It sucks, because while DS2 did things worse than any other souls game, some aspects were just objectively better. Dual wielding has lots of variety, the left hand is actually useful for cosplay, health reduction is gradual rather than instant, bonfire ascetics are a great way to skew difficulty, fashion souls, has more content than any other souls game, the best DLCs, has better progression than DS1, NG+ is actually worthwhile, challenge runs are rewarded etc...
I love it but I can see why it's considered the black sheep of the trilogy. I remember absolutely hating the two last DLCs though. Can't really put my finger on why.
It's like a bad drug, I think I really want to play it and miss it. Then I get gang banged by 30 cheap enemies with broken hitboxes and remember I actually hate it.
Hands down my most loved dark souls for me, that I admittedly didn't realize up until my third playthrough, as in the first two i gave up pretty early on. The third one? I sucked the living christ out of it and I was saddened after beating all 42 bosses that I couldn't get more (besides +NG or new character). I finished it about a year and a half ago and have only tried the scholars of sins version.
Dark Souls 2 is the only in the series to get NG+ right, or at least somewhat right. My mind was blown when Freja suddenly attacked me in an earlier spot or when Flexile Armor had ninja pals in that cramped room. Man I've had so much fun with this game. I know it's the black sheep and I can see why but it will always hold a special place in my heart. SotFS was fun but it felt like they rode the "omg so hard" meme with all the seemingly random adds.
Yea playing SotFS for the first time is absolutely kicking my ass. I rage quit multiple times and deleted the game twice to force a break while it redownloaded. Mage life is hard. Iron Keep took forever this time around, and the old iron DLC too even though I already knew it. By the time I finally killed the blue smelter demon I was running through the jail cell gauntlet 9/10 times. I’m a magic/fire mage and that bastard is nearly immune to my shit. As a melee character he was a breeze. It was all worth it. I beat Midir quicker than some of the DS2 zones, but I want that challenge. My only gripe is that SotFS didn’t balance the weapons. My +10 fire longsword with 50/30 Int/Faith is far worse than an uninfused Rapier/Mace with base str/dex to wield them. Slash and split damage is straight garbage still.
Ironically i actually like DS2 more than Bloodborne. Im one of the rare rare folks who actually strongly disliked nearly every change in Bloodborne and was very happy that they didnt keep all of it in DS3
I had played & finished all the FROM's Soulsborne games multiple times, but DkS2 still holds a special place in my heart, being my favorite Dark Souls game. It might not be the best, it surely does have its issues that I hate very much, but it speaks to me on a spiritual level, thematically, the most. It invokes that surreal mix of delusion, paranoia, loss of memories, slow degradation of the very Self of a person - all this hits so hard.
@LeadFaun i disagree, in the start of the game you learn your character is coming here to cure his hallowing to remember his family and return to them, you also forget this as you progress wondering what is going on in this land, the monarch? who is that is it me? why am i the one killing all of these things, just to meet the king? then as you keep progressing you forget the very reasons you came here, just as the fire keepers said. the slow degration of self is seen in every time you die and don't use a effigy. paranoia is very high as the game puts in you vastly different areas, some being like the shaded woods where there are people who look like phantoms in their own world but they are actually there to kill you, you also are put into areas where its dark and a torch is needed (unless you wimp out and up your brightness) these areas you cannot use a shield and you are boned if you lose your torch as then you suddenly are plunged into the darkness. delusions require that you pay attention to the game itself, the lore behind everything, you are a simple man turning hallow and now suddenly everyone is calling you a monarch, then others a simple adventurer, some don't care and others do, but the truth behind it all is that the emerald herald is your queen, destined to overthrow you and take all your power. we see this in the main story and in the expansions. in the end, this game is hated for purposes that i think everyone doesn't fully believe in. in a mainstream idea to hate ds2, i understand. the game doesn't do the best always but i must say i enjoy my experience with this game more than i did with ds1, ds3 maybe its hard to say, and bloodborne is great and i have yet to fully finish it. i never have played demon souls.
@LeadFaun It's amazing how you people just... dismiss everything unique and good about DS2 to blindly hate it... for you to even say what you just said is just such a moot point, NONE of the dark souls games do much with their themes... the story telling of the series is literally in scraps of lore dialogue, item descriptions... if anything, I'd say ds2 did great with it's themes. Ds2 is about hollowing, to put it simply. Loss of self, the cycles that make your effort pointless and that there is a truth beneath how the world is portrayed. All of this is shown first hand through experience rather than through simple dialogue. You see Lucatiel at multiple points, you watch her slowly lose herself and see her fear of this. You see Vendrick's husk, his efforts having led to nothing. You travel the dlc areas and see other cycles that feel like other worlds in how huge and how much history each area has, but each is only whats left. Kingdoms formed and fell.
@LeadFaun the entire theme of the game is talking about cycles, how we can't break free of the curse, and how they both make everything we do worthless Aldia is a scholar who through experimentation tried to get inmortality to break free from the curse but ended up becoming a deformed beast Lucatiel slowly forgets not only herself but what she even came to drangleic for, even though she was filled with resolve until the end, proving you can't beat the curse All of the giant kingdoms across history end up being destroyed from the inside by a daughter of manys Saulden, crestfallen due to his beliefs that there's absolutely no way you could accomplish your journey and even if you did it wouldn't matter Vengarl, which is pretty much just a character created to mock the curse, an undying head destined to live forever as his body murders everyone it sees Vendrick of course, sacrificed it all in search of a cure for the curse and all he ended up doing was destroying his kingdom The great souls which have been passed down to similar beings for uncountable generations Etc, etc, etc Even if it doesn't go very deep with it, the game has a theme and it sticks to it
@@lidge1994 I don't think it matters a whole lot what order you play, though it will probably influence your opinions. Like I started with 3 and ended up enjoying the faster (though still methodical in a way) gameplay. Translated great into BB, not as well into 1
@@lidge1994 I think you should first finish the dark souls trilogy before going into bloodborne, personally I have found the transition more fluid from slower shield based combat to bb as ds3 unlike previous ones is much faster but not as fast as bb
The worst part about Vendrick's blessing is that it doesn't carry over to ng+
5 років тому+74
here is a blessing that will last you for about half an hour that you get at the end game and doesn't even give you an edge on battle. thank you dark souls 2.
At the very least the next time you only need to get to Vendrick and not get all the crowns again. So in NG+ it lasts for about the last quarter of the game
@@alephkasai9384 No, you have to kill all of those bosses again, if you want proof I can show you my ds2 character. I was barely able to kill fume knight and elana on ng+5 so I gave up on the ivory crown, haven't even entered the 3rd dlc
I disagree about the hidden enemies being a bad thing. Usually you can find them if you're vigilant, though even if you don't I think it adds a lot to the gameplay. The example you gave in the video, the enemies in Huntsman's Copse, can be spotted up on the pillars and attacked from range or fought one on one. Very few enemies just spawn in from a location you can't see. The especially well hidden ones are usually just weak hollows or stealthy enemies like the rogues in huntsman's copse or the masked guys in earthen peak, there mostly to throw a wrench into your plans without being especially threatening on their own. The enemy placement in 2, scholar especially, puts a much greater focus on adapting to changing circumstances and often turns those ambush encounters into an interesting puzzle rather than a simple test of combat skill. There's a few exceptions, the npc invaders and the pursuer minibosses being the main examples, but the invaders are well telegraphed and the pursuer encounters are very easy to escape. The increased focus on managing groups of enemies and adapting to ambushes is one of the big reasons I fell in love with 2.
Evidently because of how enemy placement and aggroing in DS2 is done differently, you have to approach it differently. I think the best example of this is the location with 2 giants in harvest valley(After the first poison pool) From my experience the best way to fight those 2 is to get right in between and juggle between them. A hit on one then a dodge away from the attack from the other. Admittedly, this leads to weapons with short range such as hammers, straight swords and daggers having less viability in PVE. That leads to those weapons being relegated to sidearms for the most part in case your primary weapon is about to break. Things such as their low weight also fits them quite nicely in that niche. This is quite different from DS1 where every weapon was equally viable as long as you had the right build. Enemies came one by one or were made so the player could kill the first before the rest came
What about the enemies that just attack you through doors without much of any signposting? That is absolute bullshit and one of them is a one-shot in Aldia's Keep.
I love that you dont just talk about the game, but also the relationship between it and your personal life, and how the evolution of that relationship played a massive role in your opinion on the game, its mechanics and reward systems. This is the 1st time ive seen your vids, but i study AI and love games so i can tell ill be sticking around lol.
I am glad someone else called out Dark Souls 1 AI. Many enemies will literally stand there and let you arrow them to death if they have noy sighted or noticed you.
"how serene and calming Majula can be" *pigs have entered the chat* Scholar of the First Sin is..... weird. Even though enemy placement evolved throughout the game, and even between the two versions of the game, Scholar always felt a bit.... too much. Enemy placement makes sense sometimes, but every encounter has the potential to turn into a brutal melee because they were put everywhere. The first Dark Souls' placement felt a bit more, let's say "handcrafted" that the "thrown together" placement from the second. Like most places feel a bit like "oh, let's put a guy there, and there, and there, and oh why not this one there! Player will focus on these fifty dudes and get destroyed by that one", instead of "Okay, we got a dude hiding there, should put an archer here to divert the player's attention so that he can be attacked if he didn't pay attention to the growling on his left" (exagerrating obviously) Great vid though!
Yeah the enemy placement - like the map structure - lacks that creative touch at times, whereby you can easily get stuck being chased by five enemies at once. Heidi is really bad for it, considering it's one of the first locations you'll wind up visiting.
SotFs does overdo it in a few places. Iron Keep can have the player invaded by 3 npc invaders before you've even really entered the area. The remix enemies were designed with people in mind who've already played the game. So much of it is different just for the sake of being different. There are a few places however, such as dragon shrine that they genuinely improved.
On a world building level, Scholar also feels like it ruins much of the design that went into Drangleic. The best example of this is how the Heide Knights are all at Heide’s Tower of Flame. The background of the knights is that they abandoned the tower. But even ignoring that, in the base game the Heide Knights felt like a very special encounter. It was always an experience seeing one peacefully resting by the side of a road. But in scholar of the First Sin they’re just another enemy out for your blood with none of the nuance they had in the original game.
@@latrodectusmactans7592 while true you have to bear in mind that the ones in heids tower all wield swords (baring the one individual who wields a spear) and are all peacefull untill you kill the dragon rider. This may be personal opinion but I choose to see it like this, in the game a heid knight will only attack you if it views you as a threat to it, or in the case of heids tower in the new version, a threat to its home. When you first enter the area the heid knights simply see you as another worthless undead that can't do much, if any damage so they just ignore you, letting their weaker (yet twice as big) allies deal with you instead. But when you kill the dragon rider, something that far surpasses them in strength, they Immediately spring to life and attempt to kill you on sight as they now relize that you are actually capable of causing damage to their home. As for them not feeling unique, I get what you are saying, but the did keep all of the unique heid knights scattered throughout the world. So there is definitely evidence that some, if not most of the heid knights have left their homeland Also lets be realistic for a second here, what exactly are the odds for the entirety of a militarys elite and most likely most loyal soldiers to just abandon their homeland entirely? While its debatable as to what they are exactly, I pretty sure they were still human (or at least still sane) when they made the choice to leave, and I wouldent be surprised if the knights still at the tower refused solely out of personal pride, or loyalty to what little remained of their home. But thats just my two sense. you opinion is your own after all.
@@AIandGames I mean, the only way you get doubled (or tripled) in Heide is if you try to run past the Old Knights, aggro the Heide Knights prematurely, or don't pull one particular group effectively. It sets up Dragon Shrine (a much later area) well in that regard, as they share all of those characteristics.
I will always adore DS2 For getting me into the series. My brother was into it first. He liked the idea of a super difficult game and played it a lot. He tried to get me to play it but I had Black Ops Zombies, and I was addicted to kino. Fast forward to him being on his mission in Indiana. I missed him from time to time and without his prying eye I decided to boot up and make my first character. By the time he came back about a year and a half later I had done like 8 characters with several playthroughs each. We also managed to get bloodborne and DS3 when they came out. I tried DS1, but it was far too clunky for my tastes. I beat it once so that I could say that I had beaten it and never touched it since. DS3 is a blast though, even to this day.
I don't hate DS2 anymore but I do still prefer DS1 from a map design standpoint. Not being able to teleport holds the isolation that the game is trying to instill upon you. You're never quite safe and you don't know when you'll see Firelink again. When you go all the way into Hell and finally climb back up, you really do want to praise the sun. In DS2, you really just feel like you're playing a game. DS1 only gives you the right to teleport when getting around OFFICIALLY becomes a huge pain in the ass. You don't take it for granted that way and you still feel like you're being forced to survive in this strange world rather than just pushing through game levels. DS1 was SUCH a unique feeling experience for me as a freshmen in highschool. It truly changed me and it is kindof sad that the sequels don't feel anything like that. I LOVE 3 but it still isn't the same :/
DS2 is really cool. Contentwise, it's the best of the souls games. Buildwise it has so many possibilities as well with how enchantement works, and vast array of different movesets.
After they nerfed the initial hex degeneracy, that is. But yeah, build variance and viability was easily the best among all of the soulsborne games. Balance, too, if you discount the few missteps (ice rapier, I'm looking at you!).
@@qwormuli77 yeah, specially when you can do a "1 int mage (Raw Blue Flame)" run and it works better than a standard 50 int mage (search the video by ymfah, it's ridiculous)
Highly recommend You play Bloodborne first. Firstly, because it was being developed around the same time as DSII you could compare how the DS formula evolved in a different way and compare it to DSII. Secondly, DSIII has some Bloodborne DNA in it, so it would help you to understand why certain aspects of the game are the way they are. But in the end, it is your choice on how to experience these wonderful games.
started with elden ring and going back to ds1 was rough lol my recommended order would be the order they released, starting with ds1 (haven’t played demon souls) bloodborne was so enjoyable after ds2 and these are my favorites in the series by far
Sorry to hear about your father and how is related with Dark Souls. I had a similar experience but with Demon Souls, bought the game when my father got really ill, and a few months later I finished the game a day after he pass away. To this day listening to that menu music really brings back bitter memories, so that is why I never played again.
If you play Bloodborne next, the Return to Yharnam fan event (October) should let you experience Hunter Invasions at a similar rate to when the game was first released.
@@AIandGames If you want to be invaded a bit, know that Bloodborne does not let invaders into your world AT ALL (outside a couple late game areas) unless you look for cooperators or try to go invading yourself. You also have to hit at least level 30. Good hunting!
So none at all? There are only 2 areas you can be invaded in and by the time someone does invade you are at the boss or dead because of the eye. Or you already killed the bell bitch. Regardless bloodborne has practically 0 random invasions when i put my 300 hours into it.
@@GordKeen bloodborne definitely dropped the ball on the invasions, the bell maiden mechanic is really stupid and if you kill the bell maiden you can't have any invasions in that area (like nightmare frontier) until ng+. The chalice dungeons are pretty much the best way to consistently have invasions, but a lot of people can't stand the dungeons. I absolutely loved them but I can see why some people didn't like them much
After 10 episodes of Design Dive, I return to the most popular topic I've covered to-date: Dark Souls. I had a lot of fun playing Scholar of the First Sin. It's distinct, it's unique, though I do feel Dark Souls is still the better game. I actually finished the game + DLC earlier this year, but decided to sit on it for a while and think more about my experience. Be sure to fill in the poll card on the video to let me know which game I should tackle next: Bloodborne or Dark Souls III.
i play DS2 right now for the first time (streaming it for a friend, just broing out) and while i love DS1 and see the differences that ds2 did, i do have to say that i still grew to love this game too. Especially the environments are so wonderfully crafted. i really love the moment you meet king vendrick in the undead crypt, just had a wonderfully eerie moment. Also, the music is very good and coming back to Majula and the herald feels like coming home every time
Those Undead Hunters in Huntsman's copse are actually perched on top of a few pillars and a cliff edge just before that bridge, the only enemies that actually spawn in remotely are invaders and the Pursuers, and those are broadcasted events
As mentioned somewhere in the comments section (god knows where now), the perched enemies aren't the issue. Sorry, should've been clearer in the video.
Point is that they don't spawn until seen unless they are invaders or the Pursuer. They follow the same rules as DS1, i.e. hiding out of sight until they attack.
i think ds2 is my favorite of the soulsborne style of games, i haven't played demon souls so i cannot say i wouldn't enjoy that one more. however i think ds2 is great for each area sets up a lore that it follows none of the area don't make sense and none of the areas seem over populated because this is a dying kingdom overrun by the curse and by a queen that cares little of her people. so the people attempt to kill and pillage, you have the old fort where the giants attacked being populated with enough soldiers that probably could handle a giant attack, then you enter heides tower where the non-hallow knights let you pass until you attempt to harm the boss, where the only protectors is magical golems protecting the path and the ways to make the boss easier, the game doesn't just throw together spawns they think about how this place use to be a thriving kingdom that has fallen to the curse and lack of care by the nobles. where soldiers run a muck like normal bandits and strange creatures have moved in to become their gods or queens or bosses. while drangelic has locked itself away allowing very few to stay and the only ones who protect its door are knights that are duty bound but they are low in number.
I feel that dark souls 2 did well, I understand that it was functionally unfamiliar to its former, but there was honest improvements, like magic being a lot more viable and the fun of creating builds for pvp/pve, and more areas being active despite dead bosses. Even bows could be used to effect for the first time, and due to the improved net code and limitations for invaders/hosts it was probably the best experience I had for a souls title, Tbh the PvE became more of an after thought, as I entered ng+ my solid loadout was just stepping stones to expirement and have fun by that time, making multiple SL150 characters n such and having communities to support eachother in this was The best, TLDR this game was a pvp gold mine, pve was uniform by the time you ng++ the community for both was the best
i agree magic was busted in ds1 but there’s many qol improvements in ds2 like animations and such that allow for much better tracking on enemies love how in ds1 you can fire a soul arrow point blank on an enemy and it doesn’t hit them lol
The return to yharnam bloodborne community event is happening this month from Oct 5th-Nov 5th, so it's the absolute perfect time to play as you'll be able to experience co-op and pvp in an active state. Definitely play bloodborne while you have this opportunity!
Very nice to see refreshing ideas and beliefs communicated about his game , things that haven't been commonly parroted , positive or negative. Its easy to tell that this is a very genuine one, truly coming from someone's core. I'm subscribing and looking to see more content like this, you're underrated or undiscovered my friend and I hope you grow to a number more equivalent of your integrity. Thanks for communicating things that I couldn't wrap my head around and put it in cohesive sentences and words, this game just somehow makes me feel much more than the others in the series, as much as I have enjoyed them as well.
First time finding this channel and I think this video is really well done. I appreciate when people can elaborate on why they feel the way they do so fluently. It helps open my mind to new things when I can understand what people get out of them.
I sincerely hope you do this same video for the rest of the soulsborne series and give your thoughtful input on how design differed/remained the same from each previous installment and how they impacted you. Thanks for this excellent video.
Hey you should look at the game Rain World. It's survival platformer/metroidvania that creates a complex and arguably realistic ecosystem of creatures through simple AI and rules. Hate the phrase but you could say it's "like Dark Souls" because it is punishing and difficult but also extremely rewarding because of the way the entire game is designed. Sonething like how AI and simple rules create a complex world and ecosystem would an interesting video.
"Something like how AI and simple rules create a complex world and ecosystem would an interesting video." The word you're looking for is emergence, and it is a really intresting thing. It's an term used in biolgy and it has been ,for example, used to explain how ant colonies can be so complex. I think it's quite neat. if you're intrested about it, here's a link to video explaining the thing ua-cam.com/video/16W7c0mb-rE/v-deo.html&t But yeah, talking about AI emergence could be a really good video topic.
That's the first time I've heard anyone supporting the map-layout of Dark Souls 2 and I'm enjoying your point of view quite a lot. While playing through the Soulsborne series, I struggled to continue on with DS1 at multiple times: any time I've hit the Depths and Blighttown, I knew I had to push through it in a single go. Stopping in these areas and trying to get back to the game after a few weeks, is a tremendous drag and usually forced me to restart the play through entirely, whereas DS2 supported the "pick-up-and-go" approach by always being able to return to Majula. It made me feel at home, always gave me a place to rest at and alowed me to conquer the areas in my own pace. Your arguments helped me realizing this greatly! The parriable nature of most DS2 bosses was a new one for me as well. Every DS1 boss forced me to forget about the parry-button entirely and I never questioned, whether this would be changed in the sequel. Seems like I have a bit of catching up to do. Restricting certain bosses from being parried is probably only used to visualize the power difference between a simple (chosen) undead and the bosses' ridiculous power - I just think it creates a disparity between reliable game mechanics and the storytelling. Why restrict a core combat-mechanic for this, if you're able throw souls and upgrade-materials at your favourite weapon and three-shot bosses anyway? This approach always felt a bit dodgy to me - conquering the soulsborne-bosses is definitely a rewarding climb, but mostly due to unnecessary restrictions. The DMC-series on the other hand usually delivers well with reliability of game mechnics, by allowing to parry or grab any enemy and boss, as long as you've learned the rules and timing is on par. They are still challenging, and it's still nothing but the player's growth allowing to conquer them - thankfully without any restrictions. Parrying most bosses feels like a step in the right direction and I think I'd like to replay the game with this new knowledge! That was a great watch, thanks a lot for the video! You've gotten yourself a new viewer. :)
there's a hidden bonfire in the depths and the remaster fixed the fps issues in blight town, blight town is really not that bad at 60fps and if you take it slow with spider shield.
Bloodborne is the greatest hommage to H. P Love craft. its mesmerising, awesome & exhilarating once you get the knack of using the gun as your primary defence mechanism. Didn't take me long to platinum the game either. Its in my top 5 games of all time
I loved DS2 for how it felt like walking through a dream almost all the way through. Then again, I loved Shadow Tower, and you can tell that's where many, maaany things from DS2 came from.
you might want to do a segment on the NPC phantoms as well, they have some utterly ridiculous behaviors such as nearly perfect tracking, animation cancelling and HP/Poise that is impossible to reach via normal standards. Might be something interesting to research.
