In which I ramble for a bit about Dark Souls 2....

[Dalisclock]

So because I have a weird affinity for games that enjoy watching me suffer, over the past month or so I've been been cutting a bloody swath through the kingdom of Lor...Dranl...ritc...one of those, anyway. And in appreciation for the fact I've murdered pretty much everyone who meant anything in that land, I am apparently now the King....of a land full of dead and slowly hollowing people who do not recognize my rule or even seem to remember there is a king. So hooray for victory.

Okay, seriously. After some hesitation, I went through and finished DS2, including the DLC areas(SOTFS edition). Got the crowns, killed like 90% of the bosses and told the throne to go fuck itself, because I "inherited the flame" in the last game and one immolation is enough. So I'm gonna throw out my general thoughts in no particular order:

I was happy to know most of the things I worried about I didn't really notice. Weapons degradation wasn't really an issue for me and I don't think I once used a repair powder. I broke my weapons a few times, though those usually accompanied me using a weapon attack that degraded a weapon super fast. That and a toxic dragon who corrodes swords. That guy is a dick. I was worried about human effigies being a finite resource....and then got to the end of the game and had like 50 of the things left(and I summoned for quite a few boss fights). And honestly, I was kinda happy for the mob despawning after 12 or so deaths, because I swear that's the only way I kept my sanity in some areas(looking at you, Iron Keep).

OTOH, I really disliked the hollowing mechanic and was so fucking glad when I found the ring of binding to limit hollowing, which felt like it immediately made the game less frustrating. Also, I don't particularly like the whole "Now you can be invaded anytime" thing, and in some areas, you'll be invaded no matter what. And just to show how much FROM loves the invasion concept, they had NPC invaders, in nearly every single zone. Yeah, I really missed DS1 when I could just stay hollow to avoid that shit.

My general feeling is that this game is pretty much "Dark Souls: Now with 20% More". More areas, more weapons, more bosses, more invasions, more DLC, more everything. Except only some of that is actually interesting.

Let's start with the world. Drangleic is very pretty, Dranlegic is quite varied. Dranlegic sometimes feels like a bunch of areas only loosely connected together without any real thought for how they fit together or why. Distances don't make sense half the time, geography doesn't flow very well, and a elevator on a windmill takes you up to a lava castle. A lava castle that feels like the bastard child of Anor Londo, Lost Izalith and Bowsers castle from Super Mario Bros, where you fight a giant lava boss at the end. Why? Because fuck you, that's why.

What makes it even weirder is that the creators seem to be trying to imply that Dranlegic roughly on the same spot as Lordran was, which thematically fits but nothing really maps to that either. The closest spots that actually kind of work are the Heide Ruins(maybe a colony of Anor Londo?), the Brightstone cover(Which seems like a dead ringer for the crystal cave) and the Throne of Want(which seems like it's supposed to be the Kiln of the First Flame), which apparently means that the Castle is where Firelink Shrine used to be...I guess. Perhaps time and space are convoluted in Dranlegic?

I don't know, it just feels so disconnected. I can't help but feel perhaps some of the ruins aren't even contemporary with Vendrick at all but earlier civilizations that stood on the same area. I almost think this is supposed to extend to the DLC areas, which are generally much better laid but feel even more disconnected from the main kingdom. It doesn't help so many of the descriptions go something like "The origins of this are lost to time" making pinning any kind of timeline almost maddening.

Yeah, I'm into the Lore. So DS2 feels really scattershot on this feel, sometimes working beautifully and sometimes it's just kinda there....off to the side. There's a general sense there were a lot of cool ideas that were never really given the execution they wanted them to have, or they just couldn't figure out how to make them fit. For example, The Melfinito(or the finito) seems like an interesting idea that just isn't really developed as much as it could have been. You're introduced to it in the Shrine of Amana, you see a little more of it int he Undead Crypt and that's pretty much it.

