-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Not so hot take: Dark Souls 2 is not a good video game
- Thread starter UF_C
- Start date
I don't think I can agree with you, not with that blanket statement "not good game". Sure, I can't disagree with the issues and the annoyances you mentioned in the OP, but DS2 has a lot of good parts that more than make up for the bad parts: The great Souls combat is still there, it has more build variety than DS1, better covenants than DS1...
https://www.nexusmods.com/darksouls2/mods/76/?
If you're playing Scholar of the First Sin, read the description and download the 64-bit version.
I agree with most of what you're saying: It's the worst of the soulsborne games, but ... it's still a soulsborne game, so it's still pretty good. I ended up beating it multiple times.
I think my biggest beef with it, which you didn't mention, is that you can only kill the common monsters a limited number of times before they disappear forever. Such a strange decision, and so different from all the other From games.
EDIT: You did mention it.
That and the slightly wonky level design.
I think my biggest beef with it, which you didn't mention, is that you can only kill the common monsters a limited number of times before they disappear forever. Such a strange decision, and so different from all the other From games.
EDIT: You did mention it.
That and the slightly wonky level design.
Life gems heal you gradually, yes. But there are different types of life gems with differing rates/amounts of health regen.
Enemy respawn limit was put there to make the path to retry bosses easier, as well as letting the player realize that grinding is not the real solution but to familiarize with the game's combat mechanics.
There's a lot more in your post that seems like a rushed judgement of the game. Of course Scholars of The First Sin edition has many problems.
Game may not be the best Souls, hell it could actually be my least fav, but overall it's still a great game.
Enemy respawn limit was put there to make the path to retry bosses easier, as well as letting the player realize that grinding is not the real solution but to familiarize with the game's combat mechanics.
There's a lot more in your post that seems like a rushed judgement of the game. Of course Scholars of The First Sin edition has many problems.
Game may not be the best Souls, hell it could actually be my least fav, but overall it's still a great game.
Every time I go back to it I like it less. I'm replaying it now with my girlfriend for the first time in 1.5-2 years and I'm not having much fun with it. The general feel of movement and combat is so much worse than every other game in the series. It just doesn't feel right. Also the game is incredibly ugly, even when compared to Dark Souls 1 and Demon's Souls. Empty landscapes and repeating textures as far as the eye can see.
Yeah, I can't agree with the lifegem complaint. If anything, they're way too strong. You just stack two or three and go nuts, they'll offset the damage you take.
It's sort of necessary, though, because the hitboxes and hit reactions are kind of broken in this game. So a lot of the times you won't visibly get hit by the attack and your character won't react to the hit at all, but your HP bar will go down. The heal over time effect of lifegems is great to counter that.
On the other hand, I find the game to be a bit too easy, even with a ton of baffling design decisions to make it harder, and I suspect lifegems are a big part of the reason.
Yeah, I have the same experience with time. Every time I go back to any other game in the series, except maybe for Dark Souls III, I appreciate them even more. Just thinking back on the games and discussing them makes me appreciate them more. But Dark Souls II is the opposite, I just like it less and less with time.
The fact that we're no longer in the "holy shit a Dark Souls sequel!" period definitely helps. There are so many Souls games people are sick of them, and glad From is making different things. There's always a better Souls game I haven't played in a while whenever I feel like playing one.
It's sort of necessary, though, because the hitboxes and hit reactions are kind of broken in this game. So a lot of the times you won't visibly get hit by the attack and your character won't react to the hit at all, but your HP bar will go down. The heal over time effect of lifegems is great to counter that.
On the other hand, I find the game to be a bit too easy, even with a ton of baffling design decisions to make it harder, and I suspect lifegems are a big part of the reason.
Yeah, I have the same experience with time. Every time I go back to any other game in the series, except maybe for Dark Souls III, I appreciate them even more. Just thinking back on the games and discussing them makes me appreciate them more. But Dark Souls II is the opposite, I just like it less and less with time.
