In defense of Dark Souls 2

Recommended Videos

stroopwafel

Elite Member
Jul 16, 2013
3,031
357
88
I think Dark Souls 2 is a fantastic game in its own way. Yeah in many ways its iterative and complimentary to the first game, but at the same time it also gives its own unique spin on the core Dark Souls concepts of cycles and inevatibility. I think the overarching plot of Vendrick, Aldia and Nashandra is atleast as interesting as that of Gwyn and his cronies. Espescially considering the parallels between the two.

I admit the interconnected level design of the first Dark Souls and the way seperate areas were corkscrewed onto one another is unmatched, and while DkS2 lacked this particular focus it still gave me the same feeling of the levels being an atmospheric dwell as the first game. Forest of Fallen Giants, Shaded Woods, Shrine of Amana, Drangleic Castle all provided a similar sense of place for me as some of the best locations from the first game.

The gameplay I think is a bit tighter in DkS2 with a much steadier performance throughout the game(atleast on PS3). Colors seem a bit more saturated which also contributes to giving the game a somewhat different look and feel compared to the first game. Bosses I think are also largely on par with the first game though it lacked an emotionally impressive one like Sif. Yeah DkS2 had a lot of ?dudes in armour? but similarly DkS1 recycled many of the same monsters both in boss and regular enemy form.

As for DkS2 being made by a ?B-team? I think that?s somewhat of a misnomer. I think its great that Fromsoft gives other talent the chance to work on such a big project like a Dark Souls sequel and prove themselves. That they diversify resources is what makes and keeps this company strong, unlike most(if not all) of its contemporaries that rely solely on specific franchises and creators and when they leave the entire quality of the franchise sinks like a brick. Think of anything recent made by Capcom, Squeenix or Konami(that doesn?t involve Kojima). The faith of these companies in their own in-house developers has become so bad(if they even have any left) that they either scrapped entire divisions, terminated IPs or outsourced them to overseas devs. I think the inability of once legendary game studios to attract and recruit exceptional talent is one of the main reasons of the decline of the Japanese games industry.

Anyone thinks Miyazaki with his unconventional approach to game design would ever be hired(let alone given the creative freedom to make a game like Demon?s Souls) by the major gaming companies subsisting on their old glory? Not in a million years. So I think Fromsoft is actually doing the right thing by giving other developers a chance as well to prove themselves and allow them to grow as creators.

And I think Dark Souls 2 essentially proves this. With all the care and detail put into making this game its an undeniable love letter to the original, yet despite being a sequel and following the same core concepts it still stands on its own merits. Yeah Dark Souls 2 has some rough edges both when it comes to gameplay and level design, but so did the first one. But when games are this memorable and enjoyable those faults are easily forgiven. Atleast for me. :p
 

Valkrex

Elder Dragon
Jan 6, 2013
303
0
0
I really enjoyed Dark Souls 2, hell I still am enjoying it. Over 200 hours and I'm still loving it, and the DLC pack that came out is just amazing. I enjoyed it just as much as the first, and I feel that each has its strengths and weaknesses. What one excels in, the other falls.

I also remember about the time Dark Souls 1 came out there was just as much outrage/hatred/bile being sent towards it from Demons' Souls fans as the hate being sent toward DS2 from DS1 fans. I can guarantee that some (BY NO MEANS ALL) of the hatred towards DS2 is simply coming from those who dislike it for not being a carbon-copy of DS1. Yea DS2 has its issues, but so does every game in this series, and it seems to me that a lot of the flaws people point out are just nit-picks to be honest and if I were to be as nit-picky as many I could EASILY find just as many reasons why the other Souls games suck when compared to each other.

Also I actually LIKE the Soul Memory mechanic. It lets me keep on leveling and trying new crazy things without making it impossible to play with others in PVE, and without making PVP a complete crapshoot as to whether you can actually get invaded. Yes it can definitely be a bit unfair towards newer players and lower leveled characters, but after a certain point (pretty much anywhere after SL 170) SL stops mattering so much in terms of actual damage/effectiveness and instead moves to giving you more variety. I see a lot of complaints about homogenized builds, but i honestly see more variety here then I did in DS1 where every build I saw was either Giant Dad, rapier/katana mage, or STR Faith dude with Sunlight Blade or Darkmoon Blade.

