What Went Wrong with Dark Souls 2? 

I recently started playing DS2 again after quitting a few years ago. Now I know why I quit. For some reason movement and attacking feels so unresponsive sometimes. There are times that my character will just not attack and just stand there and get hit while I still have stamina. Also ADP is terrible and should have never been an attribute. Bosses are either no challenge at all or it's so hard because of hit boxes being so unreliable.

That's so weird I literally found your dark souls 2 video yesterday and now you follow up the next day

From what I remember from my blind playthrough of the original DS2, without having played DS1 and not knowing wtf adaptability, agility or i-frames even were (lol), the Shrine of Amana was a nightmare there too, but so was the rest of the game. A nightmare I fucking loved tho'. I installed it on my high school laptop and used to play it at school sometimes. Ill never forget how I beat Smelter Demon first time, in class, while getting yelled on by my math teacher and my friends(who were also playing) sitting beside me in disbelief as both were stuck on that sucker for hours. I was a lil' shit that really needed an ass kicking, at least DS2 gave me some of it. But the memories, the discussions, the way in which we learned and theorized about the world, lore, weapons, and playstyles together were the fucking best

I played vanilla ds2 for my first playthrough and I can confirm that shrine of Amana was still bs and annoying

Not gonna lie, you had me at the first half, lol. Glad to hear in the end you love the game, at least that’s the one thing we got.

insane plot twist

Thank you for changing your opinion to the correct one.

Man it's so popular to shit on DS2, but I generally don't think it's bad, it's different, yes very different. I remember when I first played DS, I generally hated it, because I wasn't use to how it worked, over time though I gradually started to love it and understood it better, heck the game could often remind you, that pain isn't easily avoidable. DS2 was the same for me, it took me some time to get used to it but I started to love it and appreciate it I'd say it's the same for every souls game. but to each their own! But can't deny all of them definitely had interesting lore and stories. edit: this just a random comment on my thoughts, not directly responding to the vid :P

I will bite you

Also, why are you bald markiplier?

I know ds2 has a lot of bad things, it really could have been much better, but anyways, I really enjoyed it and it has a special place in my heart

Guy complains about the bug enemy in Shrine of Amana that destroys equipment. Yet, it's piss easy to just shoot arrows, throwing knives, firebombs or other shit at him. Why lose time removing then re-equipping or breaking your own equipment? You have to come prepared by this point in the game. A ranged option is kinda mandatory if you want to have an easier time.

This is the only Souls with cancels, efficient backstep dodges, shortcut to 2 handed parries ( to be faster in active frame se), delocked jumped attack with insane tracking when you lock after jump. The gameplay is jank but clé et than any other Souls. You can t love this game if you don’t learn ton play with this unique gameplay.

When you try to do everything good, you fail to do anything great. That's how I feel about Dark Souls 2. It was super ambitious and tried so many new things, yet it's because of the quantity of ideas and mechanics that not a single one feels fully fleshed out. It's a bittersweet experience where you appreciate what's there, but can't help wonder what it could've been.

I love that RU-vid started recommending small creators. Keep up the great work man!

0:38, wait.... you can lock on in dark souls 2?

😂😂😂 just beat the king in that big ass castle with my adpt level 8 never lost to a boss more then 4 time's

I couldn't finish the game , you explained to me why the combat feels unresponsive, i could get over it if the enemy encounters were more interesting, from the start up to lost bastille fighting the enemies is either super easy OR there is an instance where multiple enemies piled onto you all at once, or they are in a room and you have to go in the room and back out of the room to have any chance, the slow unresponsive combat demands you find a cheesy way to deal with them. Bosses are cool but i just couldn't be bothered dealing with those dozen royal swordsmen again and again to get to the ruin sentinels from the blacksmith bonfire. DS2 is not a game i had fun with and i loved 1 and 3.

