The idea that the inconsistencies in the world could be inconsistencies in the mind of the player character as they continue their journey towards hollowing has got to be one of the best theories I'm heard from this series in a very long time. I didn't know I could appreciate Dark Souls 2 any more than I already do, but here I am, quite impressed. Thank you for this video.
@@millo7295 Could be. Probably is. Doesn't matter to me. Some of the most beautiful things in life were created by accident, why can't we enjoy this one, too?
This is the biggest cope ds2 fans come up with to explain why the game has world inconsistencies. The devs of ds2 were put through development hell and as a result the world has barely any semblance of cohesion. It’s a miracle the game is even functional tbh.
You actually do see Lucatiel again, in one of the DLC, as a summon. The fact that Lucatiel is available as a summon for the Burnt Ivory King AFTER her whole quest line adds such a lovely optimistic note to her story. She wrote her own name with soapstone. She hasn’t forgotten and is still fighting! Even if you never meet her again in the flesh, just know that she is out there still knowing her own name makes me happy! I like to think she is able to claim that icy crown and live on.
In the darkest depths of despair, no matter how crippling, she was able to get back on her feet and keep going. It's fitting that's in the final DLC since that's Dark Souls 2's thesis the whole journey. It's nice to see Lucatiel is capable of it just as much as the player, despite all her struggles.
also the description of her armor in dark souls 3 of the mask is just...so wholesome "Mask attached to a ceremonial hat. A Hollow once fought valiantly with this mask, but feared the fading of her self, and implored a comrade remember her name. Perhaps that is why this gentleman's mask is named after a woman." I always interpreted as the Hollow Undead writing the name on the mask to always remember her, no matter how much time passed, probably passing down her story on Majula, so that story spreads and people start to know her story.
I think you missed the point of the Scholar of the First Sin version, it changes the motivation of the Bearer of the Curse at the very end. It's not about being a prisoner of fate, but about trying to break the cycle that this world has been endlessly stuck in for ages. Aldia is the only being in existence that managed to break out of it (he was Vendrick's scholar who conducted questionable experiments and research into the essence of the soul), but in his madness and thirst for knowledge made himself an immortal being stuck out of time and even space. He succeeded, but at a price. Even once you "kill" Aldia, you still hear his voice echoing. Because you can't kill that which isn't truly there. Aldia instead offers you the proposition of striving towards something new and unknown, beyond the cycle of light and dark. A journey that could very well end with the Bearer being yet another immortal entity stuck out of time, or perhaps, the savior who brought the destruction of the entire cycle and freed humanity from the curse. That final triumphant walk away from the Throne of Want is the start of something new. It's a pity we did not get to see a proper sequel to Dark Souls 2. I think there was truly an interesting story left to tell.
Every other character referencing the main objective always tells you what to do. "Link the fire", "Become the dark lord", "take the throne", "become elden lord", etc etc. Aldia is the only character that asks what *you* want. Ironically calling it "fate" when you choose the same path he once did, not because of some grand destiny but purely because he knows the same insatiable desire for something more than what this damnable world offers to us of its own accord. Dark Souls 2 already had a lot of my favorite writing in the series, but whoever decided to add Aldia to the game so far post-launch was a genius.
A theory that I have (never got around to make it into a video for my gaming channel) is that the Aldia fight was not really Aldia but was the last remaining part of Nashandra attaching to him. Notice how you hear her voice starting to overpower his before the fight starts and then, when it is over, she remains a part of him but is muted more and his own voice is more dominate. Of course, a question I wanted to research was who is the second voice? I wonder if somehow Vindrick's soul became intertwine with Aldia's and that's why it sounds like two people talking when Aldia talks.
and dont forget that aldia is the teacher of the twin princes in dark souls 3 and he corrupted king ocerios to do experiments on dragonification thus turning him into a monster
I know it’s unpopular but Dark Souls 2 is my favorite of the series. Part of it might be because it was my first souls game I’ve ever played (after years of picking it up and putting it down, I am close to beating it). I’ve beaten Dark Souls 1 and started 3. Derail aside, I played DS2 during an extremely difficult time in my life and it’s plot, story, and themes have always resonated with me. Majula is by far the best hub world of any game I’ve experienced and its soundtrack it’s superb. I strongly believe that this game will age in a way that will be cherished by Dark Souls fans - or at least I hope. Love this game to pieces. Another side note: the Faraam armor set is by far my favorite armor in all of fantasy.
In my opinion; the themes of hollowing almost mimicking dementia, or other forms of memory loss over time, hit hardest with DkS2. Almost everyone; even the world, are stuck in a cycle of building, and slowly forgetting themselves, and those that have been around long enough to remember things are usually solitary figures. I even loved how; despite how easy it could have been to have a bunch of rematches, we get 1 alt color Ornstein, and even finding the big 4's souls on NG+ doesn't give the player their names. Aldia is also one of my favorite characters; the way he lays bear the issues with linking the flame or choosing not to, and the way he shows how seeking something else is costly to oneself and others, fits nicely into the way DkS2 was trying to do something much more interesting with its lore than I feel DkS3 followed up with. There's a sense of desperate hope in getting the DLC ending of DkS2 that is sadly thrown away in DkS3's attempt to more faithfully follow up themes in DkS1. You could tell Miyazaki wanted the story of 3 to be more definitively a book end; but also wanting to keep it from outright positive ending for the DkS world. Dark fantasy and all that lol I wouldn't say DkS series needed a "good ending"; but I will say that DkS2's DLC ending left me more satisfied than any of the more (annoying to unlock) secret endings DkS3 tried to give us. I definitely appreciate that with ER; we've moved away from DkS though, and I would love to see Miyazaki and Fromsoft come up with next.