You should take a dive into Tactics Ogre on the PSP. We regularly have discussions testing the hundreds of unique mechanics and bizarre interactions, even 10 years after the game came out. It's a strategy game that, much like Souls, tends to feel super punishing to players on the first run, but is a massive ocean of fun interactions on repeat playthroughs. It was, in many ways, created as a project of love for those that made it, since the series was largely assumed to be dead, but had a very passionate following even before the remake. I was planning to make a video like that myself, but you'd do a far better job at it.
@@AIandGames PPSSPP handles it pretty well, the only issue it has is lag in the overhead map during bad weather, which only applies on potato quality compies. This game is legit made with so much care that there's only 3 known minor bugs that anyone's found, and I've had save files reach over 600 hours before (only ever seen one of them first hand, and stream it regularly.).
The Huntsmans Copse criticism is just wrong. You can see all the enemies beforehand. They don't just spawn. You can even see them in the video hanging from the bridge. And if you meant the enemies before that, those can be seen too. They are placed on the pillars and jump down.
Hey a balanced and non emotional look into ds2. That's insane! Lol. Anyway, good job with this video (almost a year later), love your voice and your critique!
Same here. I like the bloody, intense swordplay. Though, I will say this, as I've said before in other videos. Dark Souls 2 has the greatest looking armor sets in all of gaming. Plus it maintained a level of meticulous craft in its models as thier is little to no clipping weapons in armor. Shields, greatshields, are shifted to the left of the character to not clip through weapons. Most of the weapons are held correctly, as Demon Souls was notorious for retarded weapon holding. Even DS 3 couldn't compare to Dark Souls 2 attention to correct armor models. Look at Smough or Havels armor in 3, holding Blk Iron Greatshield with say, a longsword. You'll see what I mean, if you dont already.
while i agree that DKSII goes too far with its enemies appear from offscreen locations and behind you i strongly disagree with your hunstmans copse example. the art direction draws attention to the multiple figures standing on poles, with their tan hoods (the warmest color on screen) and their dark particle effects (the only particle effects on screen) in hallway that restricts your vision and a path that angles upward (drawing your camera upward) to show that there is in fact a carefully orchestrated ambush ahead without being obvious about how well its signaled that to the player. they are hidden, but very much not offscreen, and definitely not behind you (if you were paying attention to your surroundings)
You're right that there are elements of Huntsman Copse that do it well. Your example of the hooded figures on poles is certainly the best one IMO, given it punishes you if you don't bother to look up and take stock. My gripe is with several parts on the way up to that, notably the derelict building. Especially if you take the optional path to go up to the roof, where two (maybe three?) enemies just pop out of a rock outcrop.
@@AIandGames: No Huntsman Corps isn't really a good example at all. Even those enemies on the roof don't entirely pop out of nowhere, and are actually on the map the whole time, just very difficult to see from standard angles of approach. There's nothing that can be done to avoid the ambush after the player is already on the roof, but from outside the building it's possible to snipe those enemies before going up. Whether or not the way the enemies are hidden is "fair" or not could be debated, and indeed DS2 seems to almost revel in intentionally misdirecting players or otherwise hiding enemies in very awkward locations to pull off these gothcha moments, but it rarely ever "cheats" by just spawning enemies. Now major exceptions that does stands out would be Undead Crypt. The Leydia Pyromancers can spawn in indefinitely, but at least most of their tombstones are easily identifiable and can even be permanently destroyed to prevent future ambushes. What's less fair are the Wall Ghosts, who while technically always there are impossible to see before getting close enough to trigger their ambush, making them very much trial and error, although this is moderately offset by them being entirely stationary. Worst of all however are the bell ringing Hollows most of which are inaccessibly hidden under the map until triggered, especially the trio in the alcove under the stairs leading Velstadt. The first one can be easily dispatched with cautious exploration, but there is absolutely no way to know there are going to be two more of them and so all but the most judiciously paranoid player is very likely to have moved on before they reveal themselves, making it very hard for a first or even second time player to avoid getting caught by the gauntlet of summoned Leydia Pyromancers while rushing the length of the hall to reach the boss. The other major exception would be reindeer that spawn out of the blizzard Frigid Outskirts in the third DLC. Arguably less egregious, being an optional challenge area, but still no less unfair and poorly designed.
@@@AIandGames what are you talking about? not only you can see them wen you enter the map, but they also are here to indicate you to your next path. again, you have to look around just like the rest of them. They are just harder to find.
i personally never had any problem with enemies appearing behind me from offscreen locations, every single time they came from behind i was able to find where the next time around, it was never unfair it was punishing me for being too focused on a single goal.
Dark Souls 2 was made to feel like a dark fantasy *novel* Think about it: You travel from a bonfire after slaying a hard boss to a bonfire elsewhere, kind of like when a chapter in a fantasy novel ends and the writer skips all the travel log to get to the main point quicker. The story is a LOT less foggy than in DS1 too, like it was made so everything made sense from a narrative perspective. And the Emerald Herald, the character that helps you advance by telling you the story, the one who awaits you after every battle, telling you to become stronger so you won't fail, because she depends on you. She wants you to succeed, she depends on you, and always seems glad to see you're okay... Well, she's the one who levels you up. By using a feather - *a writing quill* Even the true final boss of the game, the Emerald Herald's creator is called "Aldia, *Scholar* of the First Sin", like he's a literate, a scholar - *a writer* - himself, and he fights you, a character of his own story, one he is probably imagining, to see if you can find an alternative path, an alternative solution to the other choices, kinda like he's trying to correct some mistakes he did in the past revision of his story - as if he was trying to correct the mistakes he as the *writer of Dark Souls 2 original release*... Thanks for reading all that, and may the flames guide your souls toward peace.
I played just DkS1 even by the point even DkS3 was released, one day I really craved a new adventure but felt bored with the gameplay of a lot of rpg's... I decided to finally pick up DkS2 and went in expecting I might hate it as much as others, and while I hate some things about it, overal I really loved it. Doesn't do everything I love about DkS1 but it does have a lot of other stuff that I love about DkS1, and some stuff that's unique to DkS2. Shulva is definitely one of my favorite areas, DkS1's dlc was incredible but in some ways DkS2's surpasses it.
Some friends who've played all three stand by their belief that Scholar of the First Sin is the best in the trilogy. They were - until some comments started rolling in - the only people I'd heard think that. Though I will say the Lost Crowns DLC is damn good! I really wanted to talk about that as well, but realised this video was already long enough!
@@AIandGames Yep haha, I sometimes watch others play DkS2 and when they get to the DLC I really want to start another run myself, Eleum Loyce has so much cool stuff too. DkS1 feels like home to me, and with the way DkS2 is so grand and different I think that actually helped it give me exactly what I wanted from it.
Man that seqeunce in the demon ruins was a fucking power trip, and really showed off how far you'd come.. you had gone from a lowly prisoner barely able to fight off a single demon to a badass to whom demons were merely a inconvenience. The sense of progression was unmatched
The usage of Taurus demons and Capra demons is the same as in dark souls 2 where pursuer, ruin sentries, and dragon riders become normal enemies. It’s actually in one of your progression points where something that you thought was a boss early on turns out to be a pretty normal guy later.
I got into Dark Souls 1 just a few weeks before the second game was coming out, without realizing it at the time, and only got about halfway through the first title, right as I was getting to O&S which upsets me that I did that nowadays. While I did eventually go back to finish the first game, and loved every moment of it, 2 gave me a more...homely feel to it, mainly by ways of a, at-the-time, super active playerbase. It was the super fun pvp fights I had, and the multiple playthroughs, the builds, the rapidly changing environments and all the weirdness the layout of Dragleic brought, I think it was a combination of these that makes me still fondly look at Dark Souls 2. Of course there's the usual grievances to be had, Soul Memory most of all, but yes, I still greatly enjoy it despite the massive flaws. Especially fun to still make a new character and go mess with the rare, new player you find online! Then turn around and help them, of course, by giving them loose items or guiding them to a boss room safely.
There's two aspects to Dark Souls 2 that I haven't seen anyone else mention in the comments: enemies stop respawning, and the game has two difficulty modes. If you kill an enemy approximately 10 times, they will stop respawning. I managed to do that when trying to kill the Smelter Demon and Fume Knight, I died so many times that I cleared out all the enemies between the bonfire and the boss. It takes a long time, and gives you a mountain of souls, but you can clear out every area in the game. This feels like a great concession to players having trouble with certain bosses, and a way to show clear progress in the game. I mentioned difficulty modes earlier: you have the normal difficulty and the covenant Company of Champions. If you join the Company of Champions then every enemy becomes tougher and hits harder (roughly similar to NG+), you can't summon allies (neither NPCs nor humans) to co-operate, you can still be invaded, and all enemies respawn endlessly. You can join the covenant by going around a corner in Majula, so you can have it on for as much or as little of the game as you like. I think these aspects help DS2 stand out from the series as it's own game, and are two of the reasons I'll go back to it.
I played ds1 and 3 before 2 and enjoyed 2 alot more because i went in blind and found it, not as open as ds 1, but are as many paths and weapons to experiment with early on. And the npcs are plentiful :) not as memorable but more of them and they still have interesting lore
I can see every single enemy in Huntsman’s Copse. Took me a while, but they are either hanging off a ledge, sitting on a pillar, or behind or up a tree. Only the butterflies are up in the trees.
I'm new to the channel and I loved this video so first of all great job. Second I personally enjoyed playing through dark souls two on my third playthrough of the game. The first two and even certain points in the third I just felt that the enemies were always teaming up on me and it's not my fault. In dark souls one I either aggroed one enemy at a time or if I automatically pulled the attention of two or more it was a situation that I could focus on killing one while dodging the others attacks. Moving slowly and methodically let me keep all of the fights manageable. In ds2 it felt like I was constantly fighting groups of enemies with little time to counterattack. A lot of this comes from ambushes that are prevalent but in places like iron keep the enemies will come from across the map in groups of two to three and they are all melee and there is an archer that can shoot you from across the map. Playing slow and methodical is the only option as running past enemies to get to the boss doesn't work in ds2. I'm fine with that except it's more of moving forward and then retreating so you can kill two enemies that are chasing you and you can avoid the distant archer or mage. I think most of the time in ds1 and ds3 there was either one ranged and one melee or two melee no ranged or a mix but with a lot of environmental aspects to keep you safe from the ranged if only momentarily so you could deal with the melee. That is one of two issues I had the other being that a lot of bosses were either easy, gimmicky, or both. The boss that is a room full of rats is pretty easy if annoying. The giant rat that is a reconstructed sif fight is gimmicky as you win or lose mostly based off if you kill the little rats fast or not. I wouldn't complain as every game has bosses that aren't the best but ds2 has so many bosses that I would've preferred less bosses but a better quality on the ones they keep. Or even demoting some bosses to mini bosses just enemies that don't respawn. I enjoyed the enemy placement in Heides tower and No Mans Wharf (except the house where 4 or 5 guys show up when you enter). Then places like iron keep and the gutter feel like an unfair challenge. The games are known for difficulty but it feels like instead of making the enemies hard to fight they just filled the areas with enough enemies that it feels difficult. Creating an artificial difficulty based on traps, ambushes, and overwhelming numbers. Dark souls one is difficult due to the enemies being stronger or having unique abilities or attacks. Ds2 has that but it also has waves of basic enemies everywhere.
Dark Souls 3 has a lot of elements from Demons Souls, DaS1-2, and Bloodborne. It really felt like Miyazaki was giving the genre a 100% grand finale as he really wanted to do other projects and game styles.
On my first playthrough of DS games (on PC) and currently on the second game. The biggest complaint starting this game directly after DS remastered was how different parrying is. The animations, the timing, and the methodology are all different so instead I've focused on dodging with a 2 handed drangleic sword :) I equipped a shield for sir alonne (because i was worried about the fight and did some research lol) and beat him first try. Parrying felt good and consistent in DS1 but DS2 it just feels intentionally inconsistent to make it harder. Anyway, loving the series so far and love the vid. It's nice to see im not the only one late to the DS party
I wish I could/could've seen your reaction to Holy Knight Hodrick in Dark Souls 3. If the enemies that parry you in 2 are an annoyance, he's a great pain.
I'm actually curious if you'll do a AI and Games of HITMAN 2 as well now, since you did HITMAN (2016) and I really liked that episode. Also, Remnant: From the Ashes is a bit souls-like, but doesn't have a lot of content yet, but I personally enjoy the game a lot.
The whole theme of the Huntsman's Copse is hidden enemies. And you can actually see where the enemies come down from if you take it slow, they're up on perches on the path up to the Undead Purgatory. Given the lore behind the area, where undead are forced to hide, I think it makes sense as a cohesive and quite different experience compared to more straightforward areas such as Heide's Tower of Flame.
I loved Dark Souls 2. Maybe not as much as the original, but that's okay. I played it differently, too: Dark Souls, I would sometimes use a FAQ; Dark Souls 2, I played early enough that those kinds of resources weren't available so I was basically going in blind. Your b-roll of the early tutorial area reminds me: When I first played the game, I thought each of those fog doors led to a boss, so I avoided them - essentially robbing myself of the tutorial until I came back with enough experience that their lessons were useless... I wonder if I'm the only one.
Man I love this game so much, the whole series actually. I don't know why people hated on the 2nd so much. Like they actually just wanted a copy of the first game.. It was different but still really good. Same with the 3rd.
My time in DS2 is 900+ hours and in all other soullbourne games combined are 400somethin. Everytime i see a DS2 video on UA-cam, It immediately makes me go and play it again. Despite all the negatives (which I agree with most of them with the haters) its the only one I cant get enough
Oh, I almost forgot. The RPCS3 emulator runs Demon's Souls now, pretty reliably too! I'm not sure about the updates, I use a slightly older version for stability right now, but I've been able to play the game on PC for months. You might wanna consider that for Demon's Souls when you get a chance.
Damn i remember when you posted the first vid. Its been one hell of a journey. You've come so far This has been incredible to watch! Keep movin' forwards!
Well, first thing: there are no spawn points for enemies with exception to invaders, and even so, invaders will always appear on the same place, while the enemies that attack you from behind are always there, tucked away in some corner, up at some column, hanging from the ledge and so on and so forth, but they are always there, you can always snipe them before they can trigger and attack you, always. Now, while I love the first game and this one, I have a love/hate relationship with 3... While 1 and 2 were all about learning and developing, 3 is about how much you can exploit something before it punishes you, it's not as fun as 2 was, and I played 2 so much, the original 2 and SotFS together amount to about 500h to me, it's not my most played game, but still, it's up there, and I loved all of it, for learning and experience made so much difference, like you're achieving something not just bashing your head against it untill you eventually got it, like the Pursuer, my first fight with it was a grindfest, it took me dozens of atempts untill I finally learned all his paterns and attacks and then he became a minial boss, something I didn't really have to put effort into defeating, so easy that I would get to him without using heals, would defeat him without taking damage, heck, would go through Giant's Forest without taking damage, all because I spent so much time learning and dying beforehand, or Velstadt, my first 3 fights with him were scary, a giant with heavy attacks and magic that felt impossible to beat, by the time I fought him on NG+ he was but another enemie, the fear was gone, I had learned, I had conquered his patterns, I had conquered the fight. That's what I call good design.
I disagree with the notion that there shouldn't be as many characters that should parry you. These games, especially DS2, were designed with multiplayer in mind. Not having a good portion of AI know how to parry your attacks leads for a rude awakening as or versus invading spirits, where the tier of difficulty generally much higher and varied in mechanics versus a set AI behavior.
And I disagree with your reasoning but not your conclusion because pve and pvp play absolutely nothing alike. Also to say Soulsbornekiro games are built with pvp in mind is biased thinking given that you can play offline and still experience the full breadth of the games and that Sekiro lacks pvp entirely. Enemies should be able to parry simply because it's a tool that exists in the game and is available to the PC.
How do you balance parrying with AI? It's reaction based and completely overpowered if you remove the reaction element. So what, they guarantee parry you every third time? Half the time? Is that fair? Fun? How do you bait out the parry from a computer? How do you counter it if they always time it right? I dunno man, seems like a recipe for disaster. By the way Dark Souls balanced this by having "parry stances" for enemies so you KNOW when they will parry and can act accordingly. It is well balanced there.
Nice video, one issue I have though is when you talk about enemies spawning behind you, giving the example of huntsmans copse. Not a single enemy in that level just spawns behind you. You are being caught off guard because you literally are missing their starting placement. The guy chasing you on to the bridge is one of 5 enemies that are waiting on top of the building before the bridge. In fact even the skeletons in the cave are placed and don’t spawn in. Besides invading (and red phantom) enemies, there really isn’t much enemy spawning going on while you are running through the areas.
Personally I've never been more divided on game than DS2 Scholar because there are a lot of things that I love like Majula being my favourite hub area right up there with DS1 firelink and the fashion souls, but then there's things I don't like such as the ADP stat being something your forced to level up to have a good experience and not take damage when successfully rolling through an attack as well as some stupid hit-boxes like when attacking a mimic from behind only to get teleported into its grap attack.
Dark Souls 3 isn't the most aesthetically spicy, but it's my favorite. Best bosses, best gameplay, and it isn't as oppressively depressing as Bloodborne. A little sunlight goes a long way.
My first souls game was DS2 (the original version) sonit holds a special place in my heart when it comes to souls games... But i played the remastered version of ds1 relatively recently and i can certainly understand now why some people were dissatisfied with the sequel. That said I'd still put both games on an equal footing. They're the same but they're also different and that's what a good series (be it games, tv or film) should really be...
Dark souls 2 is so strange to me. Its so different than the 1st or 3rd in so many ways. And its undeniably less of a piece of art than the 1st or 3rd. And yet, its the dark souls entry ive spent the most time playing. Hundreds more hours in ds2 than 1 or 3. Theres just so much content, and there is so many build possibilities that I keep coming back for another playthrough. And ng+ finally feels worth it with the changes from regular ng. so sometimes I like a build so much I find myself going through ng+ with it too. Not to mention the DLCs fix a lot of the obvious drawbacks from the main game. I mean the crown of the iron king was basically like "oh our level design wasnt vertical enough huh? BAM the whole thing is a tower >:)". Its a strange and yet enthralling game. Its as paradoxically good and bad as Nicholas Cage
Buy and emulate Demon Souls (RPCS3) it would work better as a view into what made the games you've covered (and will cover) what they are. (Considering its age Demon Souls is very playable IMO)
I would recommend getting a PS3 but, otherwise, I agree with you. Specially, I would love to hear what Tommy has to say about the World Tendency mechanic (and why it was so controversial, that they removed it from future games)
“You know this is a safe place” tell that to those evil Majula piggies.
and the skeleton basement rofl
🤣🤣🤣
and the player themselves, if they are on a mission to assassinate some of the NPCs.
or that pit that you can just barely get down if you are wearing the right stuff and have max health and are human
@Axton Riley Yo not only do I not care but that's really fucking scummy. I reported your comment, hopefully UA-cam does something about that.
I loved DS2 cause it had the best fashion souls and power stances
I never really used power stances but man I love this game. There are some brilliant areas and concepts that made it so interesting to play through.
And the spells are varied!
Personally I was a magic user since power stance felt really weak in the early to mid game.
But it also had the worst boss fights, enemies and areas
It sucks, because while DS2 did things worse than any other souls game, some aspects were just objectively better. Dual wielding has lots of variety, the left hand is actually useful for cosplay, health reduction is gradual rather than instant, bonfire ascetics are a great way to skew difficulty, fashion souls, has more content than any other souls game, the best DLCs, has better progression than DS1, NG+ is actually worthwhile, challenge runs are rewarded etc...
Dark Souls 2 is one of those games most people either really love or really hate.
I love it but I can see why it's considered the black sheep of the trilogy. I remember absolutely hating the two last DLCs though. Can't really put my finger on why.
It's like a bad drug, I think I really want to play it and miss it. Then I get gang banged by 30 cheap enemies with broken hitboxes and remember I actually hate it.
@LeadFaun You're just kinda wrong. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Im one that reallt loves it.
Hands down my most loved dark souls for me, that I admittedly didn't realize up until my third playthrough, as in the first two i gave up pretty early on. The third one? I sucked the living christ out of it and I was saddened after beating all 42 bosses that I couldn't get more (besides +NG or new character). I finished it about a year and a half ago and have only tried the scholars of sins version.
Dark Souls 2 is the only in the series to get NG+ right, or at least somewhat right. My mind was blown when Freja suddenly attacked me in an earlier spot or when Flexile Armor had ninja pals in that cramped room. Man I've had so much fun with this game. I know it's the black sheep and I can see why but it will always hold a special place in my heart. SotFS was fun but it felt like they rode the "omg so hard" meme with all the seemingly random adds.
I love the new mimics, those fuckers get me everytime
best ng+ for sure.hope they use it again. keeping things fresh is a must.
"Ninja pals" that's epic
Yea playing SotFS for the first time is absolutely kicking my ass. I rage quit multiple times and deleted the game twice to force a break while it redownloaded.
Mage life is hard. Iron Keep took forever this time around, and the old iron DLC too even though I already knew it. By the time I finally killed the blue smelter demon I was running through the jail cell gauntlet 9/10 times. I’m a magic/fire mage and that bastard is nearly immune to my shit. As a melee character he was a breeze.
It was all worth it. I beat Midir quicker than some of the DS2 zones, but I want that challenge. My only gripe is that SotFS didn’t balance the weapons. My +10 fire longsword with 50/30 Int/Faith is far worse than an uninfused Rapier/Mace with base str/dex to wield them. Slash and split damage is straight garbage still.