And I really don't buy the whole "SL w/e encourages creativity by making you plan a build ahead of time". I call BS. I like to experiment organically in the game by leveling, and I HATE having to have ONE specific playstyle in mind BEFORE I even start a character, and constantly worrying about putting one too many points into something that doesn't help me, or finding a new weapon I really like but not being able to be effective with it because I put my points towards being effective in another. Yes Soul Vessels help a lot here, but with such an arbitrary restriction there were a lot of cookie-cutter min/max builds that EVERYONE used.

I see a LOT of crazy stuff here (the only main repeat offender I tend to see is the m.scimitar)and it seems that i see some new build every day that I never would have thought of.


That said, if you didn't enjoy DS2 then you didn't enjoy DS2 and that's fine. It is a different game and has a different feel to it, and it does have problems that need to be ironed out.

It really just comes down to what you're looking for in a game as they all seem to be of similar quality with a difference in subtleties in my experience.



However, FROM did drop the ball with the latest patch, and I can only hope that they fix the two big problems it created.
 

Wasted

New member
Dec 19, 2013
250
0
0
Using the OP's logic:

-Dark Souls base game had 23 bosses
-2 are repeated as Firesage and Stray Demon
-5 appear later in the game as Pinwheel, Capra Demon, Taurus Demon, Moonlight Butterfly, and Bell Gargoyles
-That leaves the game with 16 unique boss encounters

-Dark Souls II base game had 31 bosses.
-1 was repeated as the Twin Dragonriders.
-6 appear later in the game as Royal Rat Authority, Pursuer, Flexile Sentry, Skeleton Lords, Prowling Magus, and Ruin -Sentinels
-2 are reused directly from the first game as Bellfry Gargoyles and Old Dragonslayer
-That leave the game with 22 unique boss encounters

Dark Souls II unlike the first game has many bosses that feel "samey" no doubt due to many of the bosses being humanoid with a giant weapon. Not counting Asylum/Firesage/Stray Demon, I cannot think of another boss in Dark Souls that I fought in a similar pattern. Whereas in Dark Souls II I went through the whole game without ever changing my strategy.

Quality, not quantity.
 

Skin

New member
Dec 28, 2011
491
0
0
joest01 said:
It is just that Dark Souls was a big disappointment for many serious Demon's Souls players. The atmosphere was completely lost. In fact, every area after the lord vessel was, sorry, shit. The gameplay is so so. The bosses other than O&S are a joke (until the DLC, those bosses are win!).

Dark Souls 2 doesn't do anything about the atmosphere. And it goes overboard with the lore (without giving you a good reason to care). But at least it brings back some of the world tendency mechanics in NG+. But the gameplay is back. There is dual wielding. And rolling works, without a game breaking ninja flip. Bows are viable. Heck, whips and Caestus are. Bare fists are! The bosses are hit and miss but a lot of them are actually interesting and challenging. The throne duo being a prime example btw. They are an improved O&S battle really. The mirror knight spitting actual pvp players at you. The sinner in the dark. The gargoyles in NG+ are a blast!

Return to form basically. In terms of actual gameplay even better than Demon's. Now if they could introduce a way to create my own covenant where I can define what equipment, spells etc are allowed, give me a protected arena and we're on. Then we just need to get the magic back. But honestly, I'll just play through Demon's every couple of years. Or metroid prime for that matter. I don't believe anyone there even understands what made Demon's / King's Field special. At least there were no t-rexes and ice caves in the last game.
I will definitely give you that Dark Souls did not come close to the atmosphere that alot of the levels in Demons Souls had, but it was equally, if not more immersive, especially for people who have never played a Souls game before (which would be a good amount of the Xbox and PC population).

Also, with the exception of the Lost Izalith, I don't think any of the post Lordvessel areas were bad. I think simply by design of the game, the difficulty was meant to peak at Londo before taking a slight dip as a reward to the player. By that point you have mastered the systems of the game, have probably gotten a fully upgraded weapon and now on top of that, you can warp wherever. I thought that all 3 of the post Lordvessel areas did a good job.

As for combat, from a mechanical and from a balance point of view, Dark Souls absolutely blows Demons Souls away and Dark Souls 2 is not even in the discussion. The sheer depth to the combat of Dark Souls has really blown me away. The fact that there has not been a patch for so long and yet there are constantly new things and new playstyles being discovered is a testament to how great the combat is.