The general story is interesting, once you get to the castle and actually hit the meat of the plot, and a few of the side stories are nicely done. Lucatiel's story is just heartbreaking, though Vendrick has a bit of Pathos to him as well. A lot of the other characters aren't nearly as memorable, and the individuals areas are hit and miss(The old Iron King stuff, including Brume tower, is generally interesting, especially the downfall of the Fume knight).

However, lore and world aside, a lot of the game feels like the Creators were trying to make MORE without really making it better, because they apparently didn't understand why people liked the first game(and demons, for those who played demons). Yes, people like the boss fights. So now there are MORE boss fights, with a good number of them being 2 or 3 dudes fighting you at a time and others really being uninspired(The Dragonrider) or a copy-paste job(How about TWO Dragonriders?). The Smelter Demon was an interesting fight, but having a blue version of him in the DLC just feels lazy. As does the boss fight which is literally you versus a bunch of respawning rats in a small room, because apparently ripping off the SIF battle again would look too conspicuous if they did it did it a second time.

Honestly, I'm glad a fair number of bosses and areas are optional. I'm glad Summons were available for a lot of the boss fights, but I can't help but feel that the summons were a crutch for not balancing the fights the right way in the first place.

At least the bonfires were better placed for the most part, though sometimes this was to cover up the fact the level design left sometime to be desired and a lack of unlockable shortcuts built in. At least the DLC remembered unlockable Shortcuts

However, I will give props to the Ivory King Fight, the Velstadt fight(even if that guy is hard as balls), the Looking Glass Knight, and a few of the more interesting ideas. The chariot is a cool idea, though there's almost no reason to actually go in there and fight him, and just getting to him is such a pain it's debatable whether or not it's even worth it.

So it was an interesting journey. I enjoyed a good deal of it(I did invest 80 hours into it with the main game and DLC together), but there were quite a few bits where it felt like FROM just didn't quite know what they were doing. DS had problems but was much tighter and better put together and still stands as the better game. So I think I'm done with DS2. I have 3 more games in the series and I somehow suspect DS2 is gonna be at the bottom of the rankings when I've beaten them all.

 

[Saelune]

That reminds me, I need to check if Dan from Extra Credits did his lore retrospective for DS2...

*checks*

He did, YAY!. Be back in an hour.

 

[Dalisclock]

I'm still interested in playing it, even if only for the oft-discussed (loathed...?) contrasts if nothing else. And I've read combat has an arguably improved feel to it...although that was before 3 and Bloodborne, which has spoilt me a bit.

Have you tried the latter yet? In a way it feels like Lite Souls, or leaner, meaner Souls, with more engaging combat and a return to that wonderful level design of the original. I'm nearly half way through at this point and can say that the most refreshing aspect is how little filler material there really is in the game. For example, all the weapons feel incredibly unique and viable, along with a majority of items.

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

In DS2 there's a solid game with a huge direction disconnect from he first, mainly because the series' director, Miyazaki, left off the direction role to concentrate on Bloodborne (and you can see the difference in games). Still a good entry but the overall level design is very jarring when going from place to place... just feels weird/makes little-to-no-sense the further you get in the game.

 

[Sniper Team 4]

Yeah, the world is very...disjointed. For me, I tend to think of it all as not Drangliec. Drangliec is only Majula (I'm butchering these names because I'm lazy), Aldia's Keep, the castle obviously, and the fort. Everything else, you're in different kingdoms. How did all these kingdoms come to be right next to each other and such? Um...well, either reality is bent around in this place--I mean, the game starts with you jumping into a swirling black pit, so it's possible--or you go with the idea that kingdoms have literally risen and fallen on the same spot, and your just finding places that Drangliec didn't have a chance to convert yet.

I actually enjoy the story and lore in Dark Souls II a lot, mainly because it's not all there so it allows me to think up my own connections. For example, I like to believe that The Lost Sinner is the person who stole The Iron King's heart. Why else do both areas have the belfries in them? So little things like that, plus the sense of mystery around the entire world, really makes it a draw for me.
But you're right. Parts of the lore do feel like they are actually just missing instead of it being vague and up to you.

