Refresh Comments
Anonymous comments allowed.
17 comments displayed.
#9
-
andrakian (06/02/2015) [-] 
I never understood the hate Dark Souls 2 gets from the community.
I mean, it DID lack the amusing characters and wry humor of DK1, wich was a big part of the fun in the first game. Setting-wise, the ideas in DK2 are just as interesting but not as well-executed.
But IMO, the gameplay was better. DK1 was hard, but much of it was artificial difficulty. tee hee, there was an almost invisible enemy hiding just outside of your FOV in this narrow bridge, I'm such a hard game DK2 was defintely easier, but at the same time was much more fair.
inb4 git gud wut are u casul learn 2 stunlock
I mean, it DID lack the amusing characters and wry humor of DK1, wich was a big part of the fun in the first game. Setting-wise, the ideas in DK2 are just as interesting but not as well-executed.
But IMO, the gameplay was better. DK1 was hard, but much of it was artificial difficulty. tee hee, there was an almost invisible enemy hiding just outside of your FOV in this narrow bridge, I'm such a hard game DK2 was defintely easier, but at the same time was much more fair.
inb4 git gud wut are u casul learn 2 stunlock
#56 to #9
-
dealingwithit (06/05/2015) [-] Multiple enemies.
Jebus. That was just simply annoying.
The only good boos fight in the entire game was the Darklurker imo.
Jebus. That was just simply annoying.
The only good boos fight in the entire game was the Darklurker imo.
#42 to #9
-
anon (06/03/2015) [-]
DS1 was my first souls game, so naturally the sequel wasn't quite as difficult.
Also the whole world felt somewhat less epic than in DS1, which had this almost dreamlike universe.
Lastly the covenant system was even worse than in DS1, which had so much promise, but for some reason it had a few piss poor decisions
(Like why the hell does the Gravelord covenant mean jack **** till NG+, and why did I have to kill like 10 people in a row just to get an extra goddamn eye since only sign invaders count, which there were practically none of)
In DS2 they just took it down another notch, basically only two PvP covenants (Rat Covenant and Bell Keepers were ok, but the lack of reward, quick completion made kinda 'meh'). Not to mention the disappointment of Peer to Peer once again. Invasions were basically useless. The "Soul Memory System" was ******* stupid (Yea buying consumables, repairs and using chime hexes puts you in a higher level bracket, good idea.) Also while I appreciate the Souls series being discreet in terms of how the game works, no one has an honest chance of figuring out how the covenant (Red bros and blue bros) ranking system worked. I guess the PvP felt like it was all reduced to duels, and invasion signs in the Iron Keep.
Also some of the spell effects were just ******* awful in DS2, like the mists and basically every weapon enchant. Seriously FromSoftware, if every build is going to be using a weapon enchant you might as well remove it all together. Shifting to your catalyst and pressing L1 isn't such an amazing experience believe it or not. . God those bright colored weapons are so ugly.
Dark Souls 2 was good, maybe even as good as the first, but I think we all expected more.
Hopes for DS3: Dedicated Servers, better covenants, no soul memory, fixed rolling I don't care what you say, any game that makes mention of "invincibility frames" is doing something wrong.
Also the whole world felt somewhat less epic than in DS1, which had this almost dreamlike universe.
Lastly the covenant system was even worse than in DS1, which had so much promise, but for some reason it had a few piss poor decisions
(Like why the hell does the Gravelord covenant mean jack **** till NG+, and why did I have to kill like 10 people in a row just to get an extra goddamn eye since only sign invaders count, which there were practically none of)
In DS2 they just took it down another notch, basically only two PvP covenants (Rat Covenant and Bell Keepers were ok, but the lack of reward, quick completion made kinda 'meh'). Not to mention the disappointment of Peer to Peer once again. Invasions were basically useless. The "Soul Memory System" was ******* stupid (Yea buying consumables, repairs and using chime hexes puts you in a higher level bracket, good idea.) Also while I appreciate the Souls series being discreet in terms of how the game works, no one has an honest chance of figuring out how the covenant (Red bros and blue bros) ranking system worked. I guess the PvP felt like it was all reduced to duels, and invasion signs in the Iron Keep.
Also some of the spell effects were just ******* awful in DS2, like the mists and basically every weapon enchant. Seriously FromSoftware, if every build is going to be using a weapon enchant you might as well remove it all together. Shifting to your catalyst and pressing L1 isn't such an amazing experience believe it or not. . God those bright colored weapons are so ugly.