I am not going to even bother discussing Dark Souls 2. There are more than enough critiques out there that echo my opinion on the single player, and as for PvP, until Soul Memory is removed, there is no level playing field to compare the games on. More things are not viable, its just Soul Memory that screws everything up.
 

joest01

Senior Member
Apr 15, 2009
399
0
21
@Stroopwafel no Sif moment? Did you find the royal rat authority? Sif with help :) And the limping is even worse. Not that I asked for it. Hated it then. Hate it now.

@Valkrex SL doesn't matter? I haven't played in a while but they must have nerfed mundane big time.
 

Valkrex

Elder Dragon
Jan 6, 2013
303
0
0
joest01 said:
@Stroopwafel no Sif moment? Did you find the royal rat authority? Sif with help :) And the limping is even worse. Not that I asked for it. Hated it then. Hate it now.

@Valkrex SL doesn't matter? I haven't played in a while but they must have nerfed mundane big time.

I will admit that mundane is an infusion I have little experience with, but the only time I ever hear it mentioned is with the Sainter's Spear and Shadow Dagger. I'm just going off of my own experiences here but my fights in PVP tend to be fairly balanced in terms of how effective one player's build is against the other, and the outcome (barring uncontrollable elements like lag) tends to be based upon who makes the first mistake unless one person's build directly counters the other, and my main character is around SL 260. (also, holy hell it takes forever to level up at this point) If I'm fighting someone at 838 (or w/e the cap is can't remember off the top of my head) I honestly can't tell.
 

Riotguards

New member
Feb 1, 2013
219
0
0
I mean, there's 3 major cities (Undead Burg, Anor Londo, and New Londo) all within a 5 minute walk from each other, this doesn't exactly make the world seem expansive.
in defence of DK1 city placement Anor Londo is the city of the gods, its most likely that the majority of people living there would have been the gods with human servants

New Londo is the capital of humans which was destroyed not long after Gwyn left

Undead berg is most likely around a hundred years old (to put into perspective, Gwyn hollowed 1000 years ago), so its not illogical to have two ancient cities together and then another much newer city later on


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 problem with that statement is that the game suffers from not being interconnected but its trying to pull off demon souls hub but using dark souls 1 open world design, the game pretty much has you going through majula a minimal of 5 times (if you didn't go back for anything, etc)

now demon and dark souls both had it that you couldn't just warp back anywhere for no reason, the entire games were built around you having to navigate the map safely, demon souls had tons of short cuts because each map had a limited amount of bonfires / exits, which put you up against a boss, Dark souls had a lot more bonfires than demon souls and you only got teleportation once you had gotten past a good portion of the game plus beaten a boss duo, but it was also justified because unlike the nexus the open world was far too big to simply keep players running around for 10 minutes just to get to where they needed (especially when it was to fetch lord vessel souls

now Dark souls 2 tries to work both systems together, you have the accessibility of demon souls while the open world map of dark souls and none of the charm that made both work, with so many bonfires around that shortcuts were unnecessary and warping making level design result in a linier path, using both the dark and demon souls approach to bonfires results in a worse system than both provided, if they had used a minmal amount of bonfires while providing a lot more shortcuts (there's a lot of useless shortcuts like hunters corpse and that dragon zone which has you knock a ladder from above the bonefire), this type of design would have made the warping a welcome change to the game



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.
not true at all, for example looking from majula to the the lighthouse it shows it is way out to sea, going to that tower however makes you go through a tiny tunnel which somehow brings you to the top of one of the towers (when there's no indication of running up it)

from the lighthouse you have an option of two walkways followed by a Deus ex machina elevator, which takes you BELOW sea level which is somehow above sea level for the docks (also this cave is nowhere to be seen from majula)


another example being the walk to drangliec castle, you can quite clearly see that the castle is up a very tall mountain and very far away however going through a tiny tunnel takes you to the very top, how a tunnel manages to get you from below a mountain to the top within a matter of seconds is nothing short of crazy

just an example in a pic i took

http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198020247804/screenshot/585784102330467032


