ivory King if you go solo, in which case, hoo boy, get ready for some bullshit.
nailbombxx
Member
Dark Souls 2 is the most trash of all the games (still decent). But op may like it because its plays slower than even Dark Souls 1 (not a good thing imo)
zenspider
Member
Bloodborne has the most concise story in the psuedo-series. It just, like all the titles, asks you to meet it halfway.
It honestly makes me wonder if those people hate books, also.
I mean, short of there actually being an author out there who, after ceding failure to show, tells via characters' thoughts, then goes on expository asides to tell his audience the why of each and every thought.
I'd rather rub Braille into my eyes, than be subjected to such.
Seems like people are getting confused between the words story and storytelling. The story takes some digging around and research outside of the game or you join the dots yourself and come up with your own interpretation, almost as if it were a work of art.
Storytelling on the other hand is a way of conveying a story from a certain point of view. Most Soul's games don't make any attempt at this, it's intentional and obviously not to everyone's taste. These are games that don't even tell you how half the fucking game systems work remember, so don't expect a backstory to be explained.
Storytelling on the other hand is a way of conveying a story from a certain point of view. Most Soul's games don't make any attempt at this, it's intentional and obviously not to everyone's taste. These are games that don't even tell you how half the fucking game systems work remember, so don't expect a backstory to be explained.
yes, because it happens multiple times instead /s
This is entirely why I get so miffed when I see GAF describing Soulsborne games as masterpieces. They're great games yes, game feel and all that is spot on, but they're far from masterpieces because the narratives are just complete trash. "Oh well they tell a story through the environment..." Okay, that doesn't tell me anything. That Dragon is dead and rotting over there why? Is it diseased? Did someone strike it down? Is this shit supposed to mean anything:
No explanation for it. It's just there, and the player is expected to fill in the blanks themselves because the developers know all they need to do is release a game that is brutally difficult and bam, critically acclaimed.
I kind of have to agree. There are a lot of things for which you could argue that not even From know what it's supposed to mean. You constantly have to puzzle together even the most basic things and even then you might encounter some blank spots.
But on the other hand: Does everything have to have meaning? Don't think so.
I love the Souls games including 2, have fun OP.
I love these games but the story, which at times is hard to even call it that is pretty much trash due to the delivery. It still bothers me from a design pov that a lot of the story/lore is delivered on magic descriptions placed on items/equipment you get.
And no I don't want an hour of cutscenes.
I love these games but the story, which at times is hard to even call it that is pretty much trash due to the delivery. It still bothers me from a design pov that a lot of the story/lore is delivered on magic descriptions placed on items/equipment you get.
And no I don't want an hour of cutscenes.
old manatee
Banned
I agree. A lot of the time when people criticize the story in Souls games they aren't even criticizing the actual story, they are complaining about having to dig to get to the story. Souls games always put gameplay first. The story is a bonus that you get if you have the patience to read all of the dialogue and item descriptions and pay close attention to the environments. Also it's a multiplayer game, so to me it kind of sounds like complaining that Overwatch's story is too far in the background.
Honestly though I found that casters were boring by the end of all 3 games and boiled down to kite, kite, cast, kite, etc. The end bosses of DS2 are literally "Don't stand in the bad stuff, unleash spells," and "Don't get hit by bullets, unleash spells during bullets."
Bandit's knife only, low stamina and HP have been my most strategy-intensive run-throughs of Dark Souls games.
Bandit's knife only, low stamina and HP have been my most strategy-intensive run-throughs of Dark Souls games.