But ds2's story, lore and setting only makes sense if you think of it chronologically after ds3. So it would be ds1 -> ds3 -----> ds2. And it makes sense from several points of view: - The landscape in ds2 is COMPLETELY different to ds1 and ds3 (even though it's more or less 100% confirmed that Drangleic exists where Lordran stood), so much so that it would take millions or tens of millions of years to change this much. Between ds1 and ds3, the landscape didn't change that much, and heck, some structures (especially Anor Londo) are practically exactly the same, which means that, while A LOT of time did pass, it wasn't that much. With ds2 however, it seems like we're talking about geological timescales. Anor londo doesn't exist anymore, the entire landscape is different, and the few remaining things from the ds1 (and IMO ds3) eras are fragments of the lordvessel, and fragments of the original souls. - The first flame isn't a flame anymore. So much time has passed that even the first flame is gone, but the "linking of the fire" still exists (and so does the undead curse). However, linking the flame has been distorted so much throughout time that it now exists only as a concept, only as an idea. It's a meaningless ritual that still performs it's function because people believe it does. - The "timey wimey" effects that happen when the linking of the flame is near also explains how ds2 things can exist in ds3. And IMO it's not only just a "possible" explanation, it's THE ONLY explanation that makes sense. People like to point at the laddermaker in ds3 to show that ds3 follows chronologically after ds2, but that just doesn't make any sense. Look at the laddermaker's body in ds3. See anything weird? Well, the weird thing is that there IS a body, and it's not decomposed. This tells us that he recently died. The only logical explanation is that he somehow got pulled into the past, he got confused and scared, tried to make a ladder and died. I don't see this guy who managed to run from the po-leece for who knows how many decades, who was a master at making ladders, just randomly fall off of a ladder and dying, unless he was incredibly confused and panicking. Moreso, people also point at the Earthen Peak in ds3 and conclude that ds3 follows chronologically after ds2, but yet again, that explanation simply doesn't make sense. In fact, in ds2 the earthen peak is already in a state of decay and disrepair. The windmill blades are already falling apart and have holes in them and the wood is already rotting, but if you look at how earthen peak looks like in ds3, it's EXACTLY the same, in the same state of disrepair, with the same holes in the wood, with the same rotting wood (with a few differences of course, but that's because of the higher quality models and textures in ds3). How could WOODEN structures survive so long, if ds3 is aeons after ds2? This only makes sense in the context of these ruins literally being pulled back into the past. And it all makes sense, since ds3 has the biggest cataclysm happening in the story, which makes it logical that, since being near the time of the linking of the fire makes time go crazy and you can find "heroes of the past and future", being near the time of the linking AND going through the biggest cataclysm in the story would also have enough power to pull literal buildings and landscapes. It's also possible that the fact that there's no flame in ds2 is a direct result of a ds3 ending. And lastly, people point at the "heat death" (I'm just calling it that xD) part of the ds3 dlc where you fight Gay El, where everything is sand and everything is destroyed, and it's implied that you're so far in the future that nothing remains, and say that this proves that ds3 happens after ds2, but in fact we never know what happened there. It could just be another dimension, a pocket dimension, or simply a potential future, not a real future (seeing as how you can freely go from there to any other part of the game kind of proves that it's not REALLY in the far future). In my mind, this looks more like a case of locally accelerating the time, not globally.
@@meyes1098 I find it hard to be convinced by your theory for a number of reasons, - "Between ds1 and ds3, the landscape didn't change that much." It would be great to have some actual examples of this. The only thing similar between ds1 and ds3 is Anor Londo, which very well could have existed in ds2 as well, it's just that the bearer of the curse didn't go there. - "The first flame isn't a flame anymore." Just because we don't see a physical flame in ds2 isn't necessarily because it doesn't exist. It might be tucked behind the throne somewhere or heck even invisible, point is nothing points to the fact that there isn't a physical flame in ds2. - Your theory about objects and people being pulled back in time from ds2 could just as well be that they are being pulled forward to ds3. Also, seeing as the giant blacksmith's body is intact, it would seem like some corpses simply don't decompose. "seeing as how you can freely go from there to any other part of the game kind of proves that it's not REALLY in the far future." This doesn't actually prove anything, seeing as you can freely go back and forth from the dlc in ds1 to the main game, proving that time travel has no effect on such things.
@@jimridderstrom3138 "It would be great to have some actual examples of this. The only thing similar between ds1 and ds3 is Anor Londo, which very well could have existed in ds2 as well, it's just that the bearer of the curse didn't go there." - Well no, there are more similarities. The wall of Lothric follows the lines of the Lordran walls (with Irithill/Anor Londo in similar relative positions), the demon ruins and ash lake are the same. Contrast this with NOTHING being similar in ds2. In fact both ds1 and ds3 (Lordran and Lothric) are high up in dense mountains, while ds2 is an island, with no other mountainous peak in sight past the sea. There are only 2 explanations for this: either there have been MASSIVE tecnotic shifts between ds1 and ds2, and again between ds2 and ds3, that somehow managed to not only leave Anor Londo completely untouched, but also not disturb the demon ruins and ash lake, or that ds2 happens waaaaaaaaaay in the future after ds3, to allow for these massive geological changes to happen without destroying the planet lol. "Just because we don't see a physical flame in ds2 isn't necessarily because it doesn't exist. It might be tucked behind the throne somewhere or heck even invisible, point is nothing points to the fact that there isn't a physical flame in ds2." - Yes, it actually means exactly that. Both ds1 and ds3 make a point of showing the actual flame, and mentioning it again and again. In ds2 it's sparsely mentioned, and more often than not the throne is mentioned instead of the flame. If it were behind the throne, you'd see the light from even, even if faint, you'd still see something, and it being invisible makes no sense lol. It being reduced to a mere concept, on the other hand, makes perfect sense, especially in the context of ds2's heavy emphasis on memory loss. "Just because we don't see a physical flame in ds2 isn't necessarily because it doesn't exist. It might be tucked behind the throne somewhere or heck even invisible, point is nothing points to the fact that there isn't a physical flame in ds2." - If they were pulled forward in ds3, then the events of ds2 would change, which they didn't lol. But the geological differences mentioned before corroborate the fact that they're being pulled in the past. And "some bodies don't decompose" doesn't answer anything. You can argue that the reason the giant's body didn't decompose has something to do with him working with embers and magic all his life (or his giant biology, but that doesn't fly since there are giant skeletons everywhere), or even maybe that he is ageless immortal, but he was recently killed, but there's no reason for this random dude to not ne decomposed, especially in an area where there are thousands of human skeletons littering the place. Also, his wooden ladder next to him is still in top condition, other than, you know, being broken, but the wood hasn't decayed.
@@meyes1098 the other explanation is that Miyazaki just stubbornly stuck to his own plot threads, and that's why ds3 feels so close to ds1 but ds2 doesn't. I don't make a habit of assuming things like that, but you have to acknowledge it as a possibility, since humans are flawed and biased As for geography, Lokey Lore put forward a theory that parts of lordran were warped to drangleic with the flame. He even specifically points out the cathedral with the painting having warped from anor Londo, as we see a painting guardian in Aldia's Manor and heide seemingly being an evolution of anor Londo (this in particular is all but confirmed). This is compounded by the anor Londo we see in ds3 missing a lot of its original architecture, including the cathedral with the painting. In that theory, drangleic is actually not in the same place as lordran was, it's that pieces of lordran were warped over. I find that far more compelling than this outlandish argument I keep seeing that "DS2 actually happened after ds3" As for the Gilligan thing, that doesn't just happen with Gilligan. Why is Oscar's body at the start of the game completely untouched, seemingly the most insane coincidence of all time of it's just "another knight"? Why are the mushroom people in Farron keep untouched and not rotted despite the fact that they surely had not survived in that changing biome all this time? Why had dusk seemingly survived (or arrived) to plant the witchtrees all this time only to die at what must have been just before you got there? (at least, no more than 20 years I would think. Her corpse should be gone within days realistically, consumed by scavenger. It's hard to know what level the worldbuilding is working on) Why are the classic demon corpses piled in the smoldering lake despite demon culture having been changing for thousands of years? This is a reoccurring question the game asks of you, it's not just Gilligan. It's a fundamental mystery of the story, even if the answer really is just clumsy fan service like many people say
@@meyes1098 There's definitely a period of time of where Drangleic (at least some version of it) and Lothric exists at the same time since we have mercenaries from "Drang" still standing in the Lothric castle and Anor Londor. I personally subscribe to the idea that they are just neighboring kingdoms with areas where cultures overlap, that's why we see similar architecture in places like Heide's Tower mimicking Anor Londo, Archdragon Peak vs Dragons Shrine, DS1 Kiln of the First Flame vs Brume's Tower, Anor Londo vs Iron Keep. It's also possible that linking the flame can be done from multiple places, the ritual to do so it's different between cultures. In DS1 the Lordvessel is used to access the Kiln of the Flame but in DS2, we find it broken in Drangleic, it was either imported there or the broken one is just a copy of it. We see Vendrick use a similar method to lock his castle/shrine of winter behind 4 great souls, which are the inheritors of the souls from DS1. In DS2, linking the flame is done by sitting on the Throne of Want rather than lighting a flame itself. In DS3, the Lords of Cinder have to be placed on thrones to access the kiln. In DS2So again, there are points where these cultures intersect and bring customs to one another, in some form. I think it's a bit contrived to think that items are being pulled back in time from DS2 to DS3 instead of DS2 items surviving into DS3. Item descriptions don't fit this theory - how would anyone know that Lucatiel's Mask, for instance, was called this if the Lucatiel's story/legend didn't take place yet. Did people go back in time to tell the story along with item? Same thing goes for Fume Knight's Ultra Greatword - the item description states "belong to a traitor from long ago" At the same time, keep in mind time and place being convoluted already started by the time Dark Souls 2 takes places - there's no way that Earthen Keep leads to Iron Keep without space/time distortion (although you could subscribe to the theory that the Bearer of the Curse just has gaps in memory on how they arrive to certain places, since hollowing is heavily used as a metaphor for dementia in DS2).
Another thing in the opening cinematic that many miss, is that the person is reaching for the doorhandle from the inside of the room, showing that they really are losing their memories and how disjointed their mind is from reality.
"We aren't really seeing the Bearer if the Curse's entire journey, just the moments that were so impactful that they stuck with them until the end... Until their mind faded". I love that someone has finally worded that feeling I've been having with the DS2 world. It's one of the reasons that the second one if my favorite. This is a great in-game explanation! Thank you!
Lucatiel does understand human effigies, she's being glib when she claims to have no idea what it's for. Her laugh following the sentence is meant to show that she knows but values the player character so much that she's willing to part with an effigy in order to hopefully keep them around a little longer. She is a sister of battle, she doesn't like showing her true emotions through words but the player character very quickly becomes the only constant to her in a world of chaos and change.
@@FKyoutubeSERIOUSLY human effigies appear to lose effectiveness as an undead looses their memories, by that time they're probably having almost no effect. Why would there be so many hollows if an effigy could always restore a person to full humanity no matter what? This is a case of items functioning differently for NPCs than the player character imo
@@jamesgrenier8856Our MC doesn't remember anything past their name, hinted by the intro cutscene, but the effigies work flawlessly to us, it's more likely that she lost hope when she found out her brother went hollow
@@jamesgrenier8856 There's no lore to support what you are saying. Anyway, I'm not arguing that Luc was too far gone to use an effigy. I'm arguing that she didn't know what it was. Because if she did, she would have used it.
Man, it's nice to see a positive video on Dark Souls II for a change. I will never understand why people really wanted to hate this entry. Yes it has a ton of flaws, but if we balance it out they are about the same as DS1, and way less than Demon's. Moreover, people criticize features present in DS2 that they then praise in the following titles. And finally thanks for mentioning Lucatiel, she is one of my favorite characters in any FromSoft title, and perfectly illustrates the struggles of a "Bearer of the Curse".
@@NevinWarrior-es6ds No real quest to complete. Just visit him in the Wharf, then in the poison area, then he shall always be in the Pharros area with infinite poison supplies.
i personally always liked the thought that lucatiel does know what a human effigy does perfectly well, but chooses to feign ignorance and hand it to you because she knows her will is waning; she doesn't have much longer regardless and she wants you to continue on in her stead :3
Great vid! It feels like there are very specific themes in these games that can be easy to miss sometimes. This vid in particular was a good watch cause people might see the Silver knight looking at the picture and (if they haven’t played the previous games) not completely understand the significance. The greatest art is the kind that can have many interpretations, and for that reason, I think the Dark Souls series is truly a masterpiece. Again, nice video; I always love DS2 content.
You really put into words, what I love about DS2 well. It's so much more personal. Less about gods, more about people struggling. Lucatiel is a great example for that. (I also like build variety.)
the ending with the knight starring at the painting is the same reason of the setting being in '' ruins '' but the souls serie has a lot more messages and is full of symbolism . we can sit here all day talking about them. its a way of storytelling that transcands the language barrier.
i swear there's a whole ass Channel committed to debunking every misleading claim about Scholar of the First Sin being more Difficult, having more Enemies and whatever else people claim, he's showing side by side comparisons as proof, for example during gank fights, Scholar will actually make enemies stand back and wait depending on how many enemies are fighting you, OG won't, just throwing that out there, shouldn't come as a shock people who hate Dark Souls 2 naturally talk outta their ass because they do not play the game, why the fuck would they if they hate it? anyway that was unrelated mostly, thanks for speaking good of Dark Souls 2 its always refreshing >W
Domo's channel is goates but he isn't always correct about the differences between vanilla and sotfs, and is very biased for sotfs. Vanilla does have a way harder endgame then sotfs, but it's early game is way easier.
I agree Scholar is a straight up improvement. But handling the rerelease like Bandai/From did just causes confusion. I don't like that they sell both versions of the game separately. They caused this mess
I couldn't have said it better myself, although I always interpreted the anti-hollowing crowns at the end of DKS2 to be the true ending and a more-or-less "permanent" solution, at least for yourself, since the game is about the personal journey rather than the ages of light and dark.
Being able to summon chars doesn’t necessarily mean they’re alive. Many of the summon signs across the series are from characters who died a long time ago (Tarkus, for example)
I like the theory of the lack of cohesion being because of our own character's descent into Hollowing - it makes sooooo much sense. And honestly, I'd rather that as a lore explanation than just 'the devs didn't think about cohesion'. That said, I feel like, at least for me, what captures a personal feeling for me with Dark Souls 2 is that, at least with the DLC, you technically succeed in your quest. There's never anything that outright states your goal is to break the curse for everyone, so even if it's just for yourself, and with one of the crowns on, you do still succeed. Every step you are alone, and Majula fuels that with it's music, as does Vendrick's and Aldia's themes, I feel. But, as you said, in the end, like every ending, it's temporary. If you take off the crown, you can Hollow. And there's little point in being sane and immortal in a world trying to live past it's expiration date, as is driven home in DS3. It's a hollow victory. But you take pride in it all the same. DS1, it's similar. DS3, it's similar. The hubs are usually the only 'levels' with music, to signify a place to return to, to rest. But the music of each always conveys, to me, I feel, a tragic, melancholic journey. A journey you take alone. Each one, even if you end on an Age of Dark, DS3 tells us it's worthless because some hopeful warrior will light the Flame again. The efforts to cure the curse in those don't succeed. But Dark Souls 2? You get a win. Hollow, small, and technical, but a win in a world that doesn't care and just wants to burn out already. That, to me, is what makes it so personal. Honestly, that knight staring at Gwynevere's painting made me feel that all over again, but really drove it home, years after my first playthroughs of DS2.
I think people forget that DSII was the game that revealed the truth of the fire linking curse in the first place. Discovering that either ending of the first game was temporary and had been repeated countless times already really blew open the ideas at play in the series.
To elaborate on my own point, I think the series (particularly 2) wants you to accept that you don’t control the fate of the world without making you completely powerless. Each game reveals that your previous choice was ultimately overruled, but that doesn’t make those choices invalid; they obviously affected tons of lives for many lifetimes each, and that’s the most any real person can hope to do. Still it will go beyond your control in time. The ending to dark souls 3 is the most consequential given that it really might change the world in a permanent-ish way. However, letting the fire fade still fits that exact theme; it’s about letting go of that control that the gods (and probably you) had been fighting to keep up to that point.
DS2 is my favorite by a LOT, and it makes me wish that we could travel to other corners of this world, like Catarina and Mirrah. I want to see what those places are actually like. I want to see other lands than just the suburbs of Anor Londo.
Dude, your explanation for the inconsistency of DS2's world actually fits so well with its theme! I like to think the kings' crowns is the first step to curing the undead curse given that hollowing in DS3 is completely voluntary, and I love the firekeeper ending in that game so much because of how hopeful it is.
It's literally stated in game that the world doesn't make sense, just look at the intro you get sucked into a whirlpool then end up in dranglake Even the npcs have no clue how they ended up there DS3 even shows that after so much time has past the world just starts to mess up time and space don't function naturally
@@KateHikes83TJD actually are what? Humans? They belong to the race that inhabited Anor Londo which go unnamed the whole game. Definitely not humans or giants. Also, what made you think the last part? As far as I can tell, black knights are just silver knights who were scorched during the war in Izalith. I assume you think they’re more “hollow” than silver knights because they’re placed in random locations in Lordran rather than fulfilling their guard duty in Anor Londo?
@@KateHikes83TJD as for the hollowing, that specific term refers to those afflicted with the darksign. They’re more like what Gwyn became after linking the fire, a husk of his former self
Dark Souls 2 is interesting story wise because it shows the Chosen Undead's choice truly didn't matter. Time and time again, the fire is linked or snuffed out. Straid of Olaphis asks what the name of the kingdom is and you inform him it is Drangleic, and he says it is interesting. The name and kingdom change in different eras. It is implied that several of the kingdoms in the DLCs are also in the location of Drangleic. It is implied several kingdoms have existed within the lands of Drangleic have come, gone, and even been forgotten. The story of the First Flame is one of futility.
@@Fronsky-mj5tk even with those items and bits of lore from ds2, they made the story of ds3 like ds2 didn't exist. i would actually prefer if they just didn't put any ds2 things in ds3 and pretend that ds2 and ds3 are both alternative stories after the events of ds1
@@arnimalblackmane8033 Honestly they should have just done another unique setting because DS3 felt like they were trying to put in way too much fan service.
SOTFS is harder and inferior?? It fixes tons of stuff. It’s made to be the definitive version. It’s actually easier in so many areas. It’s like playing a game on the 1.0 version without the day one patches (eg Elden Ring v1.00 vs current).
@@adamtapparo2168 Tiss mainly Iron Keep that has a couple more knights. As for the hides knights in the ruins, they are passive until you kill the boss. Once you do, they are active and it turns a beginning area into a mid game area.
The Dark Souls fandom has made up so mucb shit about II. The oringal will gank you more and honestly has some encounters to hard. SCHOLAR reworkes AI to be less aggressive in multi fights,removes a lot or males more interesting ones. Scholar is objectively easier and more interesting
Fighting Cowboy. He does tons of playthroughs of games so I wouldn't call him a great Souls player (though, for DS3, more persistence than me as I never got past Pontiff). Still fun to watch if you want to see an average skilled gamer taking on different genres.
@@Ironica82 i cant stand that guy tbh, he's not very good and his "walkthroughs" are basically just him playing games while reading through wiki's. when it comes to watching youtubers im tryna see someone better than me play the game but when it comes to souls games thats hard to find. not even tryna sound cocky but the pvp guys and speedrunners are normally the only ones that are considerably better than i am
@@Ironica82 might have to check them out. lots of story games like god of war i like to watch instead of actually play because the story is cool but the actual gameplay is pretty boring at least from what i experienced myself from the first game
Second. Good vid. Keep making them. Something that's been troubling me for a while - What is the exact relationship between humanity, abyss, and the soul? Bosses have souls, but we can see that these can be corrupted by abyss (artorias's soul from DS1), Gwyn had a soul, but he split it up and shared it and then linked the first flame and now he's hollow but when we beat him we still get a soul. Do you think the player character has a soul?
I`m pretty sure silver knights don`t get hollow, because they`re not human to begin with. They were made by Gwyn as his personal army, and humans originated from dark soul. We know Gwyn hated and feared humans and "everything that stems from humanity", so he wouldn`t allow any in his private army. They`re mindless drones who are fit only to follow orders. They never had consciousness. Gwyn gave his followers exactly enough of a soul for them to function and not a bit more, we see this with giants in DS1: there are grunts who open the gates and throw bombs, they can`t even talk and they do their function despite no one being there for god knows how long, there are giant blacksmith, who can weave a few words together and knows how to smith, and then there is Gough, an eloquent knight who ponders nostalgia and speaks Shakesperian. We also never heard any silver knight speak or do anything remotely intelligent. There were plans for a silver knight npc in DS3, but he was cut, i suspect for that very reason. That silver knight probably awaited orders from the painting since he couldn`t realize it`s not his princess.
brother who keeps passing this misinformation. what do you mean sotfs "tunes the difficulty to favor people who had experience with the game" if anything sotfs makes the game easier. enemies in vanilla aggro from much further away leading to the player fighting way more ganks than in sotfs. sotfs enemy placement also makes way more sense. please get your shit together
thank you very much ive been saying this for so long, yes 1 & 3 but 2 is just different for better or worst, i forgot the name of that channel but he play ds1,2,3 bloodborne and elden ring as a philosophy and concluded that ds2 is the best game in the series because the story and the journey you took in ds2 is personal compared to other games where in 1 about some prophecy, 3 because who ever resurrect the lord messed up thinking they will do it again and also you the ashen one are not a single person but the ashes of the failed people to link the flame just the the lord of cinder are the combination of all that succeed to link the flame and in elden ring marika called back all the tarnished after she sent as away, as for the bloodborne havent played it yet so i dont know about that.
Bloodbornes protagonist (for lack of a better turn) is basically an outsider who came to yarhnam seeking a cure and got mixed up in the hunt and all that (I think I'm not super sure about the reason your character travels to yarhnam I just know they're not native they came from somewhere else though there's arguments to be made if yarhnam is even real but thats a whole other topic that I'm nowhere near qualified to talk about)
@@jeankirchstein2552 That is indeed the reason "The Hunter" travels to Yharnam, they have/had an unnamed disease and wanted one of Yharnam's "magic" blood infusions to cure it From there, you end up dragged into the hunt. Accepting Gehrman's mercy would likely be the ending the player would take as they can leave Yharnam after and return to their old life like nothing happened.
I've only played the scholar version of ds2 and absolutely hated buuuut eventually I wanted to play it again and I liked it a lot more and have done all but one of the dlc this time. And I think the reason for that is I learned how to fight locked off which makes the swarm a lot easier to handle. Honestly I really like the game now
The PS3 version of SOTFS is the one your talking about in the beginning, as its the vanilla version and it gives you the dlc keys off the bat and the gates are open if you beat the bosses guarding them. Unfortunately it no longer has multiplayer support as they killed the servers march this year. But its still a great way to get the dlc without the pains of the newer versions of Scholar.
I don't like the way movement feels in DS2, just a personal thing I guess. I really liked the 3 sentinel fight, Hex build used to be fun, Great Sword Guts build was fun. Oh and I also killed Gavlan during my first tour in No-Man's Wharf. No wheel, no deal for me. edit: I forgot binoboosting.I liked that. rip :)
The idea of an inconsistent journey due to mind loss is fine. But the implementation sucks. When you try to repeat after an old Doom WAD, you better make it good. And I like ds2.
1:55 Calling Anor Londo in Dark Souls 3 "fan-service" is really stupid. DS3 is a freaking sequel. It's not "fan-service" to bring back locations/characters from the previous game.
Batman: Arkham City is a sequel to Arkham Asylum yet they didn't have a whole section in the asylum. DS2 is a sequel to DS1 yet you didn't spend anytime in areas that were in the first game. DS3 really seems like they went too far in trying to please their fans. People complained that DS2 was too clunky, well, DS3 makes you feel as light as a feather. People complained about DS2's enemies tanking attacks, well, DS3 mostly changed poise into either they had it or they didn't. People complained about the "non-linear" of DS2 so they made DS3 as linear as possible. People complained about slowly loosing health when dying, so they went back to Demon Souls logic but this time, hid how much health you have lose in order to trick your mind. People praised Fume Knight as one of the best fights (as well as Mirror Knight) as well as O&S in DS1, and they took that as meaning that people loved two phases boss and made EVERY boss a two phase boss (and one a three phase but that was done perfectly and made sense). Now, does that all make DS3 a bad game, no. However, it does seem like they went too far in the other direction after DS2 instead of just fixing the things that people hated the most. Though DS2 is the all time favorite of their games and DS3 is my least favorite, even I have to admit that DS3 boss fights (well, the later ones at least) look amazing and much better than fighting a frog with a human face.
@@Ironica82 "DS2 is a sequel to DS1" but it broke so many established lore from DS1 because it was written and developed by a different team, and it shows. The redesigning of giants and rewriting their history and personality, making the "dark soul" inherently evil with how they portrayed Nashandra who was an offspring of Manus (who wasn't even really evil, just the manifestation of the dark soul), the introduction of Vendrick who was a completely new character who was basically an OC not-Gwyn, and even the introduction of the Throne of Want as opposed to the bonfire/first flame as a power system. Hell, even the way they portrayed hollowing was different. DS1 Hollowing was a metaphor for a sense of purpose and will to move forward, but DS2 Hollowing was treated like a disease and an infection that progressively got worse (which was already covered in DS1 with.... undead....). DS2 was essentially a different team's misinterpretation and rewrite of Dark Souls and IS NOT the norm of what a sequel should be. You call DS2 a sequel yet it breaks all of the rules of the previous game while establishing new rules and continuing none of the lore which is NOT the norm when creating a sequel. DS3 absolutely did not "lean too far in the other direction". It's what a sequel naturally should flow into. You can argue that DS3 was too linear in it's level design (which is true, but that doesn't make it bad. i personally prefer it) but DS3 takes all of the established rules and lore from DS1 and continues it. It introduced the concept of embering and the Ashen Ones which just adds on to the worldbuilding without breaking the rules of DS1 nor does it introduce an entirely new power system.
@@brandonkite4414 "he redesigning of giants and rewriting their history and personality," Who said they were the same giants from the first game? Considering that DS2 takes place thousands of years later, it really doesn't change anything. "making the "dark soul" inherently evil with how they portrayed Nashandra who was an offspring of Manus (who wasn't even really evil, just the manifestation of the dark soul)" Each of the four daughters were different aspects of Manus. That's why the one who went to the Burnt Ivory King was actually good. "the introduction of Vendrick who was a completely new character who was basically an OC not-Gwyn," Not sure what you mean by "OC". The point of Vendrick is that, after cycle upon cycle, the next one who was supposed to take over wanted to know if there was another option besides the age of fire or dark. That's the overarching story of DS2. DS2 asked what happens if someone tries to cure the curse. DS3 ask what happens if they choose to ignore their fate and does not bring in either ages (though even that is futile as if the princes stayed alive, the age of dark would happen as no one would link the fire). "even the introduction of the Throne of Want as opposed to the bonfire/first flame as a power system" The throne of Want is basically the typical ending of your character either linking the fire or letting itt go out. The alt ending shows your character ignoring fate and continuing in Aldia's and Vendrick's research into curing the curse. "DS1 Hollowing was a metaphor for a sense of purpose and will to move forward, but DS2 Hollowing was treated like a disease and an infection that progressively got worse (which was already covered in DS1 with.... undead....)" DS1 showed what happens after someone goes hollow. DS2 showed the process. "DS2 was essentially a different team's misinterpretation and rewrite of Dark Souls and IS NOT the norm of what a sequel should be" The head guy was still a supervisor over the game so that comment is muted as he would have had them change the story if it was a "misinterpretation" "DS3 absolutely did not "lean too far in the other direction". It's what a sequel naturally should flow into." So, first game, you go to restart the fire and should solve the issue. Now, you find yourself 1000+++ years later, find that all of DS1 was basically pointless, yet somehow, someone who died in the first one was still alive for some slug to start eating them, and somehow, there are some of the same characters around, even though the lore states that, during the age of fire, people actually die and the immortality only takes effect when the fire starts to fade and the dark sign appears. "DS3 takes all of the established rules and lore from DS1 and continues it. It introduced the concept of embering and the Ashen Ones which just adds on to the worldbuilding without breaking the rules of DS1", yea, DS2 does that as well. It builds on the lore of DS1, introduces how hollowing fully works, introduced the concept of the "chosen one" not following their fate, and did not make any of DS1 characters immortal.
5:30 I disagree with this take. In actuality, it shows the futility of your choice. After dark, comes fire, when the fire goes out, comes dark. It's a never ending repeating cycle, caused by Gwyn and perpetuated until the end of ringed city dlc when you face Gael. Dreg Heap shows how an impossible ammount of kingdomshave risen and fallen, to the insane extent that they're crumbling in on one another, like a microcosm version of a universe collapsing. The world was artificially extended. And although many things are up for interpretation, my perception of ds3's dlc ending, and giving the blood full of the dark soul to the little painting girl, makes her paint a blood red world different from all the others which is then consumed in flames. Which to me, is Bloodborne. Blood moons, the starting area being burnt to the ground, and so on.
I really love how personal DS2 story is. Also, if you want to learn more about symbolism and meaning of many areas and bosses of the game you most likely didn't know before, I recommend watching TB Skyen's playthrough. Not only it's funny af, entertaining, and well-edited, but also he analyses everything very deeply and with a lot of unbiased care.