The fact that we're no longer in the "holy shit a Dark Souls sequel!" period definitely helps. There are so many Souls games people are sick of them, and glad From is making different things. There's always a better Souls game I haven't played in a while whenever I feel like playing one.
If you told me it was a very extensive fan mod made by the competitive Dark Souls community, like a Project M kind of thing, I would believe you. A low grade fanfiction remix of dark souls with really good pvp options and build variety.
That it most definitely is. If you care about the multiplayer, especially PVP, there's no better game in the series. And the netcode was so good that the weapon that had Dark Souls 1-style instant parries was broken and needed to be nerfed.
I personally prefer Dark Souls III for invasions, though. They really dropped the ball not having the full Red Eye Orb there, and I'm also one of the weirdos who have a blast fighting ganks.
Kind of off topic: I just watched The Last Jedi, did they rip off the frost bunnies from the DLC?
I can forgive most of that. Those autotracking overhead attacks though. Nah, that can't be forgiven.
I'm surprised by the number of "vanilla is better" posts itt. I'm in that camp myself, but I always thought it was the extreme minority camp, it seemed like most people thought Scholar "fixed" vanilla. That's not as lopsided an opinion as I thought I guess.
Also surprised by, and won't stand for the Demon's Souls slander on the second page.. now those are hot takes. (not serious w the tone of this comment but I needed to defend the best Souls game from those posts).
But yea, to echo a lot of other posters here, I really don't agree that it's a bad game. I do think that Scholar is more flawed than vanilla, and have an easier time understanding frustration with that version of the game.
The movement is different and feels worse than the other Souls games, I agree. Enemy placement has issues but is only truly a problem in Scholar. Pursuer owns, it's a fun fight and I've always been fond of bosses turning up as more regular enemies to make you feel good about your progression (this is one of the few changes I really like in Scholar). Diminishing health is slow and mitigated with a ring, ultimately doesn't feel much different than DS3's embered health. You can grind endlessly either through the Champion covenant or bonfire ascetics (though I agree making the default worldstate one where mobs can cease spawning wasn't a great idea). Life gems are dumb and help trivialize the game.
All that being said, imo at least the game is still a lot of fun to actually play. It also has some really awesome parts (
), it feels way more like an RPG than the other games, which can be good or bad depending on your preferences, but apart from adaptability (fuck adaptability) to me it's just different. Excellent fashionsouls. Tons of weapons, more than the other games I think. Powerstancing. For all its flaws there's a lot of good in the game as well.
Also surprised by, and won't stand for the Demon's Souls slander on the second page.. now those are hot takes. (not serious w the tone of this comment but I needed to defend the best Souls game from those posts).
But yea, to echo a lot of other posters here, I really don't agree that it's a bad game. I do think that Scholar is more flawed than vanilla, and have an easier time understanding frustration with that version of the game.
The movement is different and feels worse than the other Souls games, I agree. Enemy placement has issues but is only truly a problem in Scholar. Pursuer owns, it's a fun fight and I've always been fond of bosses turning up as more regular enemies to make you feel good about your progression (this is one of the few changes I really like in Scholar). Diminishing health is slow and mitigated with a ring, ultimately doesn't feel much different than DS3's embered health. You can grind endlessly either through the Champion covenant or bonfire ascetics (though I agree making the default worldstate one where mobs can cease spawning wasn't a great idea). Life gems are dumb and help trivialize the game.
All that being said, imo at least the game is still a lot of fun to actually play. It also has some really awesome parts (
The Vendrick reveal is really cool
Don't remember what part you're talking about here. If you mean facing groups of enemies, just get better with spacing, maneuver the enemies into choke points like stairs, and use the parts of your weapon move sets that are good at hitting multiple enemies.
He's the Pursuer. He pursues you.
The health loss is kind of rough, but I'd usually just play a bit more conservatively until I figured out the combat encounters that were giving me trouble, then take care of the hollowing by dropping a soapstone or whatever.
Never ran into this problem, I don't think. Then again I'm not the kind of player who really grinds in RPGs much. If I'm getting my ass kicked I just try to learn the enemy attack patterns instead of brute forcing my way with higher stats.
