Dark Souls 2 is Criminally Underrated 

Damn, I had no idea

So maybe, though souls 2 isnt directly connected to the lordran/lothric timelines, its connected to the kingsfield timelines. Thats pretty cool if true

@@djspit8929 mostly because the ds2 wasn't being directed by Miyazaki, and were also feeling pressured to create a sequel that can top DS1, having lost in the game's direction probably led to the existing director took more inspiration from their previous games such as King's Field and Shadow Tower.

​@@aryabratsahoo7474 Miyazaki supervised the development of 2, but purposefully abstained from micromanaging the game because he didn't want to stifle the team's creativity. Dark Souls 3's development started before 2 released, once Miyazaki had finished with AotA and Bloodborne. Miyazaki did state that he looked forward to playing through 2, and subsequently 2's primary director (Tanimura) codirected DS3 and Elden Ring alongside Miyazaki (with the latter having more mechanical similarity to DS2 than DS3 did). We can only hope ER follows suit once with 3 primary DLCs. P.S. DS2's fashion is still BiS

still shit

I feel ds1 is actually the weakest

​@@Asterion_Mol0c too much shit you gotta go through before the game actually opens up whereas even on demons you could just warp around and go at your own pace instead of forced to walk back n forth everywhere for 3/4 the game...

@@DonnieDaise ds3 ringed city was stronger than ds2 truthfully

Yes!

That’s exactly how I feel I was so young when I played this game this music is so beautiful and the theme of Majula just feels so calming and feels almost like home it’s just comforting to hear

SAME bro. ive been playing it since i was around probably 8, and im 16 now and still play it a lot. its a great game if you actually look for the good instead of expecting bad

@@e1i.jh4you played dark souls since you were 8? wtf

@@fredfairley7724 what’s wrong with playing dark souls at 8?

@@familiarisfelinus4087 nothing wrong with it at all!! quite cool actually

yeah bro my dad had it on his old ps3 and he would play it some, and i always looked up to him and wanted to be like him so i started playing it and really got into it. sucks that he doesnt play it now although ive tried to get him to, he just doesnt (understandably) want to get addicted lol@@fredfairley7724

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or genuine.

@@haaahaaa6250 sarcastic lol it should most certainly be the standard.

@@Mr_Sunday_Gary yeah, well, sometimes it's good to just appreciate the small things. Ds2 was rushed, as well as it bit off more than it can chew. It's nice to know they still managed to keep the atmosphere consistent. Seriously, you'd be surprised how many games that disregard the need for a proper boss arena. Like this one game called portal knights, fumbled the bag so hard when it came to boss fights. And they didn't even give them proper boss rooms, only thing noticeable was that the colors matched the bosses. And that was only exclusive for the three main bosses, not the other over world ones. God I'm glad I got a refund and didn't buy its DLC. But yeah, still nice that ds2 took what little time it had to get it done. Sorry for ranting. :P

That’s what I was saying. Aldia says There is no path. Beyond the scope of light, beyond the reach of Dark... ...what could possibly await us? And yet, we seek it, insatiably... Such is our fate.

Based.

I also feel like Aldia's ending is to keep searching for another way.

​​​@@lexinvictus4801 fun fact, the scholar mentioned in ds3's "ring of the scolar" aka 1 of the 3 pillars of Lothric is likely Aldia, since there are various statues outside the grand archives and inside lothric castle depicting a figure covered in a blanket with roots coming out from under it. It also explains why prince Lothric chooses not to become a Lord of Cinder, nor lord of darkness, so he did in fact keep looking for another way.

@@lexinvictus4801Nature will take hold and reclaim the cycle. What did the last firekeeper say? One day, tiny flames will dance across the darkness. Souls will move on and be reborn into familiar ways again and again instead of new versions of the same dying era. An Age of Light or Fire may return. Or even Ages beyond.

Good comment.

@@fscorpion678 I think I may have made a mistake regarding the First Sin. I think it was actually when Gwyn linked the fire, not when he created the undead curse. The two are related, however, as the curse is designed to drive people to link the fire when it starts to fade.

Indeed, the Emerald Herald is rather brilliant in her manipulation as she so slowly and carefully redirects you off your own goal (curing yourself) and onto her goal (finding a True Monarch for the Throne of Want) that you don't even notice it happening. It takes Aldia's constant proddings to get you to think critically that snaps you out of it so that you realize you don't *have* to take the Throne of Want.