But for some crazy reason, despite all its flaws and its shortcomings when compared to pretty much every other game in the series, II remains my favorite. I cannot explain it, but it is the one that I have gone back to time and time again, while after I got the platinum trophies for all the others, I haven't touched them except for DLC releases.

 

[stroopwafel]

In DS2 there's a solid game with a huge direction disconnect from he first, mainly because the series' director, Miyazaki, left off the direction role to concentrate on Bloodborne (and you can see the difference in games). Still a good entry but the overall level design is very jarring when going from place to place... just feels weird/makes little-to-no-sense the further you get in the game.

Yeah, in the Dark Souls 2 design works interview that disconnect in level design is explained as a change in director halfway through development. The original director(forgot his name..Shibuya or something) was replaced by Yui Tanimura(who also co-directed DkS 3 with the maestro himself: Miyazaki) b/c whatever game he was directing didn't resemble Dark Souls. Tanimura basically repurposed all those designs and assets to better fit the Dark Souls theme and aesthetic while in the nick of time also tying this together with his own vision of the game. That Dark Souls 2 is even released and not cancelled altogether is probably a miracle in itself.

I quite enjoyed Dark Souls 2 but compared directly to other games in the series it's definitely the weakest. I will give a pass to lacklustre level design due to all these development problems but the combat also feels more floaty with poorer animation quality(why they just didn't stick with the DkS1 engine is beyond me), a generally lacking atmosphere and an often atrocious texture quality in which cut & paste assets are plastered in the game's environments lacking any of the detail of the other games in the series(just try to count the amount square boxes for rooms). The production values just seem way lower compared to the previous game despite this being the newer sequel. However what Dark Souls 2 lacks in quality it compensates with sheer volume of content. The game lacks the deliberate and focused vision of the other games making it less memorable as a result but it tries to make up for this by being the most content rich of the bunch(which apparently struck a cord by those enamored with the pvp of the game).

Ultimately though these games are so well made that even a 'bad' Souls game is still better than most other games. I played them all when they were originally released but my favorites are definitely Dark Souls 3 and Bloodborne. Both these games just feel like the victory lap of the formula they established with Demon's Souls in 2009.

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

In DS2 there's a solid game with a huge direction disconnect from he first, mainly because the series' director, Miyazaki, left off the direction role to concentrate on Bloodborne (and you can see the difference in games). Still a good entry but the overall level design is very jarring when going from place to place... just feels weird/makes little-to-no-sense the further you get in the game.

Yeah, in the Dark Souls 2 design works interview that disconnect in level design is explained as a change in director halfway through development. The original director(forgot his name..Shibuya or something) was replaced by Yui Tanimura(who also co-directed DkS 3 with the maestro himself: Miyazaki) b/c whatever game he was directing didn't resemble Dark Souls. Tanimura basically repurposed all those designs and assets to better fit the Dark Souls theme and aesthetic while in the nick of time also tying this together with his own vision of the game. That Dark Souls 2 is even released and not cancelled altogether is probably a miracle in itself.

I quite enjoyed Dark Souls 2 but compared directly to other games in the series it's definitely the weakest. I will give a pass to lacklustre level design due to all these development problems but the combat also feels more floaty with poorer animation quality(why they just didn't stick with the DkS1 engine is beyond me), a generally lacking atmosphere and an often atrocious texture quality in which cut & paste assets are plastered in the game's environments lacking any of the detail of the other games in the series(just try to count the amount square boxes for rooms). The production values just seem way lower compared to the previous game despite this being the newer sequel. However what Dark Souls 2 lacks in quality it compensates with sheer volume of content. The game lacks the deliberate and focused vision of the other games making it less memorable as a result but it tries to make up for this by being the most content rich of the bunch(which apparently struck a cord by those enamored with the pvp of the game).

Ultimately though these games are so well made that even a 'bad' Souls game is still better than most other games. I played them all when they were originally released but my favorites are definitely Dark Souls 3 and Bloodborne. Both these games just feel like the victory lap of the formula they established with Demon's Souls in 2009.

Judging Scholar of the First Sin vs. the original release, I've got to say SOTFS is much better overall and far more representative of the Dark Souls standard, personally. The original DS2 release was jarring enough that I played maybe a few hours of it and walked away wishing for something better, and going back to Demon's Souls (still tied with Dark Souls as my favorite of the series).

 

[The Wykydtron]

Yeah DS2 isn't a bad game but it's definitely the worst Souls game by miles. Honestly the B Team missed the mark without Miyazaki leading the team and they missed the point of the boss fights sometimes. To steal blatantly from one much more eloquent critic than myself, it's pretty obvious that the devs were thinking "how can we make this fight hard" instead of "how can we make this fight interesting."

The very fact that Royal Rat Authority is in the game testifies to this. FUCK that boss. Also they focused on spamming out throwaway bosses just for the sake of it at the detriment of quality. Looking at you Prowling Magus, you walk into some random ass room in a house and there's a boss fight? Hello? Can I help you? Are you lost? Oh I guess i'll just chop you to shit with no effort and carry on. I kinda feel bad now...

Think the OP got it right too, "more" is DS2 in spades. Just things everywhere, who cares if they fit together well. Hey remember that genderswapping coffin at the very start of the game behind the one cyclops? What? I'm not even mad i'm just confused...

 

[Dalisclock]

I'm still interested in playing it, even if only for the oft-discussed (loathed...?) contrasts if nothing else. And I've read combat has an arguably improved feel to it...although that was before 3 and Bloodborne, which has spoilt me a bit.

Have you tried the latter yet? In a way it feels like Lite Souls, or leaner, meaner Souls, with more engaging combat and a return to that wonderful level design of the original. I'm nearly half way through at this point and can say that the most refreshing aspect is how little filler material there really is in the game. For example, all the weapons feel incredibly unique and viable, along with a majority of items.

Despite my rambling and griping, DS2 isn't terrible. I probably wouldn't have gone for 80 hours in a game I didn't like, but apparently there are people who do. It has a lot of weird design decisions but is pretty solid. It's just not DS1. Even from a lore standpoint, from what I've read about DS3, it seemed they did build off some of the ideas introduced in DS2(Such as linking the fire being a duty of the king, should the flame start to fade, as well as more exploration of the undead curse itself and attempts to cure it).

As for the combat it does seem a bit faster and more varied, though I was able to stick with a few weapons and general tactics for like 90% of the game. It does seem like DS2 wants you to roll and dodge a bit more, whereas 1 felt like you could block most things in the game with a good shield. And then there's enemies/bosses that just feel cheap(including the myriad of red phantom NPC invaders who show up EVERYWHERE).

I just picked up a PS4 and Bloodborne, and that's the next Souls game on the list. And as much as I want to play it, it'll probably be a month or so before I finally get around to playing it because I'm kind of done with the Souls gameplay for the moment. By the end of my 80 hours, I was pretty much just wanting to get it over with and that's always a sign I'm just ready to move onto something else.

Maybe I'll actually get around to playing the Last of Us so I can stop avoiding spoilers.

 

[Dalisclock]

In DS2 there's a solid game with a huge direction disconnect from he first, mainly because the series' director, Miyazaki, left off the direction role to concentrate on Bloodborne (and you can see the difference in games). Still a good entry but the overall level design is very jarring when going from place to place... just feels weird/makes little-to-no-sense the further you get in the game.

Yeah, in the Dark Souls 2 design works interview that disconnect in level design is explained as a change in director halfway through development. The original director(forgot his name..Shibuya or something) was replaced by Yui Tanimura(who also co-directed DkS 3 with the maestro himself: Miyazaki) b/c whatever game he was directing didn't resemble Dark Souls. Tanimura basically repurposed all those designs and assets to better fit the Dark Souls theme and aesthetic while in the nick of time also tying this together with his own vision of the game. That Dark Souls 2 is even released and not cancelled altogether is probably a miracle in itself.