You get more estus charges as you go. There's a tradeoff between Estus, which has limited charges but faster healing, and lifegems, which you can have a million of but heal you slowly.
Also lifegem healing stacks, so if you pop more than one you heal faster.
Dark Souls 2 is the best Dark Souls.
It does feel a little different than other soul games, but I feel most of the decisions in its development were the right ones. And let's not forget it has one of the best areas in all the Soul games:
Beating this area is the closest thing I ever got to the "feeling of achievement" I hear so much about when people talk about these games.
It does feel a little different than other soul games, but I feel most of the decisions in its development were the right ones. And let's not forget it has one of the best areas in all the Soul games:
Beating this area is the closest thing I ever got to the "feeling of achievement" I hear so much about when people talk about these games.
I've played SoTFS and put a lot of hours into it, but never finished it or enjoyed it as much as the other games.
I got to some point in what I think is one of the DLC areas and just lost interest ever since. I launched it a couple of days ago because I was considering getting DS3 on sale, and I quickly realized 'I don't like this and I'm not ready for another Souls game'.
I don't think it's terrible but it definitely feels 'off' in a lot of ways and honestly, one of the things I really liked about Dark Souls was looking at YouTube videos breaking down the plot and talking about lore, and for some reason DS2 didn't interest me in the same way.
I got to some point in what I think is one of the DLC areas and just lost interest ever since. I launched it a couple of days ago because I was considering getting DS3 on sale, and I quickly realized 'I don't like this and I'm not ready for another Souls game'.
I don't think it's terrible but it definitely feels 'off' in a lot of ways and honestly, one of the things I really liked about Dark Souls was looking at YouTube videos breaking down the plot and talking about lore, and for some reason DS2 didn't interest me in the same way.
With the exception of Bloodborne, the Souls games became progressively worse in my estimation. I loved Demon's Souls and Dark Souls. I only bothered to finish Dark Souls II and III to platinum completion out of fandom for the other three games I love so much.
DSII is still better then III though.
DSII is still better then III though.
Actual Hot Take: I'd rather play DS2 over DS1 any day of the week. Hell, I'd probably rather play it over DS3 too.
Dark Souls 2 is the most creative of the series. It's brilliant. I honestly don't understand why people feel the need dedicate threads calling it out as terrible when all the Souls games have flaws. They can't all be the best one, but they are all amazing when compared to any other modern franchise. I'll take Dark Souls 2 over most games released over the past decade.
Especially considering how soon it came out after the original, the amount of new ideas in DS2 was mind blowing.
Anyway OP your opinions are perfectly valid but your take is stale AF.
Especially considering how soon it came out after the original, the amount of new ideas in DS2 was mind blowing.
Anyway OP your opinions are perfectly valid but your take is stale AF.
The GAME DESIGN of Dark Souls II was heavily focused on fixing problems with Dark Souls, and they were successful in changing the formula around.
* PVP in Dark Souls was shit. In fact it wasn't even supposed to be PVP but a random super dangerous threat. DS2 added soul memory to counter twinking, balanced magic to counter one hit kills, slightly harder backstabs to counter backstab fishing, agility to counter ninja-flipping giant dads, etc.
* Dark Souls was rushed at the end. DS2 took care to actually have cool set pieces in the end game.
* Weapon durability was a non-factor in Dark Souls. DS2 made it actually important to keep track of. It's still just an issue in early areas while you're killing anything, it's also helped by automatic repairs unless you actually break it.
* Very much of Dark Souls could be speedrun or bypassed by abusing invincibility frames. DS2 removed much invincibility on entering doors, backstabs etc.
* Dark Souls was frustrating to many players by constantly respawning everything. DS2 removed enemies after 12+ tries and instead added Champion's Covenant (no respawning) and the items to go into NG+ with new enemies for hardcore players.