Dark Souls 2. "But is this our only choice?" is what SOTFS is about. Also you DO see Lucatiel again. Mirroring Solaire's story if you do her entire quest, you find her summon sign outside of the burnt ivory kings boss gate.
Omce again, 10 years on, you still repeat the same boring old trite (amd wrong) criticism of Dark Souls 2: "The area connections don't make logical sense!!1!" Did you ever consider the possibility, given DS2's level design leads you to very distinct areas, that those connections just signify longer travel distance, abbreviated in favor of gameplay? Think of the tunnel to Drangleic Castle or the elevator from Earthen Peak more like fades, like a cut-to-black in a movie (or a wipe, if Star Wars).
This is how I see it as well. On my gaming channel, I even point out that you can see mountains behind Earthen Peak and can surmise that The Iron Keep is over there. However, I also did come up with a better transition to that point that would have only taken about how long the tunnel is to Dranleic (or shorter) and still make sense (basically, instead of going up, the elevator goes down, opens in a room with a huge pool of poison (to show where the poison that the windmill was pulling up came from), a bridge across the pool, and then, after the bridge, you turn the corner and enter Iron Keep).
The actual best version of this game is Playstation 3 DS2 SotFS. It did NOT include the unnecessary garbage updates to the base game, but it DID include all the DLC, all on physical disc, I might add. Highly recommended.
You should play Scholar of the First Sin, despite the backlash to the game. The DLC ending, the secret ending, lets you walk away from the fire while aldia speaks at you. Dark Souls 2 the point at the end is to find treatment to the hollowing curse so that the bearer of the curse is no longer a slave to the fire linking curse
I've found the issue with DS2 is that people played it after DS3. Because of DS3's slavish dedication to DS1 and complete ignoring of DS2, anyone who played it after DS3 could only be disappointed.
The idea that the inconsistencies in the world could be inconsistencies in the mind of the player character as they continue their journey towards hollowing has got to be one of the best theories I'm heard from this series in a very long time. I didn't know I could appreciate Dark Souls 2 any more than I already do, but here I am, quite impressed. Thank you for this video.
Your body is dead and decaying but your brain is not registering WHY its failing and not getting info from other organs. Brain fears isolation.
Or:
It's a game and developers make mistakes like how directors do
@@millo7295 Could be. Probably is. Doesn't matter to me. Some of the most beautiful things in life were created by accident, why can't we enjoy this one, too?
This is the biggest cope ds2 fans come up with to explain why the game has world inconsistencies. The devs of ds2 were put through development hell and as a result the world has barely any semblance of cohesion. It’s a miracle the game is even functional tbh.
@@rigorm136 I bet you're fun at parties.
You actually do see Lucatiel again, in one of the DLC, as a summon.
The fact that Lucatiel is available as a summon for the Burnt Ivory King AFTER her whole quest line adds such a lovely optimistic note to her story. She wrote her own name with soapstone. She hasn’t forgotten and is still fighting! Even if you never meet her again in the flesh, just know that she is out there still knowing her own name makes me happy!
I like to think she is able to claim that icy crown and live on.
In the darkest depths of despair, no matter how crippling, she was able to get back on her feet and keep going. It's fitting that's in the final DLC since that's Dark Souls 2's thesis the whole journey. It's nice to see Lucatiel is capable of it just as much as the player, despite all her struggles.
also the description of her armor in dark souls 3 of the mask is just...so wholesome
"Mask attached to a ceremonial hat.
A Hollow once fought valiantly with this mask, but feared the fading of her self, and implored a comrade remember her name.
Perhaps that is why this gentleman's mask is named after a woman."
I always interpreted as the Hollow Undead writing the name on the mask to always remember her, no matter how much time passed, probably passing down her story on Majula, so that story spreads and people start to know her story.
I think you missed the point of the Scholar of the First Sin version, it changes the motivation of the Bearer of the Curse at the very end. It's not about being a prisoner of fate, but about trying to break the cycle that this world has been endlessly stuck in for ages. Aldia is the only being in existence that managed to break out of it (he was Vendrick's scholar who conducted questionable experiments and research into the essence of the soul), but in his madness and thirst for knowledge made himself an immortal being stuck out of time and even space. He succeeded, but at a price. Even once you "kill" Aldia, you still hear his voice echoing. Because you can't kill that which isn't truly there. Aldia instead offers you the proposition of striving towards something new and unknown, beyond the cycle of light and dark. A journey that could very well end with the Bearer being yet another immortal entity stuck out of time, or perhaps, the savior who brought the destruction of the entire cycle and freed humanity from the curse. That final triumphant walk away from the Throne of Want is the start of something new. It's a pity we did not get to see a proper sequel to Dark Souls 2. I think there was truly an interesting story left to tell.
True, there is a third ending. More difficult but way more fullfilling.
Every other character referencing the main objective always tells you what to do. "Link the fire", "Become the dark lord", "take the throne", "become elden lord", etc etc. Aldia is the only character that asks what *you* want. Ironically calling it "fate" when you choose the same path he once did, not because of some grand destiny but purely because he knows the same insatiable desire for something more than what this damnable world offers to us of its own accord.
Dark Souls 2 already had a lot of my favorite writing in the series, but whoever decided to add Aldia to the game so far post-launch was a genius.
@@chaptap8376 Dragonslayer Gough is also a real homie wishing us to live life in the best way we see fit
A theory that I have (never got around to make it into a video for my gaming channel) is that the Aldia fight was not really Aldia but was the last remaining part of Nashandra attaching to him. Notice how you hear her voice starting to overpower his before the fight starts and then, when it is over, she remains a part of him but is muted more and his own voice is more dominate. Of course, a question I wanted to research was who is the second voice? I wonder if somehow Vindrick's soul became intertwine with Aldia's and that's why it sounds like two people talking when Aldia talks.
and dont forget that aldia is the teacher of the twin princes in dark souls 3 and he corrupted king ocerios to do experiments on dragonification thus turning him into a monster
I know it’s unpopular but Dark Souls 2 is my favorite of the series. Part of it might be because it was my first souls game I’ve ever played (after years of picking it up and putting it down, I am close to beating it). I’ve beaten Dark Souls 1 and started 3.
Derail aside, I played DS2 during an extremely difficult time in my life and it’s plot, story, and themes have always resonated with me. Majula is by far the best hub world of any game I’ve experienced and its soundtrack it’s superb. I strongly believe that this game will age in a way that will be cherished by Dark Souls fans - or at least I hope. Love this game to pieces.
Another side note: the Faraam armor set is by far my favorite armor in all of fantasy.
In my opinion; the themes of hollowing almost mimicking dementia, or other forms of memory loss over time, hit hardest with DkS2. Almost everyone; even the world, are stuck in a cycle of building, and slowly forgetting themselves, and those that have been around long enough to remember things are usually solitary figures. I even loved how; despite how easy it could have been to have a bunch of rematches, we get 1 alt color Ornstein, and even finding the big 4's souls on NG+ doesn't give the player their names.