Yeah, I've read of the troubled development cycle. Apparently the levels were supposed to link together a lot more then they eventually ended up being, and I can only imagine there were transitional areas that got cut. Even the original pre-rendered Trailer and parts of the Intro movie hint at things that were a bit different in the game. Dranlegic castle(or maybe that was the whole Kingdom) looks a bit different then it ended up being in game. And you're right, the fact Dark Souls 2 is as solid as it is, despite it's myriad flaws, considering the game had to be rebuilt around the halfway point is likely nothing short of amazing.

 

[bartholen_v1legacy]

The vagueness of Dark Souls 2's lore is both a strength and a weakness, oddly enough. It's a weakness in the sense that it feels nonsensical: vague references to DS1 loosely thrown together without much thought, structure or consideration. As Pat from SPBF pointed out, it at times reads like fan fiction: "Countless kingdoms have risen and fallen on this very spot"... but apparently only Lordran matters at all. There's visual references in the environments, like the rock spires at the end of Aldia's Keep being rather reminiscient of Ash Lake's gargantuan trees, Brighstone Cove vs Crystal Cave, or the similarities to Anor Londo in multiple places, but they simply don't make sense if you try to think they actually are those places. I know time's supposed to be falling apart and yada yada, but that kind of geographical change takes hundreds of millions of years, which is just silly, even in Dark Souls' setting. The war with the Giants, despite it being a central background story element, is left essentially blank as to what it was exactly about. It's like Lost: mystery piled on mystery with hints of some great revelation that never comes.

But, the vagueness becomes a strength when you realize how much the player can fill in the blanks for themselves. For example, I took to thinking that the "Drangleic is Lordran" thing is actually complete bollocks, nonsensical ramblings of a mind long gone. Remember: most characters in this setting who even make that reference have either gone mad or operate on alien logic (like the Ancient Dragon and Aldia). We never see the First Flame, only an empty cavern. None of the characters from DS1 make even a cameo appearance. This all supports my theory (or justification for shitty lore) that Drangleic is like Balder from DS1: an entirely different kingdom that fell to the undead curse. Remember how the main theme of the DLC is the "daughters" of Manus finding kings to gain power through marriage and how they all went to different kingdoms? Why shouldn't Drangleic be like that? Maybe the whole struggle to be king is just an inane, pointless cycle that only exists to perpetuate itself, not for anything meaningful.

But DSII certainly has shortcomings that can't be excused. The environments and world design are the worst offenders. The former is mostly just blank, empty, boxy corridors followed by blank, empty, hose-linear caverns or mountain passes with zero environmental storytelling or feeling of place. The latter is completely nonsensical, and downright disastrous in comparison to DS1. Majula is the only place with any sense of connectivity, since you can see Drangleic Castle, Forest of Fallen Giants and Heide's Tower from it. The rest are completely isolated from one another. There's zero sense of scale, distance or connection. You see something in the distance, you walk through some cave or corridor and poof, you're there! The Catacombs drop in Ds1 is perhaps the best way to highlight this issue: If you know how to make two very, very precise drops, you can skip about 95% of one of the hardest (for new players) areas in the game, and DSII has nothing even remotely like that. What's worse, some of the zones you can literally just run through without being forced to fight even a single enemy without even having to know some special route. Shaded Ruins and Doors of Pharros are the worst offenders in this regard. Then there's of course the rest, like lazy boss fights, fucking impossible parrying, endless hordes of "dude in armor" enemies, linearity, the forgettable music etc.

But I still hold DS2's gameplay as the most refined and balanced in the series. Many bemoaned the use of mobs of enemies in combat, but I never found that an issue to the point of frustration. If anything, it knocks magic down a peg, since you can no longer just snipe enemies from outside their aggro range. The easier to gain levels and the ability to respec make it easier to try different builds. Powerstancing is just plain awesome. Being able to fire bows and crossbows on the move was desperately needed. Upping the cap of fat rolling while adding more ring slots make heavy builds more viable. Putting bonfires right next to boss fights goes a long way to alleviate the frustration of losing 20 times to the same boss. And the amount of different weapons and armours is simply staggering, making DSII the best game for Fashion Souls. It's for these reasons that DSII is still my most played game in the series.

 

[Dalisclock]

That reminds me, I need to check if Dan from Extra Credits did his lore retrospective for DS2...

*checks*

He did, YAY!. Be back in an hour.

Do you follow VidyaVaati by chance? Dan's take was good, but Vidya tends to go into a lot more detail.

 

[Saelune]

That reminds me, I need to check if Dan from Extra Credits did his lore retrospective for DS2...

*checks*

He did, YAY!. Be back in an hour.

Do you follow VidyaVaati by chance? Dan's take was good, but Vidya tends to go into a lot more detail.

I didnt watch Vaati play DS2 blind over the course of many months. I have watched his videos though on stuff. But I feel he doesnt have as much on DS2 as he did on 1.

I just wanted to personally hear Dan's take on things. Unfortunately the actual video was a let down since he spent half of it summarizing his LP series' events, and regurgitating information he got from others rather than giving his own take on things so much.

 

[Dalisclock]

That reminds me, I need to check if Dan from Extra Credits did his lore retrospective for DS2...

*checks*

He did, YAY!. Be back in an hour.

Do you follow VidyaVaati by chance? Dan's take was good, but Vidya tends to go into a lot more detail.

I didnt watch Vaati play DS2 blind over the course of many months. I have watched his videos though on stuff. But I feel he doesnt have as much on DS2 as he did on 1.

I just wanted to personally hear Dan's take on things. Unfortunately the actual video was a let down since he spent half of it summarizing his LP series' events, and regurgitating information he got from others rather than giving his own take on things so much.

I've only been able to sit through one DS LP and that's PlagueOfGripes, despite the OMG length of it. With Vaati I've pretty much stuck to the lore videos, but you're right, he didn't do much for DS2 and most of what he did do was DLC stuff(granted, I can see why). It looks like he started a series talking about each area and then abandoned it after like 4 episodes. Maybe Bloodborne came out or something?

Oh well.

 

[Saelune]

That reminds me, I need to check if Dan from Extra Credits did his lore retrospective for DS2...

*checks*

He did, YAY!. Be back in an hour.

Do you follow VidyaVaati by chance? Dan's take was good, but Vidya tends to go into a lot more detail.

I didnt watch Vaati play DS2 blind over the course of many months. I have watched his videos though on stuff. But I feel he doesnt have as much on DS2 as he did on 1.

I just wanted to personally hear Dan's take on things. Unfortunately the actual video was a let down since he spent half of it summarizing his LP series' events, and regurgitating information he got from others rather than giving his own take on things so much.

I've only been able to sit through one DS LP and that's PlagueOfGripes, despite the OMG length of it. With Vaati I've pretty much stuck to the lore videos, but you're right, he didn't do much for DS2 and most of what he did do was DLC stuff(granted, I can see why). It looks like he started a series talking about each area and then abandoned it after like 4 episodes. Maybe Bloodborne came out or something?

Oh well.

Dan was good cause it was blind, and he was inquisitive, humble, and likable. Plus when he started DS1, he did it with James and was very game design focused which was interesting, and by the time he stopped being in it, I was hooked enough. But alot of us want James to come back, atleast for some of it. It is interesting to get a more analytical viewpoint on how the game even works, let alone just lore.

 

[Dalisclock]

Yeah DS2 isn't a bad game but it's definitely the worst Souls game by miles. Honestly the B Team missed the mark without Miyazaki leading the team and they missed the point of the boss fights sometimes. To steal blatantly from one much more eloquent critic than myself, it's pretty obvious that the devs were thinking "how can we make this fight hard" instead of "how can we make this fight interesting."

The very fact that Royal Rat Authority is in the game testifies to this. FUCK that boss. Also they focused on spamming out throwaway bosses just for the sake of it at the detriment of quality. Looking at you Prowling Magus, you walk into some random ass room in a house and there's a boss fight? Hello? Can I help you? Are you lost? Oh I guess i'll just chop you to shit with no effort and carry on. I kinda feel bad now...