The EXECUTION of Dark Souls II was flawed because of development problems and trying to push next-gen stuff on last-gen hardware, but meh, shit happens. So areas don't all connect neatly back into a central hub, whatever. So the gameplay feels a little rougher than the best gameplay ever.
* PVP in Dark Souls was shit. In fact it wasn't even supposed to be PVP but a random super dangerous threat. DS2 added soul memory to counter twinking, balanced magic to counter one hit kills, slightly harder backstabs to counter backstab fishing, agility to counter ninja-flipping giant dads, etc.
* Dark Souls was rushed at the end. DS2 took care to actually have cool set pieces in the end game.
* Weapon durability was a non-factor in Dark Souls. DS2 made it actually important to keep track of. It's still just an issue in early areas while you're killing anything, it's also helped by automatic repairs unless you actually break it.
* Very much of Dark Souls could be speedrun or bypassed by abusing invincibility frames. DS2 removed much invincibility on entering doors, backstabs etc.
* Dark Souls was frustrating to many players by constantly respawning everything. DS2 removed enemies after 12+ tries and instead added Champion's Covenant (no respawning) and the items to go into NG+ with new enemies for hardcore players.
The EXECUTION of Dark Souls II was flawed because of development problems and trying to push next-gen stuff on last-gen hardware, but meh, shit happens. So areas don't all connect neatly back into a central hub, whatever. So the gameplay feels a little rougher than the best gameplay ever.
What I think DS1 and DS3 did that DS2 didn't, which really helped my own enjoyment of them, is announcing the bosses in the intro cinematic. I looked forward to fighting Seath, or Yhorm, or whatever, and remember thinking, "How am I ever gonna beat these sort of almost gods?" DS2 plays on confusion a lot, thematically, but I've never really understood why I was fighting Mytha or the Dragonrider besides the fact that they were just there.
Honestly, I enjoy the level design of 1, the moment-to-moment gameplay of 3, and maybe the hub world/music of 2.
Honestly, I enjoy the level design of 1, the moment-to-moment gameplay of 3, and maybe the hub world/music of 2.
I found it more fun than 1. Realised this when playing the remaster. Not sure why....
Also Majula's theme makes it the best hub.
Replaying this on the ps4 right now and loving the faster pace. Ds1 and 3 are better games and more clever, but ds2 is refreshingly different and feels so vast. Yes, the repetitiveness of facing the pursuer is a bit much, but the game is just so huge and feels epic.
I agree but not for the reasons You point out...
For me was a huge letdown that the bosses are mostly stupid but in big numbers or cheap... like the game was meant to be played in coop, or just be hard because of the horde of enemies vs you...
The world was also less charming, and the level desing worse after that masterpiece of DS.
Not a BAD game, but all but a great game as the predecessors (and sequel)
For me was a huge letdown that the bosses are mostly stupid but in big numbers or cheap... like the game was meant to be played in coop, or just be hard because of the horde of enemies vs you...
The world was also less charming, and the level desing worse after that masterpiece of DS.
Not a BAD game, but all but a great game as the predecessors (and sequel)
Completed this game at SL1, there is nothing wrong with the way it does health or enemy respawns. You can grind if you want it just requires a certain item and each time you use it resets the enemies to NG+ difficulty.
DS2 is a great and really fun game, it has some issues but none of which you state in the OP.
DS2 is a great and really fun game, it has some issues but none of which you state in the OP.
It's just as good as DS1+3 and Demon's Souls with it's own strengths and weaknesses.
Fun fact: It's the only Soulsborne game I finished twice (original + remaster)
Fun fact: It's the only Soulsborne game I finished twice (original + remaster)
The movement worked just fine for me. In fact, I felt the movement worked well for weaving in and out of multiple enemies and looking for the perfect time to strike back.