What Went Wrong with Dark Souls 2? Nothing, its perfect and i love it, i dont care anyone else thinking

I much prefer Dark Souls 2 rather than Dark Souls 3: "REMEMBER Dark Souls 1?" edition

I love ds2 and still play it, its very different from the others but that doesn't make it bad

I just finished ds2 and I believe it was overhated I did enjoy it for the most part however it’s still the weakest out of the series in my opinion

Almost every enemy placement is completely solved by a bow. However, it does slow you down a bit even with the busted poison arrows. [Evil rat = good me, I'm still your first hater >:) ]

4:34 Nooo! lol wth? Soul memory isn't underdeveloped, it's straight up bad. Taking your own example: if you have 10.000 souls and die without picking them up those are lost forever except your soul memory will still be 10.000. See where I'm going here? Next time you hit 10.000 your soul memory will be at the 20.000 so if a new player dies a lot (as they will) they might end up with an inflated soul memory while still being at a low level and that sucks for co-op and invasions.

I agree shrine of Amana and other places suck but like bro JUST USE A BOW

hitboxes + too good of a game

1. Animation Commitment: Yes you're locked into most animations, but unlike the other games, you're given a brief but decent sized window to cancel attacks. This is especially helpful in PvP for creating feints. 2. Adaptability: I personally think Adaptability is fine for the most part but could use slight adjustments for better player understanding. 3. Enemy Placement: The only difference between DS2 and other titles, is the ease the other titles have in allowing you to avoid 99.9% of all encounters. The Equipment Breakage creatures are only an issue if you choose not to use the enormous plethora of tools at your disposal. Shrine of Armana is the epitome of brute forcing a solution will give you a bad time. Ranged Weapons, Spells, and Consumables exist for a reason. Spiders are terrified of torches and choosing to use them makes the entire area trivial. 4. Optional Areas: While most areas aren't entirely "optional" but you have a lot of freedom of when you wish to tackle them. If you look at DS3, it's almost entirely a branchless stick. 5. Soul Memory: It was a nice experiment, but Soul Memory was an over convoluted solution to a simple problem. If a remake is done, it needs to go. 6. Seriously Enough: DS2 went through quite the Development Hell, which is why so many inpolished ideas were glued together. (Blame Bamco for that ) Yet on the other hand, DS2 tackled numerous mechanics and little quirks that brings a lot of interaction throughout the game. Meanwhile, DS3 played it extremely safe and oversimplified, as there was barely anything that really made it stand out. While DS2 has many issues, those same issues in the other games are almost always glossed over.

Good job with the video and all but i cant disagree more with basically everything you said lol. Dark Souls 2 is my favorite of the trilogy and I won't argue with anyone who thinks it's the worst fromsoft game. There's just no convincing a souls player that ds2 is a great game if they already think it's bad. One thing I do want to mention though is the argument I've heard time and time again and that's that if Dark Souls 2 wasn't named Dark Souls that it would have been received way better. Whoever first said that and whoever agrees with it is so full of shite lmao. If it had a different name then people would shite on the game even more because they would also say something like "its the worst 'souls like' ever made" or "it copies everything dark souls did, but badly" and things like that. Theyd probably rate it the same as the original Lords of the Fallen, which btw imo is also not a bad game. I see it as a kind of love letter to ds1 because although it plays a bit slower, it pretty much copies the formula and only adds a couple of new things and actually does a good job of it for the most part. Same way that Lies of P is a love letter to Bloodborne and only adds a few new mechanics. Anyways, I've gone on long enough. Thanks in for sharing the video because although I disagree, it is a well made video as usual. Take care and God bless. 👍🍔

Haven't read the game description? have you. The game is meant to torment you as a player. Sensory Assault, A labyrinth of monsters are the key features of this game, should have read the description before playing the damn game.

Oh no do I need to unsub.

Problem is a lot of people who dislike Dark Souls 2 only played Scholar of the First Sin, which isn't actually DS2. It completely messed with the placement of enemies and pacing of the game. Miyazaki messed with the dish that didn't need to be messed with in the way he did.

I can already tell without reading comments that someone probably mentioned this before but Tseldora there is something called a "Torch" Its a wooden stick on fire, I have heard that its helpful... like I don't know removing the annoying spiders as they can't attack even if Freja's arena? XD Still ds2 for all its faults is the peak of from soft games... no this is not a joke before you ask. I genuinely think that DS2 Scholar is the best game that fromsoft made. Elden Ring is a worth while successor to ds2 even if its a disappointment for me (Elden ring isn't hard enough essentially) -Askaria

Finally came to your senses haha

Nah. None of this is an issue but it's all good. Don't like it don't play it.

i really think scholar messed up the game sm imo