Dark Souls 2 was good, maybe even as good as the first, but I think we all expected more.
Hopes for DS3: Dedicated Servers, better covenants, no soul memory, fixed rolling I don't care what you say, any game that makes mention of "invincibility frames" is doing something wrong.
#44 to #42
-
andrakian (06/03/2015) [-]
The setting was the only part of DS2 that I have to agree DS1 made much better.
DS1 had a very innovative lore and universe with the black plague/zombie apocalypse/elder gods prophecy background. It reminded me a lot of Myth, in a good way. And it was very well executed, putting information in every little corner of the map. The world itself had so much lore that the game could get away with very few NPCs and still feel "alive".
DS2 also had a great story, maybe even greater than the first, but it wasn't as well-executed. The world just felt... empty. Linear. And less original somewhat, like a dark Final Fantasy.
DS1 had a very innovative lore and universe with the black plague/zombie apocalypse/elder gods prophecy background. It reminded me a lot of Myth, in a good way. And it was very well executed, putting information in every little corner of the map. The world itself had so much lore that the game could get away with very few NPCs and still feel "alive".
DS2 also had a great story, maybe even greater than the first, but it wasn't as well-executed. The world just felt... empty. Linear. And less original somewhat, like a dark Final Fantasy.
#33 to #9
-
angelious ONLINE (06/03/2015) [-] ds1 had fair difficulty. all the traps could be avoided, there was always indications when there was going to be an ambush or a trap,the enemies were balanced and fair,same with boss fights.
ds2 however. had artificial difficulty. they placed a lot of strong mobs into one place, traps gave no indications of existing, boss fights were piss poor easy with mobs or multiple opponents slabbed on top of it.
and then there are the other things. ds2 had graphic downradge and trailer cheating that makes watchdogs look like they were being truthful. the level designs were boring,covenants are ****** up and useless most of the time,and pvp is broken as **** balance wise. the builds people normally run in ds2 pvp make **** like forest shotgun and giantdad of ds1 look like fair and balanced builds.
the story of ds2 was boring and cliched, the game counted way too much on the difficulty to bring sales rather than making a good story,most of the good stuff in ds2 was just referrences or ripped from ds1.
ds2 however. had artificial difficulty. they placed a lot of strong mobs into one place, traps gave no indications of existing, boss fights were piss poor easy with mobs or multiple opponents slabbed on top of it.
and then there are the other things. ds2 had graphic downradge and trailer cheating that makes watchdogs look like they were being truthful. the level designs were boring,covenants are ****** up and useless most of the time,and pvp is broken as **** balance wise. the builds people normally run in ds2 pvp make **** like forest shotgun and giantdad of ds1 look like fair and balanced builds.
the story of ds2 was boring and cliched, the game counted way too much on the difficulty to bring sales rather than making a good story,most of the good stuff in ds2 was just referrences or ripped from ds1.
#37 to #36
-
satrenkotheone ONLINE (06/03/2015) [-] You were such an amazing sword in DkS1.
You were good in DkS2 but I felt you weren't as viable there... to be fair only a few weapons were viable in DkS2... felt just anarrowed down man.
You were good in DkS2 but I felt you weren't as viable there... to be fair only a few weapons were viable in DkS2... felt just anarrowed down man.
#15 to #9
-
woofman (06/03/2015) [-] Besides level design, the torch system was pretty much useless, if you set your brightness high, or have a decent monitor.
The poise system is ****** all ways to sunday. Oh? Are you wearing the highest poise gear in the game? Here, I have this rapier, and the stone ring! Also, they really needed to work out system lag better too. Things are terrible with that.
There was also some of the enemies that are cheep. In DS1 Most killed you if you ****** up. In DS2, some can kill you in cheep ways, even if you know the attack is coming. In DS1 Single enemies were fair, two or three of the single guys were a challenge but you could do it, and if there were more, it was most likely easily 1 hit suckers. In DS2... they just mucked up. You poise brake everything, so 1v1s were easy, two/three were ******** , and the hoards usually took 2/3 hits, which allow the rest to swamp you.
Bosses... there were a few good ones, but others like the Royal Rat Authority? **** them. Also, it failed to stay to the lore sometimes, and with the not GOTY edition, it ****** up it's lore even more. And there were a few moments where it was just appeasing fans a little too much. Like the dragon slayer, just popping up. No reason to him being their or hexed to all hell. They just put him there because he was a favorite.