I mostly played SotFS, so I'll be speaking from my experience with that version, but I found the enemy placement to be mostly fine. The hordes that will sometimes rush you down are meant to test how good you are at crowd control. You are meant to draw enemies to fight them one-on-one, or take the fight to an area that is more advantageous to you and fight them without lock-on, or just weave in and out of them, looking for a good moment to strike, also without lock-on. At least, that's what I try to do. Many of the combat arenas seem to be more open, and this is good, since it gives you more room to maneuver around enemies and your weapons won't bounce off of walls as much. The exploding enemies in the Lost Bastille were a problem though and it was dumb to have some enemies so close to certain bonfires.
He's called the Pursuer, that's kinda what he does. I don't know, I kinda liked having a recurring mini-boss that showed up in unexpected places. It reminded me a little of the SA-X from Metroid Fusion. I just really like the Pursuer. I think he has a cool design and is really fun to fight.
I wasn't a huge fan of this, but I always had plenty of Human Effigies so it wasn't really a big deal.
I could be wrong on this, but I believe you can use an item to make enemies respawn.
Man, I loved the Life Gems lol. Saved my ass more times than I can remember. If you just spam a few of them, they heal you at a really fast rate. Plus, the gems can make the runs to the boss fights easier, since you have this technically infinite supply of healing items separate from your Estus if you need to heal without losing some Estus charges. Life Gems are neat. If anything, they make the game too easy.
I don't know man, I really enjoyed DS2. I think it is a great game that, at times, surpasses the original. Like, there is nothing as bad as Lost Izalith in DS2 (maybe Frigid Outskirts, but that is a shorter, optional level) and the DLC areas in 2 surpass even the best areas from 1 for me. But, it is also a very different game (the game seems to be built around fighting multiple enemies, for instance, and you are expected to adapt to this change to be successful). I think that DS1 is held up on this pedestal, and when the sequel deviated from the original and tried to be its own thing, some fans were really disappointed. I'm not saying that DS2 is perfect, I just don't think the gulf in quality between the two games is not as large as some people make it out to be.
One more thing, I think one of the best ways that DS2 could be improved is teaching the player that lock-on is a tool that shouldn't be used for every fight. It's pretty understandable that so many players don't realize that using lock-on sometimes puts you at a disadvantage, when the game really does nothing to teach you this.
Last edited:
It's a bad game. I've tried to play it several times. I love all of the others, but DS2 just never does it for me. It's annoying: annoying enemy placement; annoying, floaty combat; half-assed environments.
I don't know why people feel like they get to gatekeep what's considered a "bad game." Just because there are games with more severe objective issues doesn't mean Dark Souls 2 can't fail miserably to entertain just as much.
I don't know why people feel like they get to gatekeep what's considered a "bad game." Just because there are games with more severe objective issues doesn't mean Dark Souls 2 can't fail miserably to entertain just as much.
Dark Souls 2 is an amazing game. I like it more than the first one and the Sentinels are one of my favorite bosses in the series.
It's my favorite Dark game.
It's my favorite Dark game.
It is the worst game in the series. That I give you but a bad game? That it is not.
Souls series is so good that even the worst game in the series is one of the best games ever.
Souls series is so good that even the worst game in the series is one of the best games ever.
BB was my first game in the series and I gave DS2 a try right afterwards. The dip in quality was noticeable, gave up when I got to the dock area and haven't gone back. I have since played DS1 and DS3, thought DS3 was fantastic and DS1 was ok so I can't see myself revisiting DS2 any time soon.
I think DS2 is a thoroughly mediocre game. Its downsides far outweight its upsides. It does have a few good points, but... meh.
"The Pursuer pursues you!". Yeah. But he's crammed into the first half of the game. You encounter him four or five times in the span of a few hours, then he drops off the face of the Earth and you never see him again. No explanation given. What's even more jarring is that you can face him as a proper boss and then he continues to appear before going away for good. Hey, if you killed him as a boss and that was it, that's fine. But him disappearing without any rhyme or reason is completely anticlimatic.
"A finite number of enemies is there to make it easier to navigate to bosses and make you less reliant on grinding!". Well, sure, but that only means FROM didn't make good checkpoints for bosses in the first place. Grinding is part of the Souls games. And not only that, farming is as well. You need materials to upgrade weapons, tokens to level up your covenants, healing items, souls to buy stuff, etc. And did you know that you can join the Covenant of Champions and it will prevent enemies from despawning? If, in the end, it will behave like Dark Souls... why even bother changing it at all? Just to make it "different", I guess.