Ironically i actually like DS2 more than Bloodborne. Im one of the rare rare folks who actually strongly disliked nearly every change in Bloodborne and was very happy that they didnt keep all of it in DS3
I had played & finished all the FROM's Soulsborne games multiple times, but DkS2 still holds a special place in my heart, being my favorite Dark Souls game.
It might not be the best, it surely does have its issues that I hate very much, but it speaks to me on a spiritual level, thematically, the most. It invokes that surreal mix of delusion, paranoia, loss of memories, slow degradation of the very Self of a person - all this hits so hard.
Viktor Vorsin I agree completely. The Fire Keeper in Majula might be my favourite character in all of Soulsborne.
@LeadFaun i disagree, in the start of the game you learn your character is coming here to cure his hallowing to remember his family and return to them, you also forget this as you progress wondering what is going on in this land, the monarch? who is that is it me? why am i the one killing all of these things, just to meet the king? then as you keep progressing you forget the very reasons you came here, just as the fire keepers said. the slow degration of self is seen in every time you die and don't use a effigy. paranoia is very high as the game puts in you vastly different areas, some being like the shaded woods where there are people who look like phantoms in their own world but they are actually there to kill you, you also are put into areas where its dark and a torch is needed (unless you wimp out and up your brightness) these areas you cannot use a shield and you are boned if you lose your torch as then you suddenly are plunged into the darkness. delusions require that you pay attention to the game itself, the lore behind everything, you are a simple man turning hallow and now suddenly everyone is calling you a monarch, then others a simple adventurer, some don't care and others do, but the truth behind it all is that the emerald herald is your queen, destined to overthrow you and take all your power. we see this in the main story and in the expansions.
in the end, this game is hated for purposes that i think everyone doesn't fully believe in. in a mainstream idea to hate ds2, i understand. the game doesn't do the best always but i must say i enjoy my experience with this game more than i did with ds1, ds3 maybe its hard to say, and bloodborne is great and i have yet to fully finish it. i never have played demon souls.
@LeadFaun It's amazing how you people just... dismiss everything unique and good about DS2 to blindly hate it... for you to even say what you just said is just such a moot point, NONE of the dark souls games do much with their themes... the story telling of the series is literally in scraps of lore dialogue, item descriptions... if anything, I'd say ds2 did great with it's themes. Ds2 is about hollowing, to put it simply. Loss of self, the cycles that make your effort pointless and that there is a truth beneath how the world is portrayed. All of this is shown first hand through experience rather than through simple dialogue. You see Lucatiel at multiple points, you watch her slowly lose herself and see her fear of this. You see Vendrick's husk, his efforts having led to nothing. You travel the dlc areas and see other cycles that feel like other worlds in how huge and how much history each area has, but each is only whats left. Kingdoms formed and fell.
@LeadFaun Nah, you simply ignored them.
@LeadFaun the entire theme of the game is talking about cycles, how we can't break free of the curse, and how they both make everything we do worthless
Aldia is a scholar who through experimentation tried to get inmortality to break free from the curse but ended up becoming a deformed beast
Lucatiel slowly forgets not only herself but what she even came to drangleic for, even though she was filled with resolve until the end, proving you can't beat the curse
All of the giant kingdoms across history end up being destroyed from the inside by a daughter of manys
Saulden, crestfallen due to his beliefs that there's absolutely no way you could accomplish your journey and even if you did it wouldn't matter
Vengarl, which is pretty much just a character created to mock the curse, an undying head destined to live forever as his body murders everyone it sees
Vendrick of course, sacrificed it all in search of a cure for the curse and all he ended up doing was destroying his kingdom
The great souls which have been passed down to similar beings for uncountable generations
Etc, etc, etc
Even if it doesn't go very deep with it, the game has a theme and it sticks to it
I think playing Bloodborne first is a good idea. Then you can see what they carried over into DS3.
Already playing DS1, should I play Bloodborne next if I can?
@@lidge1994 I don't think it matters a whole lot what order you play, though it will probably influence your opinions.
Like I started with 3 and ended up enjoying the faster (though still methodical in a way) gameplay.
Translated great into BB, not as well into 1
@@lidge1994 I think you should first finish the dark souls trilogy before going into bloodborne, personally I have found the transition more fluid from slower shield based combat to bb as ds3 unlike previous ones is much faster but not as fast as bb
@@MrArtarius cool, thanks
I played Bloodborne before any other dark souls and it was amazing
The worst part about Vendrick's blessing is that it doesn't carry over to ng+
here is a blessing that will last you for about half an hour that you get at the end game and doesn't even give you an edge on battle.
thank you dark souls 2.
At the very least the next time you only need to get to Vendrick and not get all the crowns again. So in NG+ it lasts for about the last quarter of the game
@@alephkasai9384 no, you have to beat them all again.
@@alephkasai9384 No, you have to kill all of those bosses again, if you want proof I can show you my ds2 character. I was barely able to kill fume knight and elana on ng+5 so I gave up on the ivory crown, haven't even entered the 3rd dlc
@@nathonnovak No you just need all the crowns
I want a 1 hour loop of this guy whispering ‘Drangleic’ for some epic ASMR
I disagree about the hidden enemies being a bad thing. Usually you can find them if you're vigilant, though even if you don't I think it adds a lot to the gameplay. The example you gave in the video, the enemies in Huntsman's Copse, can be spotted up on the pillars and attacked from range or fought one on one. Very few enemies just spawn in from a location you can't see. The especially well hidden ones are usually just weak hollows or stealthy enemies like the rogues in huntsman's copse or the masked guys in earthen peak, there mostly to throw a wrench into your plans without being especially threatening on their own. The enemy placement in 2, scholar especially, puts a much greater focus on adapting to changing circumstances and often turns those ambush encounters into an interesting puzzle rather than a simple test of combat skill. There's a few exceptions, the npc invaders and the pursuer minibosses being the main examples, but the invaders are well telegraphed and the pursuer encounters are very easy to escape. The increased focus on managing groups of enemies and adapting to ambushes is one of the big reasons I fell in love with 2.
Evidently because of how enemy placement and aggroing in DS2 is done differently, you have to approach it differently.
I think the best example of this is the location with 2 giants in harvest valley(After the first poison pool) From my experience the best way to fight those 2 is to get right in between and juggle between them. A hit on one then a dodge away from the attack from the other.
Admittedly, this leads to weapons with short range such as hammers, straight swords and daggers having less viability in PVE. That leads to those weapons being relegated to sidearms for the most part in case your primary weapon is about to break. Things such as their low weight also fits them quite nicely in that niche.
This is quite different from DS1 where every weapon was equally viable as long as you had the right build. Enemies came one by one or were made so the player could kill the first before the rest came
What about the enemies that just attack you through doors without much of any signposting? That is absolute bullshit and one of them is a one-shot in Aldia's Keep.
@@balleet210 That one can be seen through the bars on the door.
@@balleet210 What are those? I don't remember any.
Ring of whispers
I love that you dont just talk about the game, but also the relationship between it and your personal life, and how the evolution of that relationship played a massive role in your opinion on the game, its mechanics and reward systems. This is the 1st time ive seen your vids, but i study AI and love games so i can tell ill be sticking around lol.
I am glad someone else called out Dark Souls 1 AI. Many enemies will literally stand there and let you arrow them to death if they have noy sighted or noticed you.
"how serene and calming Majula can be"
*pigs have entered the chat*
Scholar of the First Sin is..... weird. Even though enemy placement evolved throughout the game, and even between the two versions of the game, Scholar always felt a bit.... too much. Enemy placement makes sense sometimes, but every encounter has the potential to turn into a brutal melee because they were put everywhere. The first Dark Souls' placement felt a bit more, let's say "handcrafted" that the "thrown together" placement from the second. Like most places feel a bit like "oh, let's put a guy there, and there, and there, and oh why not this one there! Player will focus on these fifty dudes and get destroyed by that one", instead of "Okay, we got a dude hiding there, should put an archer here to divert the player's attention so that he can be attacked if he didn't pay attention to the growling on his left" (exagerrating obviously)
Great vid though!
Yeah the enemy placement - like the map structure - lacks that creative touch at times, whereby you can easily get stuck being chased by five enemies at once. Heidi is really bad for it, considering it's one of the first locations you'll wind up visiting.
SotFs does overdo it in a few places. Iron Keep can have the player invaded by 3 npc invaders before you've even really entered the area. The remix enemies were designed with people in mind who've already played the game. So much of it is different just for the sake of being different. There are a few places however, such as dragon shrine that they genuinely improved.
On a world building level, Scholar also feels like it ruins much of the design that went into Drangleic. The best example of this is how the Heide Knights are all at Heide’s Tower of Flame. The background of the knights is that they abandoned the tower. But even ignoring that, in the base game the Heide Knights felt like a very special encounter. It was always an experience seeing one peacefully resting by the side of a road. But in scholar of the First Sin they’re just another enemy out for your blood with none of the nuance they had in the original game.
@@latrodectusmactans7592 while true you have to bear in mind that the ones in heids tower all wield swords (baring the one individual who wields a spear) and are all peacefull untill you kill the dragon rider. This may be personal opinion but I choose to see it like this, in the game a heid knight will only attack you if it views you as a threat to it, or in the case of heids tower in the new version, a threat to its home.
When you first enter the area the heid knights simply see you as another worthless undead that can't do much, if any damage so they just ignore you, letting their weaker (yet twice as big) allies deal with you instead. But when you kill the dragon rider, something that far surpasses them in strength, they Immediately spring to life and attempt to kill you on sight as they now relize that you are actually capable of causing damage to their home.
As for them not feeling unique, I get what you are saying, but the did keep all of the unique heid knights scattered throughout the world. So there is definitely evidence that some, if not most of the heid knights have left their homeland
Also lets be realistic for a second here, what exactly are the odds for the entirety of a militarys elite and most likely most loyal soldiers to just abandon their homeland entirely?
While its debatable as to what they are exactly, I pretty sure they were still human (or at least still sane) when they made the choice to leave, and I wouldent be surprised if the knights still at the tower refused solely out of personal pride, or loyalty to what little remained of their home.
But thats just my two sense. you opinion is your own after all.
@@AIandGames I mean, the only way you get doubled (or tripled) in Heide is if you try to run past the Old Knights, aggro the Heide Knights prematurely, or don't pull one particular group effectively. It sets up Dragon Shrine (a much later area) well in that regard, as they share all of those characteristics.
I will always adore DS2 For getting me into the series. My brother was into it first. He liked the idea of a super difficult game and played it a lot. He tried to get me to play it but I had Black Ops Zombies, and I was addicted to kino. Fast forward to him being on his mission in Indiana. I missed him from time to time and without his prying eye I decided to boot up and make my first character. By the time he came back about a year and a half later I had done like 8 characters with several playthroughs each. We also managed to get bloodborne and DS3 when they came out. I tried DS1, but it was far too clunky for my tastes. I beat it once so that I could say that I had beaten it and never touched it since. DS3 is a blast though, even to this day.