Finally the biggest problem with me, the soul level system. Player interaction was ****** all ways to sunday. In DS1, it came down to levels. Same level? Good to go. Souls? Who gave a **** , feel free to grind up so you can get the best gear you can with the level you have.
DS2? You want to get the good gear? Welp, to make it even, have your asshole stomped in by a person that did nothing but dump into one stat, and watch how useful that gear is! Oh? You dumped into one stat? How many souls did you lose via dieing? Oh? Several levels worth? Too bad, you are going to hang with the people more leveled than you, and they'll out stomp you. Oh? You didn't die the entire time? congrats! Too bad about that boss you are having problems with, and how you can't summon anyone due to no one having the same soul level as you! Oh? Did you grind souls so you can get help now? Well, go **** yourself, you just died, before you could pick them up, and you can't spend them, even though we are still having them tacked onto your soul level.
It's not a bad game. It's truly not. It's just that it tried to fix what it didn't need.
The poise system is ****** all ways to sunday. Oh? Are you wearing the highest poise gear in the game? Here, I have this rapier, and the stone ring! Also, they really needed to work out system lag better too. Things are terrible with that.
There was also some of the enemies that are cheep. In DS1 Most killed you if you ****** up. In DS2, some can kill you in cheep ways, even if you know the attack is coming. In DS1 Single enemies were fair, two or three of the single guys were a challenge but you could do it, and if there were more, it was most likely easily 1 hit suckers. In DS2... they just mucked up. You poise brake everything, so 1v1s were easy, two/three were ******** , and the hoards usually took 2/3 hits, which allow the rest to swamp you.
Bosses... there were a few good ones, but others like the Royal Rat Authority? **** them. Also, it failed to stay to the lore sometimes, and with the not GOTY edition, it ****** up it's lore even more. And there were a few moments where it was just appeasing fans a little too much. Like the dragon slayer, just popping up. No reason to him being their or hexed to all hell. They just put him there because he was a favorite.
Finally the biggest problem with me, the soul level system. Player interaction was ****** all ways to sunday. In DS1, it came down to levels. Same level? Good to go. Souls? Who gave a **** , feel free to grind up so you can get the best gear you can with the level you have.
DS2? You want to get the good gear? Welp, to make it even, have your asshole stomped in by a person that did nothing but dump into one stat, and watch how useful that gear is! Oh? You dumped into one stat? How many souls did you lose via dieing? Oh? Several levels worth? Too bad, you are going to hang with the people more leveled than you, and they'll out stomp you. Oh? You didn't die the entire time? congrats! Too bad about that boss you are having problems with, and how you can't summon anyone due to no one having the same soul level as you! Oh? Did you grind souls so you can get help now? Well, go **** yourself, you just died, before you could pick them up, and you can't spend them, even though we are still having them tacked onto your soul level.
It's not a bad game. It's truly not. It's just that it tried to fix what it didn't need.
#11 to #9
-
cowinspace (06/02/2015) [-] The biggest problem, for myself and many others, was the level design. It was basically a series of corridors leading off in different directions. Compared to DS1 is was a significant downgrade in complexity. Bloodbourne's design looks to be much closer to DS1 (haven't played it, don't own a PS4) with sections looping back onto each other and the existence of meaningful shortcuts. Also, too many "man in suit of armour" enemies but then again DS1 had plenty of these too, I just felt that there could have been a bit more variety in certain areas.
Combat-wise I have no issues with DS2 as it was better than DS1 and, in my opinion, it is better than bloodbourne appears to be (I dislike pot-spam healing and whilst the two weapons in one is interesting there just isn't enough selection or variety).
Combat-wise I have no issues with DS2 as it was better than DS1 and, in my opinion, it is better than bloodbourne appears to be (I dislike pot-spam healing and whilst the two weapons in one is interesting there just isn't enough selection or variety).
#10 to #9
-
HenrikVIII ONLINE (06/02/2015) [-] Well, both games had artificial difficulty like the one you described, more so in DS2. What i liked the most in DS1 over 2 was Anor Londo. It was a beautiful landscape with lots of lore and bosses that made sense in their placement. It was like a real place i just happened to walk through, not a level designed to pass through. It was like a real place with all the sentries and doors a real place would have. A good example of that is the harbor in DS2 but that was more of an exception then the rule. I liked the dragon castle in DS2 but it was designed as a lvl. You have a main route and a hidden 2nd route. It was obvious and lazy. I always loved to explore and DS1 made it in a way that made sense to me. It might not be the case with you, but that's ok, were different people