And then there's the way FROM approached the encounter design for this game: more is better. Tons of enemies, tons of NPC invasions. In DS1, when you got invaded by a phantom, it meant something. "Oh, shit, Leeroy is here!", right before Nito. That was neato. In DS2, especially in NG+ and onwards, this is cranked to the max. Sometimes you get two red NPC phantoms, red phantom enemies and regular enemies at the same time. The entrance to Drangleic castle in NG+ is turrible.
"The Pursuer pursues you!". Yeah. But he's crammed into the first half of the game. You encounter him four or five times in the span of a few hours, then he drops off the face of the Earth and you never see him again. No explanation given. What's even more jarring is that you can face him as a proper boss and then he continues to appear before going away for good. Hey, if you killed him as a boss and that was it, that's fine. But him disappearing without any rhyme or reason is completely anticlimatic.
"A finite number of enemies is there to make it easier to navigate to bosses and make you less reliant on grinding!". Well, sure, but that only means FROM didn't make good checkpoints for bosses in the first place. Grinding is part of the Souls games. And not only that, farming is as well. You need materials to upgrade weapons, tokens to level up your covenants, healing items, souls to buy stuff, etc. And did you know that you can join the Covenant of Champions and it will prevent enemies from despawning? If, in the end, it will behave like Dark Souls... why even bother changing it at all? Just to make it "different", I guess.
And then there's the way FROM approached the encounter design for this game: more is better. Tons of enemies, tons of NPC invasions. In DS1, when you got invaded by a phantom, it meant something. "Oh, shit, Leeroy is here!", right before Nito. That was neato. In DS2, especially in NG+ and onwards, this is cranked to the max. Sometimes you get two red NPC phantoms, red phantom enemies and regular enemies at the same time. The entrance to Drangleic castle in NG+ is turrible.
Well I certainly prefer DS2 over DS3. I will say that The Ringed City definitely improved my opinion on the latter but man... DS3 vanilla content just has so many poorly designed enemies literally trying to just catch you early rolling with their completely ridiculous and unnaturally delayed attack animations. That completely ruins the game for me and makes everything feel incredibly garbage. Like, I get that you want to make the game harder and that just increasing the damage values of enemies isn't very interesting, but MAN was that the wrong way to create difficulty in a game.
Now, DS2 vanilla (have yet to play through SotFS, doing that once I'm done with DS3 Platinum) had some serious problem with the end game being full of huge tower knights with infinite stamina just swinging and swinging to the point where I remember just going "fuck it" and killing them with bows from safe locations - not exactly my idea of fun in these games. Will see how I handle it in SotFS on my next playthrough and how my opinion of that game changes after that.
I will say that DS2 felt a lot more mysterious and unpredictable than DS3 (with a few notable exceptions in 3, some reveals were amazing) which honestly is the main draw for me with these games. I want to be confused about what stats do, I want to not know what half of my items even do and I want the lore flavor text to be incredibly esoteric. DS2 delivers that in spades while DS3 seems more concerned with tying loose ends together and having relatively clear mechanics presented to the player. Maybe some prefer that, but I certainly don't. Bonfire ascetics are amazing btw.
Anyway, if I were to rank the games I'd say Bloodborne > Demon's > DS1 > DS2 > DS3. Funny how the popular serialised best-sellers ended up being the ones I liked the least of the souls series. It makes a lot of sense considering the Dark Souls games share a lot of mechanics while the other two are a lot more unique and hard to figure out in that sense for a long-time fan of the series.
Now, DS2 vanilla (have yet to play through SotFS, doing that once I'm done with DS3 Platinum) had some serious problem with the end game being full of huge tower knights with infinite stamina just swinging and swinging to the point where I remember just going "fuck it" and killing them with bows from safe locations - not exactly my idea of fun in these games. Will see how I handle it in SotFS on my next playthrough and how my opinion of that game changes after that.