Yeah I can imagine playing Dark Souls while mourning could have some adverse effects on one's mental state
I don't hate DS2 anymore but I do still prefer DS1 from a map design standpoint. Not being able to teleport holds the isolation that the game is trying to instill upon you. You're never quite safe and you don't know when you'll see Firelink again. When you go all the way into Hell and finally climb back up, you really do want to praise the sun. In DS2, you really just feel like you're playing a game. DS1 only gives you the right to teleport when getting around OFFICIALLY becomes a huge pain in the ass. You don't take it for granted that way and you still feel like you're being forced to survive in this strange world rather than just pushing through game levels. DS1 was SUCH a unique feeling experience for me as a freshmen in highschool. It truly changed me and it is kindof sad that the sequels don't feel anything like that. I LOVE 3 but it still isn't the same :/
DS2 is really cool. Contentwise, it's the best of the souls games.
Buildwise it has so many possibilities as well with how enchantement works, and vast array of different movesets.
DS2 is my favorite of the bunch, especially with how they handled magic in the game.
After they nerfed the initial hex degeneracy, that is. But yeah, build variance and viability was easily the best among all of the soulsborne games. Balance, too, if you discount the few missteps (ice rapier, I'm looking at you!).
@@qwormuli77 yeah, specially when you can do a "1 int mage (Raw Blue Flame)" run and it works better than a standard 50 int mage (search the video by ymfah, it's ridiculous)
Highly recommend You play Bloodborne first.
Firstly, because it was being developed around the same time as DSII you could compare how the DS formula evolved in a different way and compare it to DSII.
Secondly, DSIII has some Bloodborne DNA in it, so it would help you to understand why certain aspects of the game are the way they are.
But in the end, it is your choice on how to experience these wonderful games.
That's a pretty solid argument. Will keep it in mind!
I would think it would be SO MUCH HARDER to go back to the deliberate pace of DS1 and DS2 after starting with Bloodborne and DS3.
started with elden ring and going back to ds1 was rough lol
my recommended order would be the order they released, starting with ds1 (haven’t played demon souls)
bloodborne was so enjoyable after ds2 and these are my favorites in the series by far
Sorry to hear about your father and how is related with Dark Souls. I had a similar experience but with Demon Souls, bought the game when my father got really ill, and a few months later I finished the game a day after he pass away. To this day listening to that menu music really brings back bitter memories, so that is why I never played again.
If you play Bloodborne next, the Return to Yharnam fan event (October) should let you experience Hunter Invasions at a similar rate to when the game was first released.
Oh good call!
@@AIandGames If you want to be invaded a bit, know that Bloodborne does not let invaders into your world AT ALL (outside a couple late game areas) unless you look for cooperators or try to go invading yourself. You also have to hit at least level 30. Good hunting!
So none at all? There are only 2 areas you can be invaded in and by the time someone does invade you are at the boss or dead because of the eye. Or you already killed the bell bitch. Regardless bloodborne has practically 0 random invasions when i put my 300 hours into it.
@@GordKeen bloodborne definitely dropped the ball on the invasions, the bell maiden mechanic is really stupid and if you kill the bell maiden you can't have any invasions in that area (like nightmare frontier) until ng+. The chalice dungeons are pretty much the best way to consistently have invasions, but a lot of people can't stand the dungeons. I absolutely loved them but I can see why some people didn't like them much
Dreage only 300 hours lol get good at the game then you can speak your mind on it
12:10 "You know this is a safe place"
Hackers: Invade in Majula.
Me: *confused screaming*
Also piggies. Nevar forgit the piggies.
After 10 episodes of Design Dive, I return to the most popular topic I've covered to-date: Dark Souls. I had a lot of fun playing Scholar of the First Sin. It's distinct, it's unique, though I do feel Dark Souls is still the better game. I actually finished the game + DLC earlier this year, but decided to sit on it for a while and think more about my experience.
Be sure to fill in the poll card on the video to let me know which game I should tackle next: Bloodborne or Dark Souls III.
IT COMING BACK JUST HEAR THE END SONG IN THE BACKROUND MAKE ME WANNA PLAY IT AGEEN I DONT KNOW WHY POAPLE HEAT IT BUT I LOVED IT AND I STILL DO
i play DS2 right now for the first time (streaming it for a friend, just broing out)
and while i love DS1 and see the differences that ds2 did, i do have to say that i still grew to love this game too. Especially the environments are so wonderfully crafted.
i really love the moment you meet king vendrick in the undead crypt, just had a wonderfully eerie moment.
Also, the music is very good and coming back to Majula and the herald feels like coming home every time
Those Undead Hunters in Huntsman's copse are actually perched on top of a few pillars and a cliff edge just before that bridge, the only enemies that actually spawn in remotely are invaders and the Pursuers, and those are broadcasted events
As mentioned somewhere in the comments section (god knows where now), the perched enemies aren't the issue. Sorry, should've been clearer in the video.
Except when you move into NG+. Then you have actual new enemies spawned in most maps. (Can't be sure if all, but might be.)
Point is that they don't spawn until seen unless they are invaders or the Pursuer. They follow the same rules as DS1, i.e. hiding out of sight until they attack.
i think ds2 is my favorite of the soulsborne style of games, i haven't played demon souls so i cannot say i wouldn't enjoy that one more. however i think ds2 is great for each area sets up a lore that it follows none of the area don't make sense and none of the areas seem over populated because this is a dying kingdom overrun by the curse and by a queen that cares little of her people. so the people attempt to kill and pillage, you have the old fort where the giants attacked being populated with enough soldiers that probably could handle a giant attack, then you enter heides tower where the non-hallow knights let you pass until you attempt to harm the boss, where the only protectors is magical golems protecting the path and the ways to make the boss easier, the game doesn't just throw together spawns they think about how this place use to be a thriving kingdom that has fallen to the curse and lack of care by the nobles. where soldiers run a muck like normal bandits and strange creatures have moved in to become their gods or queens or bosses. while drangelic has locked itself away allowing very few to stay and the only ones who protect its door are knights that are duty bound but they are low in number.
I feel that dark souls 2 did well, I understand that it was functionally unfamiliar to its former, but there was honest improvements, like magic being a lot more viable and the fun of creating builds for pvp/pve, and more areas being active despite dead bosses. Even bows could be used to effect for the first time, and due to the improved net code and limitations for invaders/hosts it was probably the best experience I had for a souls title, Tbh the PvE became more of an after thought, as I entered ng+ my solid loadout was just stepping stones to expirement and have fun by that time, making multiple SL150 characters n such and having communities to support eachother in this was The best,
TLDR
this game was a pvp gold mine, pve was uniform by the time you ng++ the community for both was the best
"magic being more viable" as in it being completely broken and unbeatable. Magic was amazing in the first game too. You should give it a try.
i agree magic was busted in ds1 but there’s many qol improvements in ds2 like animations and such that allow for much better tracking on enemies
love how in ds1 you can fire a soul arrow point blank on an enemy and it doesn’t hit them lol
You should explore Shadow of Mordor/War (if you haven't already.) Very curious about what you'll find & research.
I've played (and finished) Shadow of Mordor. Hoping to sit and play War later this year. Been toying with writing an episode about it for a while now.
do the "chronological launch games", i think it will help you understand DS3 in a different way. Great video Mate!
This game is so dreamlike. I love it
I agree with you so much
The return to yharnam bloodborne community event is happening this month from Oct 5th-Nov 5th, so it's the absolute perfect time to play as you'll be able to experience co-op and pvp in an active state. Definitely play bloodborne while you have this opportunity!
Good idea!
Oh yes, I was hoping you would come back to this series. Great 'rambling' as always. ;-)
Wow, I never knew pattying was such an important mechanic in Dark Souls XD
Very nice to see refreshing ideas and beliefs communicated about his game , things that haven't been commonly parroted , positive or negative. Its easy to tell that this is a very genuine one, truly coming from someone's core. I'm subscribing and looking to see more content like this, you're underrated or undiscovered my friend and I hope you grow to a number more equivalent of your integrity. Thanks for communicating things that I couldn't wrap my head around and put it in cohesive sentences and words, this game just somehow makes me feel much more than the others in the series, as much as I have enjoyed them as well.
First time finding this channel and I think this video is really well done. I appreciate when people can elaborate on why they feel the way they do so fluently. It helps open my mind to new things when I can understand what people get out of them.
I sincerely hope you do this same video for the rest of the soulsborne series and give your thoughtful input on how design differed/remained the same from each previous installment and how they impacted you.
Thanks for this excellent video.
Hey you should look at the game Rain World. It's survival platformer/metroidvania that creates a complex and arguably realistic ecosystem of creatures through simple AI and rules. Hate the phrase but you could say it's "like Dark Souls" because it is punishing and difficult but also extremely rewarding because of the way the entire game is designed.
Sonething like how AI and simple rules create a complex world and ecosystem would an interesting video.
"Something like how AI and simple rules create a complex world and ecosystem would an interesting video."
The word you're looking for is emergence, and it is a really intresting thing. It's an term used in biolgy and it has been ,for example, used to explain how ant colonies can be so complex. I think it's quite neat.
if you're intrested about it, here's a link to video explaining the thing ua-cam.com/video/16W7c0mb-rE/v-deo.html&t
But yeah, talking about AI emergence could be a really good video topic.
@@Trombi01 Interesting. Thanks!
You should definitely make a design dive for Dark Souls III and Bloodborne.
That's the first time I've heard anyone supporting the map-layout of Dark Souls 2 and I'm enjoying your point of view quite a lot.
While playing through the Soulsborne series, I struggled to continue on with DS1 at multiple times: any time I've hit the Depths and Blighttown, I knew I had to push through it in a single go. Stopping in these areas and trying to get back to the game after a few weeks, is a tremendous drag and usually forced me to restart the play through entirely, whereas DS2 supported the "pick-up-and-go" approach by always being able to return to Majula. It made me feel at home, always gave me a place to rest at and alowed me to conquer the areas in my own pace.
Your arguments helped me realizing this greatly!
The parriable nature of most DS2 bosses was a new one for me as well. Every DS1 boss forced me to forget about the parry-button entirely and I never questioned, whether this would be changed in the sequel. Seems like I have a bit of catching up to do.
Restricting certain bosses from being parried is probably only used to visualize the power difference between a simple (chosen) undead and the bosses' ridiculous power - I just think it creates a disparity between reliable game mechanics and the storytelling. Why restrict a core combat-mechanic for this, if you're able throw souls and upgrade-materials at your favourite weapon and three-shot bosses anyway?
This approach always felt a bit dodgy to me - conquering the soulsborne-bosses is definitely a rewarding climb, but mostly due to unnecessary restrictions. The DMC-series on the other hand usually delivers well with reliability of game mechnics, by allowing to parry or grab any enemy and boss, as long as you've learned the rules and timing is on par. They are still challenging, and it's still nothing but the player's growth allowing to conquer them - thankfully without any restrictions. Parrying most bosses feels like a step in the right direction and I think I'd like to replay the game with this new knowledge!
That was a great watch, thanks a lot for the video! You've gotten yourself a new viewer. :)
there's a hidden bonfire in the depths and the remaster fixed the fps issues in blight town, blight town is really not that bad at 60fps and if you take it slow with spider shield.
Bloodborne is the greatest hommage to H. P Love craft. its mesmerising, awesome & exhilarating once you get the knack of using the gun as your primary defence mechanism. Didn't take me long to platinum the game either. Its in my top 5 games of all time
I loved DS2 for how it felt like walking through a dream almost all the way through. Then again, I loved Shadow Tower, and you can tell that's where many, maaany things from DS2 came from.
you might want to do a segment on the NPC phantoms as well, they have some utterly ridiculous behaviors such as nearly perfect tracking, animation cancelling and HP/Poise that is impossible to reach via normal standards. Might be something interesting to research.
"You know it's a safe place"
Obviously you haven't met the little piggies yet.
You should take a dive into Tactics Ogre on the PSP. We regularly have discussions testing the hundreds of unique mechanics and bizarre interactions, even 10 years after the game came out. It's a strategy game that, much like Souls, tends to feel super punishing to players on the first run, but is a massive ocean of fun interactions on repeat playthroughs. It was, in many ways, created as a project of love for those that made it, since the series was largely assumed to be dead, but had a very passionate following even before the remake. I was planning to make a video like that myself, but you'd do a far better job at it.
Duly noted! Would need to find a PSP, or a half-decent emulator. :)
@@AIandGames PPSSPP handles it pretty well, the only issue it has is lag in the overhead map during bad weather, which only applies on potato quality compies. This game is legit made with so much care that there's only 3 known minor bugs that anyone's found, and I've had save files reach over 600 hours before (only ever seen one of them first hand, and stream it regularly.).
The Huntsmans Copse criticism is just wrong. You can see all the enemies beforehand. They don't just spawn. You can even see them in the video hanging from the bridge. And if you meant the enemies before that, those can be seen too. They are placed on the pillars and jump down.
Hey a balanced and non emotional look into ds2. That's insane! Lol. Anyway, good job with this video (almost a year later), love your voice and your critique!
Well written and a good evaluation. :)
Dark Souls 3 is my favorite of all of these games!
Same here. I like the bloody, intense swordplay. Though, I will say this, as I've said before in other videos. Dark Souls 2 has the greatest looking armor sets in all of gaming. Plus it maintained a level of meticulous craft in its models as thier is little to no clipping weapons in armor. Shields, greatshields, are shifted to the left of the character to not clip through weapons. Most of the weapons are held correctly, as Demon Souls was notorious for retarded weapon holding. Even DS 3 couldn't compare to Dark Souls 2 attention to correct armor models. Look at Smough or Havels armor in 3, holding Blk Iron Greatshield with say, a longsword. You'll see what I mean, if you dont already.
while i agree that DKSII goes too far with its enemies appear from offscreen locations and behind you i strongly disagree with your hunstmans copse example.
the art direction draws attention to the multiple figures standing on poles, with their tan hoods (the warmest color on screen) and their dark particle effects (the only particle effects on screen) in hallway that restricts your vision and a path that angles upward (drawing your camera upward) to show that there is in fact a carefully orchestrated ambush ahead without being obvious about how well its signaled that to the player.
they are hidden, but very much not offscreen, and definitely not behind you (if you were paying attention to your surroundings)
You're right that there are elements of Huntsman Copse that do it well. Your example of the hooded figures on poles is certainly the best one IMO, given it punishes you if you don't bother to look up and take stock. My gripe is with several parts on the way up to that, notably the derelict building. Especially if you take the optional path to go up to the roof, where two (maybe three?) enemies just pop out of a rock outcrop.
@@AIandGames
yeah thats one of the bad ones i was talking about (i didnt know how to differentiate the area between those two encounters)
@@AIandGames: No Huntsman Corps isn't really a good example at all. Even those enemies on the roof don't entirely pop out of nowhere, and are actually on the map the whole time, just very difficult to see from standard angles of approach. There's nothing that can be done to avoid the ambush after the player is already on the roof, but from outside the building it's possible to snipe those enemies before going up. Whether or not the way the enemies are hidden is "fair" or not could be debated, and indeed DS2 seems to almost revel in intentionally misdirecting players or otherwise hiding enemies in very awkward locations to pull off these gothcha moments, but it rarely ever "cheats" by just spawning enemies.
Now major exceptions that does stands out would be Undead Crypt. The Leydia Pyromancers can spawn in indefinitely, but at least most of their tombstones are easily identifiable and can even be permanently destroyed to prevent future ambushes. What's less fair are the Wall Ghosts, who while technically always there are impossible to see before getting close enough to trigger their ambush, making them very much trial and error, although this is moderately offset by them being entirely stationary. Worst of all however are the bell ringing Hollows most of which are inaccessibly hidden under the map until triggered, especially the trio in the alcove under the stairs leading Velstadt. The first one can be easily dispatched with cautious exploration, but there is absolutely no way to know there are going to be two more of them and so all but the most judiciously paranoid player is very likely to have moved on before they reveal themselves, making it very hard for a first or even second time player to avoid getting caught by the gauntlet of summoned Leydia Pyromancers while rushing the length of the hall to reach the boss.
The other major exception would be reindeer that spawn out of the blizzard Frigid Outskirts in the third DLC. Arguably less egregious, being an optional challenge area, but still no less unfair and poorly designed.
@@@AIandGames what are you talking about? not only you can see them wen you enter the map, but they also are here to indicate you to your next path. again, you have to look around just like the rest of them. They are just harder to find.
i personally never had any problem with enemies appearing behind me from offscreen locations, every single time they came from behind i was able to find where the next time around, it was never unfair it was punishing me for being too focused on a single goal.
I've had this game forever now. Originally bought it on the 360 then on the One, I haven't beat it on either.....
Dark Souls 2 was made to feel like a dark fantasy *novel*
Think about it:
You travel from a bonfire after slaying a hard boss to a bonfire elsewhere, kind of like when a chapter in a fantasy novel ends and the writer skips all the travel log to get to the main point quicker.
The story is a LOT less foggy than in DS1 too, like it was made so everything made sense from a narrative perspective.
And the Emerald Herald, the character that helps you advance by telling you the story, the one who awaits you after every battle, telling you to become stronger so you won't fail, because she depends on you. She wants you to succeed, she depends on you, and always seems glad to see you're okay... Well, she's the one who levels you up. By using a feather - *a writing quill*
Even the true final boss of the game, the Emerald Herald's creator is called "Aldia, *Scholar* of the First Sin", like he's a literate, a scholar - *a writer* - himself, and he fights you, a character of his own story, one he is probably imagining, to see if you can find an alternative path, an alternative solution to the other choices, kinda like he's trying to correct some mistakes he did in the past revision of his story - as if he was trying to correct the mistakes he as the *writer of Dark Souls 2 original release*...
Thanks for reading all that, and may the flames guide your souls toward peace.
I loved that game Because the Lance/Spear Backstab and Broken Guard Riposte Animation... Also Casts and Special Weapons were Pretty Fun and Unique
I played just DkS1 even by the point even DkS3 was released, one day I really craved a new adventure but felt bored with the gameplay of a lot of rpg's... I decided to finally pick up DkS2 and went in expecting I might hate it as much as others, and while I hate some things about it, overal I really loved it. Doesn't do everything I love about DkS1 but it does have a lot of other stuff that I love about DkS1, and some stuff that's unique to DkS2. Shulva is definitely one of my favorite areas, DkS1's dlc was incredible but in some ways DkS2's surpasses it.
Some friends who've played all three stand by their belief that Scholar of the First Sin is the best in the trilogy. They were - until some comments started rolling in - the only people I'd heard think that. Though I will say the Lost Crowns DLC is damn good! I really wanted to talk about that as well, but realised this video was already long enough!
@@AIandGames Yep haha, I sometimes watch others play DkS2 and when they get to the DLC I really want to start another run myself, Eleum Loyce has so much cool stuff too. DkS1 feels like home to me, and with the way DkS2 is so grand and different I think that actually helped it give me exactly what I wanted from it.
Many people have a love hate relationship with Ds2( or knockoff souls).
Appreciate the in-depth analysis, I love this game so much.
Man that seqeunce in the demon ruins was a fucking power trip, and really showed off how far you'd come.. you had gone from a lowly prisoner barely able to fight off a single demon to a badass to whom demons were merely a inconvenience. The sense of progression was unmatched
The usage of Taurus demons and Capra demons is the same as in dark souls 2 where pursuer, ruin sentries, and dragon riders become normal enemies. It’s actually in one of your progression points where something that you thought was a boss early on turns out to be a pretty normal guy later.
I got into Dark Souls 1 just a few weeks before the second game was coming out, without realizing it at the time, and only got about halfway through the first title, right as I was getting to O&S which upsets me that I did that nowadays. While I did eventually go back to finish the first game, and loved every moment of it, 2 gave me a more...homely feel to it, mainly by ways of a, at-the-time, super active playerbase. It was the super fun pvp fights I had, and the multiple playthroughs, the builds, the rapidly changing environments and all the weirdness the layout of Dragleic brought, I think it was a combination of these that makes me still fondly look at Dark Souls 2. Of course there's the usual grievances to be had, Soul Memory most of all, but yes, I still greatly enjoy it despite the massive flaws. Especially fun to still make a new character and go mess with the rare, new player you find online! Then turn around and help them, of course, by giving them loose items or guiding them to a boss room safely.
There's two aspects to Dark Souls 2 that I haven't seen anyone else mention in the comments: enemies stop respawning, and the game has two difficulty modes.
If you kill an enemy approximately 10 times, they will stop respawning. I managed to do that when trying to kill the Smelter Demon and Fume Knight, I died so many times that I cleared out all the enemies between the bonfire and the boss. It takes a long time, and gives you a mountain of souls, but you can clear out every area in the game. This feels like a great concession to players having trouble with certain bosses, and a way to show clear progress in the game.
I mentioned difficulty modes earlier: you have the normal difficulty and the covenant Company of Champions. If you join the Company of Champions then every enemy becomes tougher and hits harder (roughly similar to NG+), you can't summon allies (neither NPCs nor humans) to co-operate, you can still be invaded, and all enemies respawn endlessly. You can join the covenant by going around a corner in Majula, so you can have it on for as much or as little of the game as you like.
I think these aspects help DS2 stand out from the series as it's own game, and are two of the reasons I'll go back to it.
I will always love DS2 as it got into the souls games, made me go back and retry DS1 after giving up on it all those years before. Never looked back
I played ds1 and 3 before 2 and enjoyed 2 alot more because i went in blind and found it, not as open as ds 1, but are as many paths and weapons to experiment with early on. And the npcs are plentiful :) not as memorable but more of them and they still have interesting lore
I can see every single enemy in Huntsman’s Copse. Took me a while, but they are either hanging off a ledge, sitting on a pillar, or behind or up a tree. Only the butterflies are up in the trees.
I'm new to the channel and I loved this video so first of all great job. Second I personally enjoyed playing through dark souls two on my third playthrough of the game. The first two and even certain points in the third I just felt that the enemies were always teaming up on me and it's not my fault. In dark souls one I either aggroed one enemy at a time or if I automatically pulled the attention of two or more it was a situation that I could focus on killing one while dodging the others attacks. Moving slowly and methodically let me keep all of the fights manageable. In ds2 it felt like I was constantly fighting groups of enemies with little time to counterattack. A lot of this comes from ambushes that are prevalent but in places like iron keep the enemies will come from across the map in groups of two to three and they are all melee and there is an archer that can shoot you from across the map. Playing slow and methodical is the only option as running past enemies to get to the boss doesn't work in ds2. I'm fine with that except it's more of moving forward and then retreating so you can kill two enemies that are chasing you and you can avoid the distant archer or mage. I think most of the time in ds1 and ds3 there was either one ranged and one melee or two melee no ranged or a mix but with a lot of environmental aspects to keep you safe from the ranged if only momentarily so you could deal with the melee. That is one of two issues I had the other being that a lot of bosses were either easy, gimmicky, or both. The boss that is a room full of rats is pretty easy if annoying. The giant rat that is a reconstructed sif fight is gimmicky as you win or lose mostly based off if you kill the little rats fast or not. I wouldn't complain as every game has bosses that aren't the best but ds2 has so many bosses that I would've preferred less bosses but a better quality on the ones they keep. Or even demoting some bosses to mini bosses just enemies that don't respawn. I enjoyed the enemy placement in Heides tower and No Mans Wharf (except the house where 4 or 5 guys show up when you enter). Then places like iron keep and the gutter feel like an unfair challenge. The games are known for difficulty but it feels like instead of making the enemies hard to fight they just filled the areas with enough enemies that it feels difficult. Creating an artificial difficulty based on traps, ambushes, and overwhelming numbers. Dark souls one is difficult due to the enemies being stronger or having unique abilities or attacks. Ds2 has that but it also has waves of basic enemies everywhere.
no mention of how the timing of the parry is different from the previous game?
Demon's Souls and Dark Souls II are easily my favourites.
I'd recommend playing Bloodborne before Dark Souls 3, seeing as a few things were brought over from it into DS3.
I'd say more than a few things. The entire game feels like Bloodborne-lite littered with incessant, uninspired DS1 fanservice.
Dark Souls 3 has a lot of elements from Demons Souls, DaS1-2, and Bloodborne. It really felt like Miyazaki was giving the genre a 100% grand finale as he really wanted to do other projects and game styles.
I'd say Bloodborne first because I feel like it's a good primer for the faster pace of Dark Souls 3.
On my first playthrough of DS games (on PC) and currently on the second game. The biggest complaint starting this game directly after DS remastered was how different parrying is. The animations, the timing, and the methodology are all different so instead I've focused on dodging with a 2 handed drangleic sword :)
I equipped a shield for sir alonne (because i was worried about the fight and did some research lol) and beat him first try. Parrying felt good and consistent in DS1 but DS2 it just feels intentionally inconsistent to make it harder.
Anyway, loving the series so far and love the vid. It's nice to see im not the only one late to the DS party
I wish I could/could've seen your reaction to Holy Knight Hodrick in Dark Souls 3.
If the enemies that parry you in 2 are an annoyance, he's a great pain.
I love this content. Thank you for the video!
I'm actually curious if you'll do a AI and Games of HITMAN 2 as well now, since you did HITMAN (2016) and I really liked that episode. Also, Remnant: From the Ashes is a bit souls-like, but doesn't have a lot of content yet, but I personally enjoy the game a lot.
The whole theme of the Huntsman's Copse is hidden enemies. And you can actually see where the enemies come down from if you take it slow, they're up on perches on the path up to the Undead Purgatory. Given the lore behind the area, where undead are forced to hide, I think it makes sense as a cohesive and quite different experience compared to more straightforward areas such as Heide's Tower of Flame.
Im a big fan of DS2 so im biased, but i feel like the world building/architecture/enemy placement/etc was backed up by lore more so than in 1 and 3.
I loved Dark Souls 2. Maybe not as much as the original, but that's okay. I played it differently, too: Dark Souls, I would sometimes use a FAQ; Dark Souls 2, I played early enough that those kinds of resources weren't available so I was basically going in blind.
Your b-roll of the early tutorial area reminds me: When I first played the game, I thought each of those fog doors led to a boss, so I avoided them - essentially robbing myself of the tutorial until I came back with enough experience that their lessons were useless...
I wonder if I'm the only one.
Man I love this game so much, the whole series actually. I don't know why people hated on the 2nd so much. Like they actually just wanted a copy of the first game.. It was different but still really good. Same with the 3rd.
My time in DS2 is 900+ hours and in all other soullbourne games combined are 400somethin.
Everytime i see a DS2 video on UA-cam, It immediately makes me go and play it again. Despite all the negatives (which I agree with most of them with the haters) its the only one I cant get enough
Dark souls 2 was my favorite.
PLEASE do this same analysis for the original dark souls 2 release and see how much better it feels
Oh, I almost forgot. The RPCS3 emulator runs Demon's Souls now, pretty reliably too! I'm not sure about the updates, I use a slightly older version for stability right now, but I've been able to play the game on PC for months. You might wanna consider that for Demon's Souls when you get a chance.
Damn i remember when you posted the first vid. Its been one hell of a journey. You've come so far
This has been incredible to watch!
Keep movin' forwards!
I loved darksouls 2 just because of dual lighting zweihanders 😁
Well, first thing: there are no spawn points for enemies with exception to invaders, and even so, invaders will always appear on the same place, while the enemies that attack you from behind are always there, tucked away in some corner, up at some column, hanging from the ledge and so on and so forth, but they are always there, you can always snipe them before they can trigger and attack you, always.
Now, while I love the first game and this one, I have a love/hate relationship with 3... While 1 and 2 were all about learning and developing, 3 is about how much you can exploit something before it punishes you, it's not as fun as 2 was, and I played 2 so much, the original 2 and SotFS together amount to about 500h to me, it's not my most played game, but still, it's up there, and I loved all of it, for learning and experience made so much difference, like you're achieving something not just bashing your head against it untill you eventually got it, like the Pursuer, my first fight with it was a grindfest, it took me dozens of atempts untill I finally learned all his paterns and attacks and then he became a minial boss, something I didn't really have to put effort into defeating, so easy that I would get to him without using heals, would defeat him without taking damage, heck, would go through Giant's Forest without taking damage, all because I spent so much time learning and dying beforehand, or Velstadt, my first 3 fights with him were scary, a giant with heavy attacks and magic that felt impossible to beat, by the time I fought him on NG+ he was but another enemie, the fear was gone, I had learned, I had conquered his patterns, I had conquered the fight. That's what I call good design.
I disagree with the notion that there shouldn't be as many characters that should parry you. These games, especially DS2, were designed with multiplayer in mind. Not having a good portion of AI know how to parry your attacks leads for a rude awakening as or versus invading spirits, where the tier of difficulty generally much higher and varied in mechanics versus a set AI behavior.
And I disagree with your reasoning but not your conclusion because pve and pvp play absolutely nothing alike. Also to say Soulsbornekiro games are built with pvp in mind is biased thinking given that you can play offline and still experience the full breadth of the games and that Sekiro lacks pvp entirely. Enemies should be able to parry simply because it's a tool that exists in the game and is available to the PC.
I don't know man, people are bots lol
How do you balance parrying with AI? It's reaction based and completely overpowered if you remove the reaction element. So what, they guarantee parry you every third time? Half the time? Is that fair? Fun? How do you bait out the parry from a computer? How do you counter it if they always time it right? I dunno man, seems like a recipe for disaster.
By the way Dark Souls balanced this by having "parry stances" for enemies so you KNOW when they will parry and can act accordingly. It is well balanced there.
16:31 you can also parry ornstein. Though you cant riposte, it will still stun him and allow you free damage
I enjoyed this video, thank you.
well, I think I found my new binge channel!
Nice video, one issue I have though is when you talk about enemies spawning behind you, giving the example of huntsmans copse. Not a single enemy in that level just spawns behind you. You are being caught off guard because you literally are missing their starting placement. The guy chasing you on to the bridge is one of 5 enemies that are waiting on top of the building before the bridge. In fact even the skeletons in the cave are placed and don’t spawn in. Besides invading (and red phantom) enemies, there really isn’t much enemy spawning going on while you are running through the areas.
Scholar of the first sin is a masterpiece.
Personally I've never been more divided on game than DS2 Scholar because there are a lot of things that I love like Majula being my favourite hub area right up there with DS1 firelink and the fashion souls, but then there's things I don't like such as the ADP stat being something your forced to level up to have a good experience and not take damage when successfully rolling through an attack as well as some stupid hit-boxes like when attacking a mimic from behind only to get teleported into its grap attack.
Having to think about positioning more than ever is boring right? Boring to re-learn sh1ts and not be able to put Your pe on a mimic Ue?
I think the bells and returning to fire link shrine for frampt are pretty obvious signs the first gameplay loop is completed
i love dark souls 2 so much. especially the dlc and hexes
Dark Souls 3 isn't the most aesthetically spicy, but it's my favorite. Best bosses, best gameplay, and it isn't as oppressively depressing as Bloodborne. A little sunlight goes a long way.
I never parried, but when I did, it was the Pursuer and his charging attack.
Those enimies in huntsmans copes are always there you can spot and hit them if you just look around.
Shrine Amana be like: haha eat soul arrows noob haha get inf stunned noob
Like you need poise for Shrine Amana
My first souls game was DS2 (the original version) sonit holds a special place in my heart when it comes to souls games... But i played the remastered version of ds1 relatively recently and i can certainly understand now why some people were dissatisfied with the sequel.
That said I'd still put both games on an equal footing. They're the same but they're also different and that's what a good series (be it games, tv or film) should really be...
Royal Rat Authority. That's a sick ass name. Like the Celestial Emissary. Some smart, deep thinking people who write these games.
The knights in the undead burg could parry you in DS1. They had the tiny shields and rapiers
Congratulations on making a good video. Commiserations all your dark souls fans subscribed after you praised DS2!
What I miss about being a black phantom was being able to attack enemies for people that was one of the best things for me.
Dark souls 2 is so strange to me. Its so different than the 1st or 3rd in so many ways. And its undeniably less of a piece of art than the 1st or 3rd. And yet, its the dark souls entry ive spent the most time playing. Hundreds more hours in ds2 than 1 or 3. Theres just so much content, and there is so many build possibilities that I keep coming back for another playthrough. And ng+ finally feels worth it with the changes from regular ng. so sometimes I like a build so much I find myself going through ng+ with it too. Not to mention the DLCs fix a lot of the obvious drawbacks from the main game. I mean the crown of the iron king was basically like "oh our level design wasnt vertical enough huh? BAM the whole thing is a tower >:)". Its a strange and yet enthralling game. Its as paradoxically good and bad as Nicholas Cage
Buy and emulate Demon Souls (RPCS3) it would work better as a view into what made the games you've covered (and will cover) what they are. (Considering its age Demon Souls is very playable IMO)
I would recommend getting a PS3 but, otherwise, I agree with you. Specially, I would love to hear what Tommy has to say about the World Tendency mechanic (and why it was so controversial, that they removed it from future games)