Aldia is also one of my favorite characters; the way he lays bear the issues with linking the flame or choosing not to, and the way he shows how seeking something else is costly to oneself and others, fits nicely into the way DkS2 was trying to do something much more interesting with its lore than I feel DkS3 followed up with. There's a sense of desperate hope in getting the DLC ending of DkS2 that is sadly thrown away in DkS3's attempt to more faithfully follow up themes in DkS1. You could tell Miyazaki wanted the story of 3 to be more definitively a book end; but also wanting to keep it from outright positive ending for the DkS world. Dark fantasy and all that lol
I wouldn't say DkS series needed a "good ending"; but I will say that DkS2's DLC ending left me more satisfied than any of the more (annoying to unlock) secret endings DkS3 tried to give us. I definitely appreciate that with ER; we've moved away from DkS though, and I would love to see Miyazaki and Fromsoft come up with next.
But ds2's story, lore and setting only makes sense if you think of it chronologically after ds3. So it would be ds1 -> ds3 -----> ds2.
And it makes sense from several points of view:
- The landscape in ds2 is COMPLETELY different to ds1 and ds3 (even though it's more or less 100% confirmed that Drangleic exists where Lordran stood), so much so that it would take millions or tens of millions of years to change this much. Between ds1 and ds3, the landscape didn't change that much, and heck, some structures (especially Anor Londo) are practically exactly the same, which means that, while A LOT of time did pass, it wasn't that much. With ds2 however, it seems like we're talking about geological timescales. Anor londo doesn't exist anymore, the entire landscape is different, and the few remaining things from the ds1 (and IMO ds3) eras are fragments of the lordvessel, and fragments of the original souls.
- The first flame isn't a flame anymore. So much time has passed that even the first flame is gone, but the "linking of the fire" still exists (and so does the undead curse). However, linking the flame has been distorted so much throughout time that it now exists only as a concept, only as an idea. It's a meaningless ritual that still performs it's function because people believe it does.
- The "timey wimey" effects that happen when the linking of the flame is near also explains how ds2 things can exist in ds3. And IMO it's not only just a "possible" explanation, it's THE ONLY explanation that makes sense.
People like to point at the laddermaker in ds3 to show that ds3 follows chronologically after ds2, but that just doesn't make any sense. Look at the laddermaker's body in ds3. See anything weird? Well, the weird thing is that there IS a body, and it's not decomposed. This tells us that he recently died. The only logical explanation is that he somehow got pulled into the past, he got confused and scared, tried to make a ladder and died. I don't see this guy who managed to run from the po-leece for who knows how many decades, who was a master at making ladders, just randomly fall off of a ladder and dying, unless he was incredibly confused and panicking.
Moreso, people also point at the Earthen Peak in ds3 and conclude that ds3 follows chronologically after ds2, but yet again, that explanation simply doesn't make sense. In fact, in ds2 the earthen peak is already in a state of decay and disrepair. The windmill blades are already falling apart and have holes in them and the wood is already rotting, but if you look at how earthen peak looks like in ds3, it's EXACTLY the same, in the same state of disrepair, with the same holes in the wood, with the same rotting wood (with a few differences of course, but that's because of the higher quality models and textures in ds3). How could WOODEN structures survive so long, if ds3 is aeons after ds2? This only makes sense in the context of these ruins literally being pulled back into the past.
And it all makes sense, since ds3 has the biggest cataclysm happening in the story, which makes it logical that, since being near the time of the linking of the fire makes time go crazy and you can find "heroes of the past and future", being near the time of the linking AND going through the biggest cataclysm in the story would also have enough power to pull literal buildings and landscapes.
It's also possible that the fact that there's no flame in ds2 is a direct result of a ds3 ending.
And lastly, people point at the "heat death" (I'm just calling it that xD) part of the ds3 dlc where you fight Gay El, where everything is sand and everything is destroyed, and it's implied that you're so far in the future that nothing remains, and say that this proves that ds3 happens after ds2, but in fact we never know what happened there. It could just be another dimension, a pocket dimension, or simply a potential future, not a real future (seeing as how you can freely go from there to any other part of the game kind of proves that it's not REALLY in the far future).
In my mind, this looks more like a case of locally accelerating the time, not globally.
@@meyes1098 I find it hard to be convinced by your theory for a number of reasons,
- "Between ds1 and ds3, the landscape didn't change that much." It would be great to have some actual examples of this. The only thing similar between ds1 and ds3 is Anor Londo, which very well could have existed in ds2 as well, it's just that the bearer of the curse didn't go there.
- "The first flame isn't a flame anymore." Just because we don't see a physical flame in ds2 isn't necessarily because it doesn't exist. It might be tucked behind the throne somewhere or heck even invisible, point is nothing points to the fact that there isn't a physical flame in ds2.
- Your theory about objects and people being pulled back in time from ds2 could just as well be that they are being pulled forward to ds3. Also, seeing as the giant blacksmith's body is intact, it would seem like some corpses simply don't decompose.
"seeing as how you can freely go from there to any other part of the game kind of proves that it's not REALLY in the far future." This doesn't actually prove anything, seeing as you can freely go back and forth from the dlc in ds1 to the main game, proving that time travel has no effect on such things.
@@jimridderstrom3138 "It would be great to have some actual examples of this. The only thing similar between ds1 and ds3 is Anor Londo, which very well could have existed in ds2 as well, it's just that the bearer of the curse didn't go there."
- Well no, there are more similarities. The wall of Lothric follows the lines of the Lordran walls (with Irithill/Anor Londo in similar relative positions), the demon ruins and ash lake are the same.
Contrast this with NOTHING being similar in ds2.
In fact both ds1 and ds3 (Lordran and Lothric) are high up in dense mountains, while ds2 is an island, with no other mountainous peak in sight past the sea.
There are only 2 explanations for this: either there have been MASSIVE tecnotic shifts between ds1 and ds2, and again between ds2 and ds3, that somehow managed to not only leave Anor Londo completely untouched, but also not disturb the demon ruins and ash lake, or that ds2 happens waaaaaaaaaay in the future after ds3, to allow for these massive geological changes to happen without destroying the planet lol.
"Just because we don't see a physical flame in ds2 isn't necessarily because it doesn't exist. It might be tucked behind the throne somewhere or heck even invisible, point is nothing points to the fact that there isn't a physical flame in ds2."
- Yes, it actually means exactly that. Both ds1 and ds3 make a point of showing the actual flame, and mentioning it again and again. In ds2 it's sparsely mentioned, and more often than not the throne is mentioned instead of the flame.
If it were behind the throne, you'd see the light from even, even if faint, you'd still see something, and it being invisible makes no sense lol. It being reduced to a mere concept, on the other hand, makes perfect sense, especially in the context of ds2's heavy emphasis on memory loss.
"Just because we don't see a physical flame in ds2 isn't necessarily because it doesn't exist. It might be tucked behind the throne somewhere or heck even invisible, point is nothing points to the fact that there isn't a physical flame in ds2."
- If they were pulled forward in ds3, then the events of ds2 would change, which they didn't lol. But the geological differences mentioned before corroborate the fact that they're being pulled in the past.
And "some bodies don't decompose" doesn't answer anything. You can argue that the reason the giant's body didn't decompose has something to do with him working with embers and magic all his life (or his giant biology, but that doesn't fly since there are giant skeletons everywhere), or even maybe that he is ageless immortal, but he was recently killed, but there's no reason for this random dude to not ne decomposed, especially in an area where there are thousands of human skeletons littering the place.