I will say that DS2 felt a lot more mysterious and unpredictable than DS3 (with a few notable exceptions in 3, some reveals were amazing) which honestly is the main draw for me with these games. I want to be confused about what stats do, I want to not know what half of my items even do and I want the lore flavor text to be incredibly esoteric. DS2 delivers that in spades while DS3 seems more concerned with tying loose ends together and having relatively clear mechanics presented to the player. Maybe some prefer that, but I certainly don't. Bonfire ascetics are amazing btw.
Anyway, if I were to rank the games I'd say Bloodborne > Demon's > DS1 > DS2 > DS3. Funny how the popular serialised best-sellers ended up being the ones I liked the least of the souls series. It makes a lot of sense considering the Dark Souls games share a lot of mechanics while the other two are a lot more unique and hard to figure out in that sense for a long-time fan of the series.
Power stance. Colorful, fantasy world. Lovely cast of characters. Majula. Excellent quality of life after DS1 (Estus + Life Gem combo, cleaned up interface, farmable bonfire asthetic and Human Effigies in memories for unlimited Respec/Zone farming). Absolutely fantastic DLC zones and boss fights that make up for a safe base game. Fucking Faraam set BABY.
It's a a great game. Durante's minor visual mod via GeDoSaTo is enough to let it shine (and it looks much better than Vanilla DS1/DS3, that's for sure).
Sure, many bosses are humanoid creatures in armor, and levels aren't interconnected. Too bad.
The emotional journey towards Vendrick and the story ties to Manus from DS1, especially in the DLC, make for a memorable quest.
Going through DS3 with ultra hyper mega fast enemies is the real torture. Fuck Irithyll dungeon and its max HP drain gimmick. Was a lot more frustrating that "Can't See Shit Snow Mountain" from DS2's DLC.
It's a a great game. Durante's minor visual mod via GeDoSaTo is enough to let it shine (and it looks much better than Vanilla DS1/DS3, that's for sure).
Sure, many bosses are humanoid creatures in armor, and levels aren't interconnected. Too bad.
The emotional journey towards Vendrick and the story ties to Manus from DS1, especially in the DLC, make for a memorable quest.
Going through DS3 with ultra hyper mega fast enemies is the real torture. Fuck Irithyll dungeon and its max HP drain gimmick. Was a lot more frustrating that "Can't See Shit Snow Mountain" from DS2's DLC.
Last edited:
Good game thats dog shit compared to the other souls games
Too many bosses most of them either too easy, boring, cheap, or all of the above. Poor area design and floaty control and bullshit areas designed to be hard rather then challenging.
Cool environment and enemy designs though and some cool ideas. having a dungeon that pitch black and uses lanterns to go through, enemies afraid of the dark, the turtle shell enemies could of been cool.
Such a disappointment,
Amazing DLC though.
Too many bosses most of them either too easy, boring, cheap, or all of the above. Poor area design and floaty control and bullshit areas designed to be hard rather then challenging.
Cool environment and enemy designs though and some cool ideas. having a dungeon that pitch black and uses lanterns to go through, enemies afraid of the dark, the turtle shell enemies could of been cool.
Such a disappointment,
Amazing DLC though.
The initial encounter with Vendrick is one of my favorite moments in the entire series. The build-up to the reveal is fantastic and it says so much without a single line of dialogue. It's just a really beautiful and tragic piece of storytelling.
I've been voicing out about this for a while already , Era is full of hyperbole nonsense that goes un-moderated . DS2 is not a good DS , but it's still a much better video game that many pile of junks out there
I don't agree that some issues with aspects of the game make the entire game bad, but it's still the worst of the series for me due to the environment design and lack of enemy variety .
I've never caused enemies to stop spawning in DS2. How many times do you need to kill something for it to stop spawning?
I've never caused enemies to stop spawning in DS2. How many times do you need to kill something for it to stop spawning?
Last edited: