I really want to like Dark Souls 2 but I just can't

[Lant_War]

This April coming from Sekiro I wanted more, and with Dark Souls 2 SotfS on sale it only made sense to give it another try. It'd been a long time since the last time I'd played it (on release), and maybe with the upgraded visuals, 60FPS and quality of life changes the experience will be more enjoyable.

It was not. I had some very positive impressions at the beginning, the game looks and runs great, Majula is still a great hub and while a lot of the aesthetics still feel like someone ripping off the original Dark Souls, but the game starts falling apart right after that.

The bosses are still a disaster. They're either a complete joke or fucking bullshit with all the tracking, the weapons break in like half a second, having a death penalty is fucking dumb, the voice acting is all over the place, the character design is ridiculous...

I don't think it's a bad game, but man it's hard to like. At least Majula still has great music

 

[TheJackdog]

honestly after sekiro i find it hard to go back to ANY souls.

at least i still think majula is tops in terms of hubs.

 

[Joe2187]

Dont even bother, there's nothing significant in DS2 worth caring about or playing.

 

[Aurongel]

honestly after sekiro i find it hard to go back to ANY souls.

at least i still think majula is tops in terms of hubs.

Click to shrink...

Majula is by far the most static of all the hubs though. None of the NPC's contained within ever seem like they have a shred of agency.

It is the prettiest though, having a place of respite goes a long way in games this brutal.

 

[Sotha_Sil]

Yep, after playing Sekiro everything else From Soft has made feels so limiting. Not having stealth and traversal options like Sekiro does is tough to get around.

Dark Souls 2 has the worst level design and art (though it does have a few good moments, it's extremely inconsistent) of any new-era From Soft game, so it especially feels bad.

edit - I would say give their pre-Sekiro games a little time. You'll eventually adjust to the slower pace.

 

[scaryrobots]

I played it again the other night after I was reading through the previous DS2 thread we had. It's still a great game, and has some things I wish other souls games had. Bonfire ascetics and champions covenant make the game so much better. I love being able to choose my own difficulty.

 

[5taquitos]

There are simply too many games to bother trying to force yourself to like anything.

 

[Deleted member 42472]

While I am nowhere near as much of a fan of Sekiro as many (I actually kind of dislike it), I think Dark 2 is very much the game it can call grandpa (Bloodborne probably being "mom").

But just like i wouldn't recommend folk go back to play Demon unless they REALLY like Souls games and want to appreciate where Dark 1-3 came from, I also wouldn't recommend going back to Dark 2 after Sekiro.


That being said: the weapon durability sounds like a glitch. I haven't tried PC remaster yet but I played a good chunk of the remaster on PS4 a few months ago (maybe a year?) and didn't notice any issues.

 

[DC5remy]

3 was so good, I could never go back.

It's too bad, as the PS4 version had a great frame rate, it looked pretty good.

 

[Melkezadek]

Dark Souls 2, in terms of movement and weight, feels completely different than any other game in the series. It's floaty and it doesn't feel as good to play as the rest. All the other complaints, like over use of humanoid bosses or level design, are minor nitpicks in comparison to the aforementioned issue. It kills the game for me.

Oh, and your weapons degrade faster when you hit dead enemies, so be careful not to R1 spam.

 

[Tomeru]

I think its time I revisit demons souls... Thanks op!

 

[Hippopuncher12]

I just replayed the series over the last couple of weeks and man, I still prefer 2 to 3 in almost every way outside of the QoL improvements from 3. 2 at least tried to be different and not just a retread of the original which I loved. If the world wasn't so weirdly connected compared to the original it would probably be my favorite.

 

[Lucael]

I've recently completed Dark Souls 2 and then I started the third game. I'm not a hardcore fan of the series since I play it mostly for the art, atmosphere and the challenge, so I leave to the others any comment about the gameplay.
Anywyay as you surely have red around, Dark Souls 2 is "different" with a overal slower approach to the fighting and exploration. The overall feeling is different from the other games of the series: where Dark Souls 3 inspires more a sense of dread the second one (to me) is all about melancholy, using artistic categories this translate in a more "classic" visual design and architectures against the "gothic" approach of first and third games. I strongly suggest to take a look to the overall explanation of the lore of Dark Souls 2, there are a couple of well done video on YouTube. The rise and fall of kingdoms, the tragic fate of kings and queens is notheworthy.

 

[Gradon]

It certainly has the highest highs and the lowest lows in the Souls series for me. I still love it though, I wish others loved it too.

 

[Biestmann]

I recently played the game co-op with my SO, and treating it like a DnD campaign has made it so much more enjoyable. It's all about choices, which the game gives you more of than any other entry in the series.

 

[DaniThePinguim]

You don't have to like it, or anything really. I understand being disappointed by something you wish were great but it's better to waste your time with stuff you like.

 

[Sephzilla]

Dark Souls 2 is a pretty good example of how the entire "Souls" formula can be really screwed up with a bunch of minor changes, some of which you don't even think about right away. DS2 is still a good game in the bigger picture but, man, it's such a big step down from the other games.

 

[Deleted member 176]

if you really want to give it every shot, try the PS3 version. SotfS takes an already mediocre game imo and just fucks with shit for the sake of it. It's basically a fan remix.

 

[Sephzilla]

if you really want to give it every shot, try the PS3 version. SotfS takes an already mediocre game imo and just fucks with shit for the sake of it. It's basically a fan remix.

Click to shrink...

Yeah. There's a reason I call it "Scholar of the First Romhack", I vastly preferred vanilla DS2

 

[dancingphlower]

Don't force yourself to play a bad game! Time is precious.

 

[Deleted member 176]

Yeah. There's a reason I call it "Scholar of the First Romhack", I vastly preferred vanilla DS2

Click to shrink...

I played SotfS when it released right around Bloodborne and was like what the fuck? this is the worst.

then years later when I played vanilla on a psnow trial I understood why some people liked it so much, even though it's still my least favorite.

 

[Deleted member 51539]

I had a good time playing through as a hexer.

Except for Shrine of Amana, fuck that place.

 

[Lant_War]

I just replayed the series over the last couple of weeks and man, I still prefer 2 to 3 in almost every way outside of the QoL improvements from 3. 2 at least tried to be different and not just a retread of the original which I loved. If the world wasn't so weirdly connected compared to the original it would probably be my favorite.

Click to shrink...

I feel the same but in the opposite way. Dark Souls 3 felt fresh, a new take on the world of Dark Souls. DS2 is basically DS1 but with other locations and worse mechanics.

 

[genjiZERO]

This April coming from Sekiro...

Click to shrink...

That's your problem. Sekiro is so fast paced that it makes the slowness in Dark Souls really pop out (and Dark Souls 2 is the slowest in the series). I was fooling around with my sister-in-laws character in Dark Souls 3 last week, and could barely get over how clunky it felt - and originally I had G+5ed.

As far as DS2 it's clearly very controversial. Personally, it's my favorite Dark Souls game because it just gives and gives and gives and never seems to end. I also like how it's focused ore on duels than giant monsters. It does require a lot of patients though. I tend to find that if you really liked Bloodborne then you probably won't like DS2 and vice versa (I do like BB it's just my least favorite). I don't know what version you're playing, but on PS4 I never experienced any of the problems you're talking about. If the boss you're talking about is the Pursuer - he's actually easy if you parry his sword.

 

[Mikebison]

It's fine to have bad taste.

 

[Force_XXI]

Yeah. There's a reason I call it "Scholar of the First Romhack", I vastly preferred vanilla DS2

Click to shrink...

This is the truth. 300+ hrs on vanilla, dropped Scholar after about 10 and uninstalled

 

[F4raday]

if you really want to give it every shot, try the PS3 version. SotfS takes an already mediocre game imo and just fucks with shit for the sake of it. It's basically a fan remix.

Click to shrink...

Wait, there are notable differences between DS2 on PS3 than on PS4? I've only played the latter, so I wouldn't know.

In any case, DS2 has some good ideas behind it, but I think that people have trouble liking it because of how it deviates from the regular From Software mechanics behind enemy and level design. In all other Souls games, the challenge is more in learning the enemies than the levels themselves. DS2 to me has a somewhat... "platformy" feel to it, where you learn to execute a level perfectly, instead of just organicaly progressing through it from one challenging fight to another. It's not a bad idea, it's just different, but it also requires a much more patient and slow approach, and that's not for everybody.

Plus, outside of some really cool locations, it has the blandest visual design of all the From Software games by far.

 

[Deleted member 176]

Wait, there are notable differences between DS2 on PS3 than on PS4? I've only played the latter, so I wouldn't know.

Click to shrink...

Yup. Stuff like all the turtle enemies in the Giant's fortress and the 500 armor knights in that one lava room are SotFS "features"

SotFS has the DLC included which is cool because that's the best part of the game but like it ain't worth it. Some areas are frustrating in both tho.

 

[BossLackey]

Yep, after playing Sekiro everything else From Soft has made feels so limiting. Not having stealth and traversal options like Sekiro does is tough to get around.

Click to shrink...

As much as I love Sekiro, this sentence is a bit baffling. Dark Souls is all about options and customization. Sekiro feels limiting. Not that it's a bad thing. It's been streamlined for a reason and it works, but the amount of options available to the player in previous games dwarfs that of Sekiro.

 

[Finale Fireworker]

I maintain that Dark Souls 2 is the only work of art I've ever experienced that can truly be called a "beautiful mess." It is incredibly enigmatic and strange in a way that will likely never be replicated. It's a game that tries to do so many things, succeeds at few, but somehow comes together in a fascinating way.

I cannot explain it. I think you either take to it or you don't. I only played it for the first time earlier this year and got the Platinum and I doubt I will ever replay it for any reason, but boy do I look back on the experience with fond nostalgia. Maybe that's best for some people. Dark Souls 2 makes good memories.

As for players like you who just can't take to it, that's okay. The series as a whole has enough to offer that you don't have to try to like Dark Souls 2.

 

[SmittyWerbenManJensen]

I like this game so much more than Sekiro, but it's okay to not enjoy a game. There's more variety in the world and combat, leveling up is better, NG+ is better, co-op, etc. but Sekiro plays smoother, which is nice. If you don't like it, just play a different game. Nothing wrong with doing so.

 

[Ferrs]

Wait, there are notable differences between DS2 on PS3 than on PS4? I've only played the latter, so I wouldn't know.

Click to shrink...

Yes, PS4 version features a revamped enemy encounter. Usually for the better, but there's some exceptions. PS3 also doesn't have cool features like the duels in Dragon Shrine, in the PS3 version is just regular enemies encounter (with more enemies).

Yeah. There's a reason I call it "Scholar of the First Romhack", I vastly preferred vanilla DS2

Click to shrink...

There's a lot more interesting stuff in SOTFS (Dragon Shrine, The Gutter torchs, the Pursuer being... a Pursuer, duh!) and the majority of enemy placement makes more sense (like having Flexile Sentry in Lost Bastille instead of these half dragon things and not having him before Drangleic Castke), and even though it starts harder than vanilla, it ends up getting easier midway.

The only thing that really doesnt make sense in SOTFS is the dragon before the.. Dragonslayer lol but overall the vanilla version is the one that feels more ·"romhack"

 

[lowhighkang_LHK]

Yeah its not that great. Just play something else. It doesn't get better.

 

[Sotha_Sil]

As much as I love Sekiro, this sentence is a bit baffling. Dark Souls is all about options and customization. Sekiro feels limiting. Not that it's a bad thing. It's been streamlined for a reason and it works, but the amount of options available to the player in previous games dwarfs that of Sekiro.

Click to shrink...

It doesn't have to mean having attack options (which Souls/Bloodborne obviously have more of). Simply not being able to jump on top of a small wall feels limiting. No real stealth system feels limiting. The terrible platforming segments of Souls/BB feels limiting. You spend the first 80% of Dark Souls 2 trying to open the door of a 10-foot wall to Aldia's Keep.

 

[Capndrake]

Agreed with the sentiment that vanilla DS2 is a vastly superior experience. You need not look further than Heide's Tower of Flame, which in SotFS adds a million Heide Knights that all stay permanently aggro'd as soon as you beat the Dragonrider, when that area already had enough enemies in vanilla. It's interesting to play after playing the vanilla version, as a sort of OoT Master Quest-esque experience, but should definitely not be how you first play the game.

 

[BossLackey]

It doesn't have to mean having attack options (which Souls/Bloodborne obviously have more of). Simply not being able to jump on top of a small wall feels limiting. No real stealth system feels limiting. The terrible platforming segments of Souls/BB feels limiting. You spend the first 80% of Dark Souls 2 trying to open the door of a 10-foot wall to Aldia's Keep.

Click to shrink...

I don't know why on earth you think not having stealth in a game where stealth makes no sense means it's limiting. You're not playing a shinobi in Dark Souls.

Here, let me try:

Not being able to use dozens of weapons in Sekiro is limiting
Not being able to level specific attributes is limiting
Not being able to change armor between loads of sets is limiting
Not being able to have different builds is limiting

 

[Denamitea]

I'm playing it for the first time right now and I'm having a great time. Yeah, it's not as good as Dark Souls or Bloodborne (I haven't played the other souls games yet) but it stills has a lot of the stuff that I like in the first Dark Souls.

 

[F4raday]

Agreed with the sentiment that vanilla DS2 is a vastly superior experience. You need not look further than Heide's Tower of Flame, which in SotFS adds a million Heide Knights that all stay permanently aggro'd as soon as you beat the Dragonrider, when that area already had enough enemies in vanilla.

Click to shrink...

Huh, I always found this location one of my favorite and I never did mind how challenging it was, even though it was early game. If anything, I hated everything that came after that, i.e. No-Man's Wharf and Lost Bastille.

Also, it's not a million Heide Knights, it's, like, 6. One near Dragonrider bonfire, one up the stairs from there, two on the way to Dragonslayer and 2 on the way to Majula. The last two are basicaly completely ignorable, since it's always quicker to get to the Dragonslayer from the Dragonrider bonfire. Fighting them gives you also the benefit of training before the Dragonslayer, since they are the first enemy in the game that requires some active dodging and not just circling (much like the Dragonslayer is the first such boss).

 

[Manu]

Yep, after playing Sekiro everything else From Soft has made feels so limiting. Not having stealth and traversal options like Sekiro does is tough to get around.

Dark Souls 2 has the worst level design and art (though it does have a few good moments, it's extremely inconsistent) of any new-era From Soft game, so it especially feels bad.

edit - I would say give their pre-Sekiro games a little time. You'll eventually adjust to the slower pace.

Click to shrink...

Funny, after finishing Sekiro I found myself missing the character creator, weapon variety and customization.

I still enjoyed it a whole lot but it's the only From game that basically forces you into playing it in a specific way.

edit:

I don't know why on earth you think not having stealth in a game where stealth makes no sense means it's limiting. You're not playing a shinobi in Dark Souls.

Here, let me try:

Not being able to use dozens of weapons in Sekiro is limiting
Not being able to level specific attributes is limiting
Not being able to change armor between loads of sets is limiting
Not being able to have different builds is limiting

Click to shrink...

Yeah, this basically.

 

[Zoid]

I tried too but it's just a terrible game. I must have nearly 1000 hours between DS1, 3, BB, and Sekiro but this game doesn't measure up to any of the others. I don't even subscribe to that "DS2 is not a bad game, just a bad DS game" nonsense. The game is just bad. Bosses, levels, and enemy design and placement are what make a Soulsborne game and this one drops the ball in each of those categories. I managed to beat the main game after much frustration but I'm never going back to bother with the DLCs.

 

[Sotha_Sil]

Funny, after finishing Sekiro I found myself missing the character creator, weapon variety and customization.

I still enjoyed it a whole lot but it's the only From game that basically forces you into playing it in a specific way.

Click to shrink...

I admitted from the get-go that other From games have more options like builds and fashion souls. That's not what I'm talking about. Sekiro has more open levels, more verticality, stealth, a quicker character, and traversal that goes far beyond anything they've done before.

Going from Sekiro to Dark Souls 2 means losing all of that, and yes, I say it feels limiting. Choosing between a greathammer or an Estoc and wearing fluted armor or dirty rags doesn't make up for it, for me at least. Would Sekiro have benefited from more outfits and weapons? Absolutely.