Think the OP got it right too, "more" is DS2 in spades. Just things everywhere, who cares if they fit together well. Hey remember that genderswapping coffin at the very start of the game behind the one cyclops? What? I'm not even mad i'm just confused...

Reading this alone is enough to make a Souls fan wonder how anyone could prefer DS2 over any of the others. It's like a blatant disregard for attention to detail and congruity that the other games have had. It also goes to show that not just anyone can handle directing a series like this.

 

[Dalisclock]

I'm still interested in playing it, even if only for the oft-discussed (loathed...?) contrasts if nothing else. And I've read combat has an arguably improved feel to it...although that was before 3 and Bloodborne, which has spoilt me a bit.

Have you tried the latter yet? In a way it feels like Lite Souls, or leaner, meaner Souls, with more engaging combat and a return to that wonderful level design of the original. I'm nearly half way through at this point and can say that the most refreshing aspect is how little filler material there really is in the game. For example, all the weapons feel incredibly unique and viable, along with a majority of items.

Despite my rambling and griping, DS2 isn't terrible. I probably wouldn't have gone for 80 hours in a game I didn't like, but apparently there are people who do. It has a lot of weird design decisions but is pretty solid. It's just not DS1. Even from a lore standpoint, from what I've read about DS3, it seemed they did build off some of the ideas introduced in DS2(Such as linking the fire being a duty of the king, should the flame start to fade, as well as more exploration of the undead curse itself and attempts to cure it).

As for the combat it does seem a bit faster and more varied, though I was able to stick with a few weapons and general tactics for like 90% of the game. It does seem like DS2 wants you to roll and dodge a bit more, whereas 1 felt like you could block most things in the game with a good shield. And then there's enemies/bosses that just feel cheap(including the myriad of red phantom NPC invaders who show up EVERYWHERE).

I just picked up a PS4 and Bloodborne, and that's the next Souls game on the list. And as much as I want to play it, it'll probably be a month or so before I finally get around to playing it because I'm kind of done with the Souls gameplay for the moment. By the end of my 80 hours, I was pretty much just wanting to get it over with and that's always a sign I'm just ready to move onto something else.

Maybe I'll actually get around to playing the Last of Us so I can stop avoiding spoilers.

Good idea, and yeah I did the same. Went to finish trophies in GoW: CoO after Demon's Souls (damn you, Pure Bladestone!! *shakes fist*) and it was a refreshing contrast. Only months before I was sick of the GoW formula. Funny how that works.

 

[Souplex]

Dark Souls: II's blatant hatred of shield players made me dislike it from the get-go. It still had that delicious Souls combat, but everything was a little off.
Plus they did nothing to stop LagStabbing in PvP. If anything it's worse because now there's lag-swatting (As in swatting a shield not calling in S.W.A.T. against a player you don't like) too.

 

[Saelune]

Dark Souls: II's blatant hatred of shield players made me dislike it from the get-go. It still had that delicious Souls combat, but everything was a little off.
Plus they did nothing to stop LagStabbing in PvP. If anything it's worse because now there's lag-swatting (As in swatting a shield not calling in S.W.A.T. against a player you don't like) too.

I love my shield in Dark Souls. Got a 100% physical defense shield ASAP.

Was really annoying though when I felt like I should have had enough time to throw my shield up but got stun-locked anyways.

 

[Dalisclock]

Dark Souls: II's blatant hatred of shield players made me dislike it from the get-go. It still had that delicious Souls combat, but everything was a little off.
Plus they did nothing to stop LagStabbing in PvP. If anything it's worse because now there's lag-swatting (As in swatting a shield not calling in S.W.A.T. against a player you don't like) too.

I know that apparently DS2 is apparently the go to for PVPers. I stumbled across a reedit threat from around release time mostly griping about how DS3 RUINED PVP FOREVER. Maybe opinions have changed somewhat since then.