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.
well firstly the dark souls version while some are just normal mobs its actually really clever how they did those type of bosses, here we are fighting a huge demon and we're pretty much running for our lives, then we go to somewhere that houses a lot of them and we're like daaayum that guy was just a minion?, and then we proceed to slaughter all the demons, etc

it shows a sort of progression that makes you feel a lot stronger and that you've accomplished a lot since your days of struggling

now here's the problem with dark souls 2 bosses

The Pursuer
Looking Glass Knight
Flexile Sentry
Lost Sinner
Belfry Gargoyles (almost like ruins sentry, and clear copy)
Ruin Sentinels (almost like belfry, without flame breath)
Royal Rat Authority (Sif 2.0)
Old Dragonslayer (ornstein 2.0)
Smelter Demon (his phases are somewhat like velstadt)
Velstadt, The Royal Aegis (Garl Vinland 2.0)
Dragonrider(s)
Giant Lord
Throne Watcher and Throne Defender (BS duo)

all of these bosses have one thing in common, they're all heavy tankers who use 3 - 4 moves to attack you with, these attacks range from general attack, a gap closer and a large swing

out of those all the bosses in DK2 12 of them have adds for "difficulty" unlike dark souls 1 which had 6 bosses that had adds, now i don't mind adds in a boss fight, if the boss gets more interesting because they summon adds or anything then that's perfect, however after fighting 12 bosses that just summon adds for the hell of it (flexile sentry and lost sinner, wtf your useless) plus the many others it just gets too much and any enjoyment from the fight is lost


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
i agree with you that having a sequel should mean that your allowed to reuse some assets but lets be honest, when you bring back a good few of the weapons from the original, talk about how nostalgic it is and then follow it by saying "does nostalgia feel good? well here's some nostalgic boss fights!" only serves to show that instead of using interesting new plots the game is more willing to revert to use the nostalgia from dark souls in place of any real history, why do the lord souls have to come back to us

lets just see this from another side for a second, in the first game we the choosen undead use the lord souls to acess the kilm, from there what happens is assumed that the lord souls are scattered (well its obvious they weren't used up) and for thousands of generations these souls have been constantly been wrecking havok on the people of the past, the game is all about cycles so its little wonder that they wouldn't keep coming back so really it just points out that no matter what you will do, this will all happen again and again and again, thus what you do is of very little importance

overall the lore and story are very weak compared to dark souls
 

Matthew Jabour

New member
Jan 13, 2012
1,063
0
0
michael87cn said:
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.
Who needs all the gear in the game? Give me a fire sword and a greatshield and I'm set.

You seem to be blowing that one issue way out of proportion. Do you have any other complaints?
 

joest01

Senior Member
Apr 15, 2009
399
0
21
Valkrex said:
joest01 said:
@Stroopwafel no Sif moment? Did you find the royal rat authority? Sif with help :) And the limping is even worse. Not that I asked for it. Hated it then. Hate it now.

@Valkrex SL doesn't matter? I haven't played in a while but they must have nerfed mundane big time.

I will admit that mundane is an infusion I have little experience with, but the only time I ever hear it mentioned is with the Sainter's Spear and Shadow Dagger. I'm just going off of my own experiences here but my fights in PVP tend to be fairly balanced in terms of how effective one player's build is against the other, and the outcome (barring uncontrollable elements like lag) tends to be based upon who makes the first mistake unless one person's build directly counters the other, and my main character is around SL 260. (also, holy hell it takes forever to level up at this point) If I'm fighting someone at 838 (or w/e the cap is can't remember off the top of my head) I honestly can't tell.
I share your experience. But then I was wearing jesters armor so the mundane daggers couldn't really touch me. (low def though so there's a price for everything)

I think mundane builds tend to be a little higher than the range you mentioned originally. But even for them a full 838 is pretty much wasted. At the 270 you mentioned I think you're fine. I don't even know what my SL is tbh. Around 240? I am pretty sure I play in the highest SM range. But yea it's not that bad.

@Skin we must be playing different games. But then I quit Dark1 after 2 playthroughs. At that point I found the pvp gimmickey, I never even bothered joining any organized pvp. Got back into it with the DLC (in NG++, fun was had...) and tried the pvp again. Hey Arenas! But it had gotten worse. Homing magic and ninja flips everywhere. Maybe I missed out but if it looks like a duck ...
 

Weaver

Overcaffeinated
Apr 28, 2008
8,977
0
0
I guess for me I complain about DS2 because I loved DS1. DS2 is still probably my favourite game that released this year, I just had some major issues with some of the things they changed.
 

Augustine

New member
Jun 21, 2012
209
0
0
A solid, clear, and sound write-up.
Well put, Dirty.

DS2 is excellent title, it is not perfect as many like to point out, but neither are DS1 and Demon's.
And the first DLC for it makes me even more excited for the whole - it was superbly done.
 