Bravo. And I feel that THIS is how to make a successful sequel to Dark Souls-not the fan-pandering nonsense of the third game. As a massive fan of the souls games, almost every plot point of the third game had me throwing my hands up in frustration, saying, “why is this here??”

@@JedrekVRoscoe Why making sequels to begin with tho, Dark Souls 1 story didn't need extra lore since it was already complete DS2's story doesn't expand the world or the lore (Besides making our DS1's journey irrelevant), it has so many inconsistencies with DS1 or fanfiction writing is laughable or is fine but has no reason to be there (Vendrick and Nashandra fit both checks). The only actually good thing it has is Aldia.

me when I cannot read subtext

​@@sentii8131yeh tha boy is dum as hell

​@@sentii8131I'm pretty sure OP is correct

which version?

@@d7c388 I wouldn't think he's talking 360 or PS3.

This game set the foundation for ds3 to shine. Without it expanding on the curse and lore, we may not have gotten a proper final Ds3 DLC. Cause I don't believe the game would've shoved all of that lore in our faces. Would've ran out of development time mid way. Which makes me even more grateful for ds2.

my boy Benhart of Jugo

Same. Perfect gaming times like no other man

Playing vanilla then adding DLC is the way.

Scholar definitely gives the game a bad name

In Dark Souls 1 the main character (Chosen Undead) is originally motivated to fulfill the mission of a certain knight who freed them from the Undead Asylum. After ringing the bells they are manipulated by either Primordial Serpent into gathering the lord souls to access the Kiln of the First Flame and either burn as kindling for the flame, or become a lord of dark. In Dark Souls 3, the main character (Champion of Ash) is specifically an Unkindled, who failed to link the fire in the past. They are only reawakened after the original and backup Lords of Cinder refuse to link the fire. They gather cinders to access the Kiln and defeat the amalgamation of lords that is the Soul of Cinder. They have the choice to link, let fade, usurp, or betray/claim (with both DLCs implying the creation of a new world free from the fire-linking Undead Curse). In Dark Souls 2, the main character (Bearer of the Curse) journeys to Drangleic (possibly going back in time, unclear) in search of a way to break their Undead Curse. There is a higher focus on the process of becoming Hollow, with a penalty to maximum HP on each death. Yet immediately they are also being manipulated by NPCs such as Shanalotte, the Emerald Herald. They are promised a ‘cure’ but only if they replace King Vendrick as a true monarch. As the story unfolds, more objectives arise. The focus shifts from killing Vendrick to claiming the Throne of Want. No one else cares about your curse, except to use it as motivation- to dangle it as a reward. Only Vendrick elaborates on how to break it, by collecting the three crowns. They have the choice to claim the throne (it is unknown whether this is a Light/Dark choice, as some claim it represents a path to the First Flame, and others that is represents becoming a new Dark Lord, as a true monarch of an Undead kingdom). Alternatively, as of the definitive edition, they can walk away from the Throne (presumably to seek a third option akin to the painting of Ash, a way to permanently end the cycle and curse). What saddens me is that neither choice of Dark Souls 2 seems to matter per the events of DS3. To bring back the Chosen Undead is illogical (either burnt to cinders or decayed by time) but to reveal the Bearer of the Curse, making a canon ending to DS2, as either an ally or enemy, would have been more incredible than the inclusion of Earthen Peak, two Drang knights, and a Desert Pyromancer.

@@R1R1R2 ds3 is just a fan service retcon. I don’t consider it canon. Edit: the replies are just ds3 fanboys. Nobody ever wants to acknowledge that the game retcons all of dark souls lore so that it can justify fan service. That’s literally the only reason the game was made. Like 90% of ds3 is some form of fan service and most of the game is built off ds1. It added nothing to the series at all. Just like ds1 it did nothing new in the genre or gaming but gets praised as a creator of a genre it didn’t create, it didn’t add anything and it’s gameplay holds nothing of substance. Both ds2 and bloodborne are just objectively better versions of ds1 and ds3. 3 I don’t consider canon bc of how much of a waste of potential it is

@@zzodysseuszz that’s an incredibly arrogant viewpoint. ‘I don’t like it because it references 1 too much, not canon’ God, thanks for the laugh mate. Counter edit: say specifically what DS3 retcons. Keep in mind that it continues the theme of cycles introduced by 2. DS3 added Weapon Skills, new equipment, new areas, and new bosses.

​@@R1R1R2 IIRC Miyazaki did not care for 2 since he didn't make it. He made 3 with no regard for 2.

@@smithcubs DS3 actually improves and clarifies DS2 AND it incorporates tons of items, characters, locations and lore from it. So he didn't ignore it all.

That's because 90% of games today are way worse than what we though it mediocre 10 years ago.

I think it was a poisoning of the well thing. So many people said it sucks so most people went I with a bias. After a fair degree of separation you probably looked at it more objectively

@@jezebeltryst5444 I was about to say something similar but quite different, hardcore souls fans would have had massive expectations and ds2 just couldn’t live up to the hype, it’s not terrible, but there is a LOT of BS

@@nomercy8989it’s better than what we thought was a masterpiece 10 years ago too

@@o7ViiGHTMAREothat’s just such a dishonest argument tho. Dark souls 1 (even the modern remaster version) has WAY more bullshit in it than the entirety of ds2

I'm curious if you have played DS1 yet? for myself, I found DS1 to be endlessly more frustrating than 2 especially once at the last third or so of the game after beating O&S, so much so that the frustration got directly in the way of my enjoyment of the game. DS2:SOTFS may throw a lot of enemies your way but I rarely ever found the environment I was fighting those enemies in to be a direct, almost intentional feeling, hinderance to whatever it may have been that was attack me. flaws and all, Dark Souls 2 captivated me like no other game in the series other than Bloodborne and I wish I had given it a shot sooner and didn't listen to the "muh broken hitboxes!!!!" crowd for so long.

I hope you’re doing well bro❤

Visions of Hollow, not here!

I will never forget your beautiful words my brother

i also played during a hard time in my life. The majula theme will always give me the feeling of comfort in the emptiness.

Hold on, I've heard from the internet that this community is super toxic! Well, not here Praise whichever celestial body is closest and don't become hollow 🤠

ds2s story is far better and more original than ds1 and bb, ds1 is a mishmash of greek mythology abd berserk, while bb straight up copy pastes alot of plotlines from lovecraft, bb is literally the laziest and most uninspired story between them.

I waited for the pointe

@@flamingmanure It was intense. The Ivory King story is one example of how complex it is. Alsanna was a fragment of Manus, but she was not evil. Maybe this is because Manus wasn't all evil. It gives the player a lot to think about, and yet I never felt the need to go to a lore channel.

@@flamingmanure More original? Nothing is original anymore. DS2 has obvious influences in its story

@@flamingmanure nah

If I remember correctly Milfanitos siging causes creature of darkness fall asleep (one of them says so). I always considered that it was to not allow Nashandra to follow Vendrick.

He was trying to become a dragon, hence his state of undress. See also: Quelaag, Logan

I think the main reason nashandra cant enter the cave because she's not human anymore. While the requirment to enter the cave to get vendrick soul was you must be a human

What's the point in having so many environments if they all look bland and ugly?

@@BhaalSakh not every environment is bland and ugly. Most areas have at least a good presentation. It's true that the rushed development affected this game, but fairly enough, even with it's drawbacks, this game evoked on me that sense of adventure

This! And I love your videos btw ♥️🔥

@@genudeltefrau69 thanks bro

I really like Darklurker, but boy do I hate the Dark Chasms of Old. Of course, this could be solved with some git gud on my part, but I still dislike it lol

@@marcelovieira519 Lol, they can be frustrating, especially with the Effigy cost, but I actually like that you have to do a bunch of shit to get to the Darklurker. What a reward after some frustration.

Is SOTFS worse than vanilla

@@wrackfardage6055 I prefer Vanilla. You lose the Agape ring that way, but you get a more reasonable amount of mobs. I dig SotFS too, but Vanilla is more accessible.

I have 1200 hours in DS2 and pretty much have a complete different view about it. I realy hate how simple and stupid DS3 gameplay is, you can just spam attacks and roll as much as you want, stamina dosent matter. in DS2 stamina management is super important, you realy have to thinka bout every attack and dodge and i assume that many Players playing DS2 last just dont do that because they come from games where it dosent matter. They also dont know that every point in weight lower the stamina regen. A feature i realy like and its only possible because with ADP the i-frames are no longer bound to the weight system. I also dont get swarmed by tons of enemies all the time, i have no clue how people manage to do that. Or i mean play undead burg in DS1, the first area in that Game you get "ganked" the whole time and no one cares. If you are new and die alot, there is a ring early on which halfes the HP loss with every death. Or you just farm effigies. And which combos were not fair? I never had a problem with them, talking about Elden Ring on the other hand, that Game is full of supid Bosses and enemies with insane combos and damage, but no one realy cares about it again. Makes you wonder. DS2 did so much new and better then any other Souls Game and most of the complains are from people who go in blind (i hated DS2 when it came out and was frustrated, but mostly because i did not know anything about the mechanics because there wasn a wiki yet) or force their DS3 playstyle on the Game. APD is also not unfair or anyoing, you get like double the amount of levels in DS2 compared to DS1+3, so it dosent hurt any build at all but putting a few points into ADP from time to time.

​@@henriklarssen1331 Dude, seriously... "i hated DS2 when it came out and was frustrated, but mostly because i did not know anything about the mechanics because there wasn't a wiki yet", meaning that a wiki or guide or article made by a random person is needed to enjoy the game or know how to play? That statement alone can make the whole design fall apart on itself... Loosing max hp every time you die and depend on a finite resource to fix that is unfair af, specially from the start until you get to Heide's Tower of flame where the ring is, ring you can potentially skip without the help of a guide or a wiki. "I realy hate how simple and stupid DS3 gameplay is, you can just spam attacks and roll as much as you want, stamina dosent matter.", I'll just ignore the fact that I beat pretty much every boss in DS2 with the exact same strategy and stamina didn't matter at all because I barely needed it, when DS1 and 3 bosses actually made me rethink my combat style for many of them because no I couldn't spam attacks and roll as much as I wanted. I can only think it's because of different builds, but still, that'd be like saying all Souls are stupid because you can be a mage and LB/R1 from the distance and that's the whole gameplay... "Most of the complains are from people who go in blind", you mean without watching/reading any guide or wiki? Like when the game first came out and was meant to be played? Like how ever souslike is meant to be played if you want the full experience because it encourages learning and improving by yourself and that's what makes the expierence beautiful? My friend, I don't believe DS2 to be a good game, yet I don't doubt it can be enjoyable for many, but you're only making it look much more worse than it is by saying that it's the player's fault not to have read a guide before. What really makes me wonder is how some DS2 fanboys just hate on everything Fromsoft made after DS2 and wonder why people don't see things the way they do, and you can never see that maybe it's because those game don't feel broken or off in any moment? Or unnecesarily unfair? Or were games they could beat by learning and overcoming the challenges by themselves without the help of any guide, reassuring how important not having a detailed tutorial telling you exactly what to do in soulslikes is?

@@emilianosalvado6196 Sorry i cant read such bad formated text walls, it makes my ead explode. But i bet it was well informed and worth reading.

@@henriklarssen1331 I disagree with everything you said. Stamina management is important in all the souls game, so saying it's hard for players who came from games where it didn't matter is wrong. It did matter in the other games. DS1, DS3, and Bloodborne are very fair with stamina management. DS2 on the other hand made many weird changes that make the game unfairly difficult, for the sake of being difficult. 1. The main one was ADP, which yes, is unfair. - You aren't told by anyone anywhere in the game how important it is, and people coming into this game after DS1 I aren't assuming that there is a stat that affects i-frames. - It has a huge effect on gameplay. You essentially are forced to level up ADP 20 levels to get the game to feel like DS1 or DS3. - I disagree about the amount of souls you receive, I spent hours farming just to level up ADP, so no it wasn't balanced at all. ADP is also a broken mechanic because if you level up only ADP and nothing else, you can dodge roll out of anything and everything throughout the whole game with no chance of taking damage ever. It's ridiculous. 2. Another big one is the time it takes to roll after an attack animation or drinking Estus. In both DS1 and 3, if you attack, you can roll out of the way pretty quickly, and if you drink Estus, the same. But in DS2, you are basically stuck for a whole extra half second, spamming the circle button, trying to dodge. 3. Drinking Estus is way slower, and the health fills up much slower. In DS1 and 3, not only is the drinking animation faster, but when you drink, your health fills up instantly. In DS2, if you're trying to heal during combat, you will most likely die even if you already drank the Estus, because your health didn't have time to fill up all the way yet and the damage you took was larger than your current health. This is unfair because although the amount of health the Estus replenishes could have been enough to survive, it didn't fill the gauge fast enough. In DS1 and 3, you have a fair chance to time when to heal and if you are hit right after the animation, most likely the damage you took would be less than the health you replenished. 4. In DS1, the undead burg, there are a lot of enemies. However most of them are slow and don't do much damage. It is a good area to learn the basics of combat and space/stamina management and planning timing attacks. In DS2 however, too many areas have too many enemies. Forest of Fallen Giants, Dead Man's Wharf, certain areas in the Lost Bastille, Shrine of Amana, etc.. are all full of amounts of enemies that are nearly impossible to handle all at the same time. It's not similar to anything found in the other games. This combined with the unfair slowness of the stamina, health refill, and dodging added to the game makes things even more difficult. 5. There are many enemies that have insane combos that drain all your stamina or health very quickly, and those attacks happen randomly with no good indication of the timing. Just another weird change that only exists in DS2 to make the game artificially difficult, and not really fair. 6. I used the ring since the start of the game, and despite that, it was still annoying needing to bring my health back to full after dying a few times. In DS1 this only happened when you were cursed from specific enemies. Being penalized every time you die is yet another lame "difficulty" feature that again, only exists in DS2. 7. I don't think DS3 gameplay is simple or stupid. It is definitely faster, and took a lot from Bloodborne, but it is no more simple than the rest of the games. Stamina management, blocking, rolling, attacking, and timing. There's a reason DS3 removed a lot of the unfair mechanics that DS2 implemented and brought it back closer to what DS1 was, and that reason is Miyazaki directed DS1 and 3, but not 2. DS2 was a project run by people who didn't understand what made DS1 so great, so they just shoved in anything they could think of to make it as hard as possible.

​@@henriklarssen1331 Well, let me say it more briefly... If you need a wiki to enjoy the game or be able to play it at the very least, it's poorly designed.

DS3 spam r1 roll parry Edition

elden ring:

"they ended up doing a massive u turn to the comfort zone of dark souls 1" What? Is that even English?

@@hellinterface6721 132 agreed with me on this, if you don’t understand then law of large numbers proves that you’re just kinda dumb if you don’t understand what I mean

@@hellinterface6721 yes

Glad you liked the video Lenny! Great things to add too. Vendrick and Aldia truly are the goats of the series for figuring out that they've been on a carousel for a billion years.

honestly ds2 shows you why lighting is important. you walk out of the darkness and see the beautiful cliff/shore of majula, and i don't know how you can love anything else.

@@saketbakshi4235 And then you walk into any other area and can't see shit.

@@Hollow_Tim just like real life (plus torches are so cool)

Sure you'd say the same after the 24h marathon?

even if they fixed all the issues and made it perfect, DS fans would still complain it's not a 1:1 of DS1.

​@@BigHailFanThat's not true man, I have tried to play Ds 2 for over 200h but never seem to be able to finish the damn thing. I see so much potential but the way the game controls, adaptability, shitboxes and poor boss design combined with the enemy spam in every fucking area just makes me not like the game as much as the others. Which is why everytime I play the game I get bored at around the halfwaypoint of the game and quit. Which is sad cause I can see theres a lot of cool shit in the game .

@@milanelst5754 yeah, im calling bs. there is no damn way you are 200 hours in and are half way into the game. if that is ACTUALLY true, then that is clearly a you problem and not the game. though i highly doubt that is true and you're making shit up. quit parroting what others have told you to say and actually play the game.

@@BigHailFan Yeah he clearly is just regurgitating popular talking points. I feel like a lot of DS II haters just made up their mind about the game without even playing through it, just vomit out same shit they got from their shit-tubers. Like, "muh adaptability". You're really gonna keep complaining about the stat that you can be done with leveling by the time you beat the very first area of the game? That is supposed to be the big game ruining thing? Oh no, this action RPG dared to make stats more impactful, what a tragedy. The only bad thing about was poor description that fails to tell you what the stat really does and thus you need to find out on internet. But then there are plenty other poorly explained things in other Souls games as well. It's a flaw of the series as a whole, being unfairly fucked over if you play completely blind.

it does tho.

Would you recommend Ds2 or Softs i played soft and liked it and dont Knie the difference

@@meistermarius24 sotfs is vastly better, objectively, and despite what many say.

@@Ecco_The_Dolphin wht are some of the differeneces?

I agree but his criticisms on sotfs are objectively wrong. “The game encourages you to run past everything” but all the from games after ds2 did that exact thing so it’s not a criticism AND it’s wrong. Ds2 actively punishes you for running past everything, it encourages you to fight enemies as they’re presented to you

@@meistermarius24 Sotfs is better in almost every way. More shortcuts, more unique mechanics, clearer path of progression, less unfair ganks, better access to key items, etc

I would love to see a DS4 but it ended with 3.

As someone who is playing the game with the dlc it feels like the rest since you can either follow the mainline story or go straight towards picking off the crowns. I’ve gotten two of crowns without even going to vendrick. That was a bad idea since I was fighting the fume knight with half the damage I could’ve been :). Yet the game with dlc stands tall. I will say two things break my mind one being the backtracking from certain bosses mainly looking at the rotten

Occasionally when I see clips of people playing elden ring I think to myself “‘man dark souls 2 was a great game” then I realize it’s elden ring cause they do look similar at times

I am playing through it for the 2nd time now (I played DS1, 2, and 3 for the first time last year. I have 100% on DS1 and DS3, bit annoyed that DS2 requires you to do online play to get 100% (sunlight spear and hidden weapon I believe), but perhaps it will be good for me to give online play a go. The servers were all down the first time I played. DS2 is the best and the hardest in my opinion, I don't understand the hate, aside from the whole Miyazaki fanboy stuff, and the handling being a bit odd (you get used to it though).

@@-opus you can farm sunlight medals and the bell covenant rank completely offline, just look it up on yt

@@rafaelbrito9519 Thank you, not sure if I knew that the first time I played through, I still had half a dozen boss soul spells to get via NG+, so probably hadn't worried too much about the covenant stuff. I left them until last on DS3 as well due to the farming being mind-numbing. These games would be completely different without youtube, fextralife, and mugenmonkey.

@@-opus ds3 also technically doesn't require multiplayer but it will save your sanity to just do the online to get the achievement

@@Asterion_Mol0c Yes, I got 100% offline on DS3

I always praised DS2 PvP as the best in the series, but I couldn't quite put my finger on why. The weighty, slower animations definitely reduced roll-spamming and made duels much more engaging, like a proper fight, baiting your opponent into playing into your hands, punishing their mistakes, and rewarding the player for clever plays and successful predictions. They couldn't just roll-spam away. The combat felt methodical and nuanced and not without its punishments for spams or overcommitment. I fondly remember falling in love with the humble Broadsword because of its charged R2 sweeping attack, which could whip out a full 180 sweep when you unlocked your targeting, letting you roll-catch and punish backstab farmers. Players were rewarded for learning little techs like that, and it was a great expression of player skill. That slow weightiness made the tempo for PvP was just right. (And the lack of a Hornet Ring helped alot too.)

For real. The atmosphere here is so good. Beautiful sadness describes it perfectly. When I went to play dark souls 3 after playing dark souls 2, everything just felt bland and dreary. Almost boring and gray.

@@tylertyler6418 I agree. The gameplay was obviously a lot of fun but it didn’t give me any deep sense of feeling, which is why I fell in love with the first two so much. I think a lot of Souls fans love the games purely from a gameplay standpoint, which is why DS II cops a lot of hate, but the first two games hit me in an indescribable way and almost reshaped how my brain was working at those stages in my life lmao. The third one was just an enjoyable game that refined the combat loops, exploration and world, but lacked soul (pardon the pun).

Because most people don't play games for the story, they play games for the gameplay. You can have the greatest story, the most endearing characters, and the most amazing plot ever in a video game, none of it matters if the gameplay is hot garbage and an absolute chore to play.

@@Rockhard1492 I found the gameplay in DS1 to be worse... I guess with the AG feature to funnel upgrades into, I never found DS2 to be particularly laggy... In DS1, I could be on my NG+1 and still feel sluggish- unable to carry much, even though I'd hit the soft cap limit...

It got so much hate BECAUSE of how great the first game was. It's like being Eli/Cooper Manning or Seth Curry. None of them are bad athletes, Seth and Eli both start/started as first-team members of the professional leagues of their sports, Cooper was a highly rated prospect heading into college before medical issues cut his career short, Seth is killer shooter, and Eli is a 2x Super Bowl champ. It's just that when you use other members of their family as the benchmark for their skills, they come up short. People came from the Peyton Manning Dark Souls expecting Peyton 2, and were upset to wind up with Cooper.

The story also does a great job demonstrating the cycles of rebirth and destruction, where Lordran was so long ago that only a few hints to its existence are present. One example that really stood out to me was Straid of Olaphis, which was so long ago that nobody besides him even knew that kingdom once existed. It's a lot of little touches like that, instead of being in your face about despair and desolation, instead being an omnipresent and subtle reminder about what will happen someday even if you become a monarch. ...Then DS3 happened with Anor Londo shoved in your face and a lot of other throwbacks, to the point it feels like DS1 happened a decade or two ago.

It is a solid game, and I do think that it gets more flak than it deserves, but I also do think that it does deserve it’s placement at the bottom of the list. It’s a 6 or a 7 in a series that otherwise ranges from 8-10.

It’s at least an 8-8.5 in a series with 9s and 10s

@@AbdulB agreed, I'd place it at a solid 8/10 compared to the 9/10 I rate most the others

@@rock21611 Agreed, the DLCS are a step above which will eventually bring me back one day.

the same no wind up thing can be said about bloodborne, like 90% of enemies and bosses just instantly hit you

The hiede knights do have tells though?

@Maniac in the fextralife wiki, it's called a backslash. It has no wind up and comes out almost instantly. Try backstabbing one and see how fast it comes out.

@Danijal Jahic I can't say that I've seen it, personally. Not to say it isn't there, but BB is much higher paced than just about all the souls games and is tuned for it. So, it wouldn't feel nearly as out of place as it does with DS2 and it's, almost, plodding pacing.

@@danijaljahic1312 but bloodborne is build on aggression and counteraggression. being hit by cheap shots isnt as bad, if you are able to instantly turn the aggression around, since that regenerates your health.

It is much better being able to equip 4 rings

Iam realy surprised why some people think DS3 is the most replayble. Its my least played by far and thats mostly because it has zero NG+ content and the world design is a straight line with 2-3 side branches. So you play through each area in the same order every time and you are also limited early on when it comes to build variety. Meanwhile in DS2 you have new NG+ content and even more important, you can reach tons of different areas early on which gives you tons of different toys to play with. And on top of that, you can play through each area in a different order every playthrough. Thats why DS2 is my most played in the series, new runs and challenge runs are realy fun and different every time.

Idk if i should think this is a critic or a positive stuff

The fanfic is DS3

If you think about how the areas connect it’s a lot like dream logic

I mean you get what the stats are doing ingame, same as in Elden Ring. The hollow mechanic can be tough early on, but you can find a Ring in one of the starting areas that halfs the HP loss from that mechanic. Or you can also farm some effigies early on and buy more.

Then I'll ask more to maybe learn something cuz I want to eventually beat this game.. what is the correct way for encounters? Cuz sometimes you round a corner and everything comes out other times you open a door and everything rushes the door way but I still can't get a swing in on all of them stacked up cuz of how frequent they attack I've heard shield is the way to go but how? most of the time I've tried one or two hits even from little guys still breaks it rolling feels weird even with recommended agility score and yes take my time pull back be meticulous and slow about everything only works so long as enemies aggro far enough before returning to their spot which usually has at least one other threat leading to these awkward clumsy fights against two enemies or more maybe that last part is skill issue on my part but still... again not mad just at a lost over this game

@@mitchlinder1689 Take the game slowly. That's how DS2 is meant to be played. Of course, running past everything is an option, but in some places like Iron Keep and Shrine of Amana, you are gonna get ganked into oblivion trying to do so. Take one enemy or 2 at a time and slowly clear everything. Some Boss Runs can be solved by simply despawning everyone if you want too, I at least like to do it on Smelter Demon because Iron Keep's first half is loaded with enemies

@@mitchlinder1689 In my experience, veterans of the other, more reflex-based souls games and soulslikes tend to try and brute-force or outskill every encounter, and run past when that doesn't work. It really is best to treat DS2 like a hardcore dungeons and dragons game or an old-school, unforgiving RPG. The encounters are harsh and difficult yes, but you are given lots and lots of tools and resources to deal with them even from the start of the game. It's just that these options might seem counterintuitive or conflict with a certain character fantasy you're trying to go for. It's biggest sin in my opinion is that it doesn't do a great job of informing the player of them. For instance, this game gives you every single ranged combat option you could ask for and will treat you like a chump for not using them to their fullest extent, which is different from other souls games. Knives, bombs of every elemental type, rope-bombs, pyromancies, and crossbows are all completely viable with no stat investment. Even sorceries and miracles can be used with little stat sacrifice with the spice system through the vendor in Iron Keep. Life gems are available to you in unlimited quantities (granted that you know to exhaust the hag's dialogue) after the first area and are meant to act as a buffer to keep you moving through the unforgiving environments when your estus dries up. Resin buffs are also available early on through certain paths you can take. The durability system, while annoying at times, heavily encourages you to diversify your arsenal and the encounters follow suit. (Wide slashing for multi-enemy encounters, thrusting/slamming for tight corridors). If you're having a tough time, you're playing as intended. But in my experience most souls veterans that try this game get offended at the mere proposal that their skill and reflexes alone may not suffice enough for certain encounters, which is very in keeping with old school RPG design philosophy. How you feel about this approach is up to you, it's certainly not a perfect implementation here. But I would try not to see the game as a skill contest but rather a survival game. DS2 is going to play dirty and be unfair at times, and you have to be just as clever and resourceful to match, even if that doesn't feel as satisfying as 2-hand Zweihandering your way through the first game. If you're at a road block, head back to Majula and take stock of everything you have. Could you try upgrading a different weapon to suit the encounter better? Do you have ranged options? Is there anything to buy from the Blacksmith or the Hag that will assist you? If all else fails you can try a different route and gain some levels and more resources before tackling that one again (unless you've made it a certain way in the game, which at that point, the game expects you to come prepared). Seek souls, bearer of the curse. For only a true monarch may walk these grounds.

If DS3 is to be believed Aldia's ending is the canon ending of DS2. As the DS2 items and their descriptions in DS3 would be impossible unless Aldia's ending is canon. For example the "taking the throne" ending would make both the Hollow Slayer and Lucatiel's Mask appearing in DS3 impossible.

Those are just annoying grind. Farming Falconers for Sunlight Medals was not a fun time.

Is this console only? On PC I can move in any arbitrary direction

@Dominik Leys it's on any controller. Play ds1 then play ds2 and watch how your character changes direction.

Scholar ?

@@wrackfardage6055 yesss

Yeah half the charm is gone these days. It's just big bosses and rolling alot.

@@stinkfinga4918 This is the thing nostalgia-blind idiots say. Makes absolutely no sense cuz you roll a lot in every Souls game.

"Relevant item durability" Yeah relevant in the sense that it constantly ruins the game.. Why of all things would you praise the two worst things about this game? The r*tarded durability and decreasing your max health. What a stupid concept. If you're dying a bunch you're probably already struggling; why then punish players further by reducing max health and making it even harder? Long lasting consquences don't make sense in a game where you can die as easily as these games.

@@Hollow_Tim you're entitled to your opinion, but i like games where there's something at stake.

Git gud?

this was my first dark souls game but since then i’ve played them all multiple times with different builds and can still say ds2 is my favorite. ds3 felt so shallow with the areas yet dark souls 2 had so much personality and enjoyable locations over the others

DS2 has the coolest locations but the lamest boss fights. It does some things better and other things worse, it doesn’t deserve so much hate, but it’s definitely not the best Fromsoft game.

If you don't lock on it helps greatly

Basically sums up my issues with the game. It does come down to how the movement feels, and it is the one I have replayed the least.

@@personman1148 man that's such cope haha. the movement feels so insanely bad no matter what.

Godlike movement, give it another shot and try a diff build There's all kinds of stuff you can do. Did you know you can fake-shoot arrows? Did you know you can fake a fake, but it costs stamina? Just try stuff. And don't be afraid to lock on

Get good

If Asmon reacts to this then it'd be golden

smooth?... it aint smooth since you need to level up ADP for it to be smooth