II2

New member
Mar 13, 2010
1,492
0
0
I'm a pretty new souls player, only started a couple months back. Cleared DS1, truly loved it, despite a few grumbles at the PC port and slightly odd UI / menus. I dropped the dosh for DS2 and season pass, wanting more.

I feel like I got my money's worth, honestly. I didn't expect it to live up to DS, but I expected it to be good - and it is! Were it not for the comparison to it's predecessor, I'd say *great* in comparison to my typical gaming diet. It's not the wholistic TOTAL sorta experience DS1 offered, but for the lack of focus and refinement, I AM enjoying the extra quantity of things to explore and mechanics to play with.

On the bosses, very few are tragic, in the sequel. I think even if you're not really digging into the lore, the slightly more dignified characterization and presentation of the bosses in DS1 made them more memorable as entities, as opposed to mere obstacles. EG: Compare what you know of the backstory and in-game level design framing of the Ceaseless Discharge vs The Old Iron King, as giant lava bosses go. The Old Iron King is functional, but uninteresting. Ceaseless Discharge was a character and set piece.

Overall, your expectations of something tend to shape what you get out of it. DS2 has been great for me, but that's largely based on what I want out of it. Longtime souls fans with a legacy of comparison and understanding of high play meta mechanics probably have some legitimate frustrations I'm not attuned to.
 

Lovely Mixture

New member
Jul 12, 2011
1,474
0
0
Greg White said:
Bell Gargoyles: completely different fight aside from aesthetics and name
Except that it's taken from the 4 Kings "kill all these things until the health bar depletes"

Greg White said:
Mytha: Poison all over her arena(unless you burn down the windmill) that heals her, plus a pretty unique moveset.
Greg White said:
Lost Sinner: light mechanics and the red phantoms that join in for new game+
Both are things that you can alleviate before the fight begins. Also you're saying that adds are an interesting mechanic?


Greg White said:
Throne Watcher and Defender: ability to resurrect each other if you don't kill one quickly enough after the first goes down.
Feels more like a gimmick to extend the fight.


Greg White said:
I'd also add Nashandra because she can summon orbs that both curse and deal damage.
[/quote]

I don't see how this is any different from a regular attack

Greg White said:
Pursuer: Ability to make you a target for homing attacks if his thrust attack connects.
That would be good if he used more often.

Greg White said:
Looking Glass Knight: ability to summon other players to fight for him during the boss fight
Fine.
 

KoudelkaMorgan

New member
Jul 31, 2009
1,365
0
0
I've said it before, but I'll say it again. I hate bonfire aecetics, and the despawning of enemies + piss poor drop rates even with maximum item find. If I want to actually play the game for fun and take a few runs through an area, I get to choose between no enemies or eventually enemies that are no longer fun to fight. I choose between getting the item I want or going without because my allotment of attempts expired.

Could you imagine that shit in Demon's Souls? NG+++++++++++++++++ black phantom skeleton farming for pure bladestone?

Also, that getting prisoner tatters is dependant on RNG as well so you might not even get maximum item find without jacking up that bonfire a few times.

Soul Memory is idiotic, at least in the way its currently implemented.

They have already changed every spell in the game 3-4 times, so I no longer know what the fuck any of them do anymore damage-wise week to week.

I have to wonder at some of their "balance" choices. Do they sit around and discuss how much people like to use X, so it must be too much fun and therefore too powerful and needs to be destroyed like resonant weapon?

I don't even use hexes, but it makes me facepalm that dark weapon if now the superior buff and it costs no souls.

And their latest mistake, where they slash off 75% of the casts of some miracles and accidentally nerf instead of buff their damage.

I loved the DLC, and it has only reminded me of how terrible I found the main game's level design to be. Its funny that it is accessed through the pit/gutter/black gulch as that whole chain of areas is easily the worst in the series.

You can literally go from the Far Fire all the way to the 2nd bonfire of Black Gulch and not kill a single enemy besides a few illuminated corpses. I mean you COULD get by them but that would actually be more work. The whole run takes maybe 5 minutes, no torch required thanks to that scrapped lighting mechanic they heavily showcased before release. the only thing stopping you from going there first off is that it is gated behind a HP/gear check. Or getting Gilligan there.

I really didn't like the game at all aside from the pursuer and No Man's Wharf until I got to Drangleic Castle. From then on it got pretty good. Which is the opposite of how many view the previous game.

I'm not one of them, but I do despise the Four King's with a passion. People give DS2's boss design a lot of crap, but 4ks is the worst in the series. There is no strategy, no subtlety. You just spawn in utter blackness and immediately have to sprint right up to the boss and hit it as fast as possible. Repeat as needed. You want to not be hit by their rediculous purple homing orb? Good fucking luck because it tracks better than prepatch Amana soul arrows and explodes bigger than forbidden sun.

You want them to NOT spam their damn almost totally unavoidable grab attack? Well you had better not stand within 15 feet of them at any time, except you NEED to be up in their face to kill them before getting gang raped. The fact that more than 4 kings can end up being spawned is just the icing on this shit cake.

By comparison I actually LIKE the new gargoyle fight a lot. Not so much the dogs afterwards though.
 

auron200004

New member
Oct 12, 2010
90
0
0
Okay...Dark Souls is one of my favorite games. I've beaten Demon's Souls, Dark Souls, and now Dark Souls II. The reason I prefer Dark Souls to Demon's is one that I'm not entirely sure of (but I bet a lot of it has to be chalked up to that I played DkS first).

Here's the thing: I LIKE DkSII. I really liked DeS. I loved DkS. So now that my biases and overall POV are out of the way...a hear we go (imagine Mario saying that -- I like it when Mario says that).

Dark Souls had its problems. NOTE: I don't care about PvP. Like...at all. I understand people's enjoyment of it, but I couldn't give one rat's testicle as to whether that's improved or not. Problems with Dark Souls include but not limited to: lightning weapons being broken compared to other elements (more or less fixed due to scaling in DkSII), certain bosses being cheap as shit (Capra Demon, Four Kings, O&S to a certain extent), Blight Town design and FPS, etc.

The thing that makes me love Dark Souls is by far and beyond the interconnected, convoluted level design. I adore it. The first time I stepped out of Quelaag's ashy fight area, rang the bell, and walked a bit further and saw the Demon Ruins cemented my love for that game. The sheer scale of areas that exist more or less in a consistent way with each other was simply phenomenal. When I realized that I could see the Ash Lake from the path that lead to Nito, I almost goddamn lost it with happiness.

In comparison, Demon's Souls has a main hub with portals to five areas throughout the kingdom of Boletaria. However, it still earns points in the "interconnected" category for me because within those five areas, they are interconnected as shit. Tons of shortcuts, and you can generally feel a level of consistency as you progress through each area.

Compare that to DkSII. A windmill surrounded by poisonous landscape is BELOW (somehow) an active volcano that a keep ostensibly SUNK into. Makes no sense. I'm not entirely sure how the Shrine of Amana works in relation to Drangleic Castle (although, at least you're DESCENDING there).

After that point, the second thing I loved about DkS was the build-your-own lore. There's a more or less established head canon in DkS now, but at the time, it was largely left up to interpretation. Don't get me wrong, there are certain things I really enjoy about DkSII lore (Vendrick and Nashandra, Nashandra's origin, Tseldora's back story, Lucatiel). I just don't...get it. I understand that they are trying to maintain connections to the previous game. I get that. But there are so many unanswered questions that CANNOT be answered. In many cases, it's not a left-up-to-interpretation thing. Unless the DLC confirms some theories, we have NO real way of even figuring out what Vendrick stole from the Giants, where the Giants came from, what the Giants even ARE, and many other things. It would be one thing if those were minor points in the story (there's never been any sort of common consensus on exactly what Pinwheel was, for example -- but there's at least CLUES), but those are HUGE story points. Hell, most of the areas lack any sort of flavor that would allow anybody to develop theories (leading back to the level design point, of course).

Also, most of the bosses -- even forgetting the fact that only a few of them are interesting -- lack any sort of back story or hinted back story whatsoever. The only areas where I had a general idea of what the bosses were in any sort of meaningful way were Tseldora, the Old Iron King's domain (including Harvest Valley, Huntsman's Copse, and Earthen Peak, naturally), and Amana. This might just be chalked up to personal opinion, but still. I loved the design (back story and fight) of the Demon of Song, though.

I don't know, I'm getting kind of ranty. I enjoyed DkSII. I enjoyed it a lot, actually. But there were so many of those niggling "this isn't quite what I expected from a Souls game" issues that I can't say that I loved the game. Only liked it.

TL;DR: Dark Souls II is a'ight. Big problems for me with level design and lore, though.
 

Frozengale

New member
Sep 9, 2009
761
0
0
Dirty Hipsters said:
1. The world design:
Really I think both ways work great. I loved the feeling of intricacy that you get from the world of Dark Souls 1. In so many games you'll often see a distant feature and think, "I want to explore that." but aren't given the chance. In Dark Souls you actually do get that chance and it's often terrifying and wonderful. But you're right that it does make it feel small. It's intricate, but small, and I love it.

But there is nothing wrong with the other design philosophy of having areas less connected and much unique. In Dark Souls things kind of blend together to a point. But in Dark Souls 2 there is a much sharper contrast from one area to the next.

Both are fine ways to design worlds, both with pros and cons. The way Dark Souls did things just tends to be more rare so it feels a bit more special I guess.

2. The bosses:
There are good and bad Boss Fights in ALL the Souls games. In all honesty I think Dark Souls lost some of the more interesting boss fights from Demons Souls. I mean come on, it's hard to top the Storm King when it comes to creative and fun boss fights. You use a giant freaking wind sword to take down a whole swarm of flying Manta Rays. Dark Souls had some incredibly HORRENDOUS boss fights. The Bed of Chaos and Ceaseless Discharge are both horrible for different reasons. The Four Kings gave me all kinds of headaches, and Gwyn is a complete pushover and an uninspired battle. I mean compare Gwyn to the final boss of Dark Souls 2 Nashandra. I would rather fight Nashandra any day, she is just so interesting compared to Gwyn. Dark Souls 2 also has awesome battles like The Rotten, Darklurker, Executioner's Chariot, and Royal Rat Vanguard. Not to say some of the boss battles are a tad boring. I though Looking Glass Knight was subpar. But each Souls game has some truly fantastic bosses and then some horrible duds.

3. The Lore:
Wait, people complain about this? I thought it was fine. I thought it was great in fact. Even including such things as DLC lore from the first game as plot points for the Second game. They really build up the world, expand on it, and tie it in together in fun and interesting ways. No one should be complaining about the Lore.
 

SmallHatLogan

New member
Jan 23, 2014
613
0
0
I'm not a fan of soul memory and enemies dying for good (eventually) but apart from that I really enjoy the game. I don't deny that the geography often makes no sense whatsoever but it doesn't really bother me.

I do have a hard time taking the hatred of Dark Souls II seriously when people are just repeating the exact same things Demon's Souls fans were saying (and some still say) when Dark Souls came out.
 

joest01

Senior Member
Apr 15, 2009
399
0
21
Lovely Mixture said:
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.

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?

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

...

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

loa

New member
Jan 28, 2012
1,716
0
0
Dark souls 1 had atmosphere and interesting boss designs.
You may play it for the lore and whatnot, I played it for the incredible variety of well designed locations.
They really knew how to use color there.
They really knew how to design the most bizarre enemies.
They really knew how to introduce a boss.

Dark souls 2 commits the greatest sin of entertainment and bores you with samey bosses and samey locations.
On top of all that, Ill just say "bearer of the curse. Seek souls, larger souls".
They really shit the bed with those tons over tons of mandatory dialogue lines.
I never spent much time to listen to someones story in dark souls 1, it was a bonus but never mandatory.

Dark souls 2 sits you down and force feeds you that shit because who needs subtlety and passive storytelling in a souls game, right?
Speaking of which, what is it with that pulsating bleeding from the eye thing during boss introductions?
Did we really need that little extra clue that "ohnoes, dis is sum dangerous stuff there!!!11" because dark souls 1 was just too subtle about it?
Like, you wanna put big, blinking red letters going "DANGER!!" before a boss or something?

And that's what dark souls 2 does constantly, it waves in front of your face going "HEY, DO YOU GET IT YET? DO YOU GET IT?".
On top of all that, farming got a LOT more focus in dark souls 2 with a metric crapton of equipment being locked behind limited rng drops.
Fuck. That.

Dirty Hipsters said:
I liked what Dark Souls 1 did with the level design, and I found it very impressive from a technical point of view in how much planning must have gone into fitting the world together like a puzzle, but from a gameplay point of view I preferred traveling the world of Dark Souls 2, because my journey seemed larger, like a real epic fantasy quest.
How is this a good thing?
Were you really playing dark souls 1 to have an "epic fantasy quest"?
It's blindingly clear from the very start that this game is not about that.
You're nothing special, you're just some asshole with a halberd and your "quest" is that you're bored and wander around to see what happens if you ring those 2 bells.

Everything more than that is you roleplaying.
That's why it worked.