Also, his wooden ladder next to him is still in top condition, other than, you know, being broken, but the wood hasn't decayed.
@@meyes1098 the other explanation is that Miyazaki just stubbornly stuck to his own plot threads, and that's why ds3 feels so close to ds1 but ds2 doesn't. I don't make a habit of assuming things like that, but you have to acknowledge it as a possibility, since humans are flawed and biased
As for geography, Lokey Lore put forward a theory that parts of lordran were warped to drangleic with the flame. He even specifically points out the cathedral with the painting having warped from anor Londo, as we see a painting guardian in Aldia's Manor and heide seemingly being an evolution of anor Londo (this in particular is all but confirmed). This is compounded by the anor Londo we see in ds3 missing a lot of its original architecture, including the cathedral with the painting. In that theory, drangleic is actually not in the same place as lordran was, it's that pieces of lordran were warped over. I find that far more compelling than this outlandish argument I keep seeing that "DS2 actually happened after ds3"
As for the Gilligan thing, that doesn't just happen with Gilligan. Why is Oscar's body at the start of the game completely untouched, seemingly the most insane coincidence of all time of it's just "another knight"?
Why are the mushroom people in Farron keep untouched and not rotted despite the fact that they surely had not survived in that changing biome all this time?
Why had dusk seemingly survived (or arrived) to plant the witchtrees all this time only to die at what must have been just before you got there? (at least, no more than 20 years I would think. Her corpse should be gone within days realistically, consumed by scavenger. It's hard to know what level the worldbuilding is working on)
Why are the classic demon corpses piled in the smoldering lake despite demon culture having been changing for thousands of years?
This is a reoccurring question the game asks of you, it's not just Gilligan. It's a fundamental mystery of the story, even if the answer really is just clumsy fan service like many people say
@@meyes1098 There's definitely a period of time of where Drangleic (at least some version of it) and Lothric exists at the same time since we have mercenaries from "Drang" still standing in the Lothric castle and Anor Londor.
I personally subscribe to the idea that they are just neighboring kingdoms with areas where cultures overlap, that's why we see similar architecture in places like Heide's Tower mimicking Anor Londo, Archdragon Peak vs Dragons Shrine, DS1 Kiln of the First Flame vs Brume's Tower, Anor Londo vs Iron Keep. It's also possible that linking the flame can be done from multiple places, the ritual to do so it's different between cultures. In DS1 the Lordvessel is used to access the Kiln of the Flame but in DS2, we find it broken in Drangleic, it was either imported there or the broken one is just a copy of it. We see Vendrick use a similar method to lock his castle/shrine of winter behind 4 great souls, which are the inheritors of the souls from DS1. In DS2, linking the flame is done by sitting on the Throne of Want rather than lighting a flame itself. In DS3, the Lords of Cinder have to be placed on thrones to access the kiln. In DS2So again, there are points where these cultures intersect and bring customs to one another, in some form.
I think it's a bit contrived to think that items are being pulled back in time from DS2 to DS3 instead of DS2 items surviving into DS3. Item descriptions don't fit this theory - how would anyone know that Lucatiel's Mask, for instance, was called this if the Lucatiel's story/legend didn't take place yet. Did people go back in time to tell the story along with item? Same thing goes for Fume Knight's Ultra Greatword - the item description states "belong to a traitor from long ago"
At the same time, keep in mind time and place being convoluted already started by the time Dark Souls 2 takes places - there's no way that Earthen Keep leads to Iron Keep without space/time distortion (although you could subscribe to the theory that the Bearer of the Curse just has gaps in memory on how they arrive to certain places, since hollowing is heavily used as a metaphor for dementia in DS2).
Another thing in the opening cinematic that many miss, is that the person is reaching for the doorhandle from the inside of the room, showing that they really are losing their memories and how disjointed their mind is from reality.
"We aren't really seeing the Bearer if the Curse's entire journey, just the moments that were so impactful that they stuck with them until the end... Until their mind faded".
I love that someone has finally worded that feeling I've been having with the DS2 world. It's one of the reasons that the second one if my favorite. This is a great in-game explanation! Thank you!
That yellow screen is an assault on the eyes. No way am I watching this without playing a game.
Lucatiel does understand human effigies, she's being glib when she claims to have no idea what it's for. Her laugh following the sentence is meant to show that she knows but values the player character so much that she's willing to part with an effigy in order to hopefully keep them around a little longer. She is a sister of battle, she doesn't like showing her true emotions through words but the player character very quickly becomes the only constant to her in a world of chaos and change.
That's a lot of BS. Lucatiel would give anything to not go hollow. She says as much when talking about her Self.
@@FKyoutubeSERIOUSLY human effigies appear to lose effectiveness as an undead looses their memories, by that time they're probably having almost no effect. Why would there be so many hollows if an effigy could always restore a person to full humanity no matter what? This is a case of items functioning differently for NPCs than the player character imo
@@jamesgrenier8856Our MC doesn't remember anything past their name, hinted by the intro cutscene, but the effigies work flawlessly to us, it's more likely that she lost hope when she found out her brother went hollow
@@EldenLord-wh4ov Lucatiel did not find her brother. That's the tragedy of it all. She went hollow just before finding him.
@@jamesgrenier8856 There's no lore to support what you are saying. Anyway, I'm not arguing that Luc was too far gone to use an effigy. I'm arguing that she didn't know what it was. Because if she did, she would have used it.
Man, it's nice to see a positive video on Dark Souls II for a change.
I will never understand why people really wanted to hate this entry. Yes it has a ton of flaws, but if we balance it out they are about the same as DS1, and way less than Demon's.
Moreover, people criticize features present in DS2 that they then praise in the following titles.
And finally thanks for mentioning Lucatiel, she is one of my favorite characters in any FromSoft title, and perfectly illustrates the struggles of a "Bearer of the Curse".
People who hate on Dark Souls 2 never seem to remember that Gavlan wheel, Gavlan deal…
Lmao, I remember that guy. I've never looked up a guide on his quest but I love him
@@NevinWarrior-es6ds No real quest to complete. Just visit him in the Wharf, then in the poison area, then he shall always be in the Pharros area with infinite poison supplies.
@@Ironica82 wish I knew that, I always do the poison area first and never go back because I think I'd waste my time
i personally always liked the thought that lucatiel does know what a human effigy does perfectly well, but chooses to feign ignorance and hand it to you because she knows her will is waning; she doesn't have much longer regardless and she wants you to continue on in her stead :3
Great vid! It feels like there are very specific themes in these games that can be easy to miss sometimes. This vid in particular was a good watch cause people might see the Silver knight looking at the picture and (if they haven’t played the previous games) not completely understand the significance. The greatest art is the kind that can have many interpretations, and for that reason, I think the Dark Souls series is truly a masterpiece. Again, nice video; I always love DS2 content.
You really put into words, what I love about DS2 well. It's so much more personal. Less about gods, more about people struggling. Lucatiel is a great example for that. (I also like build variety.)
the ending with the knight starring at the painting is the same reason of the setting being in '' ruins '' but the souls serie has a lot more messages and is full of symbolism . we can sit here all day talking about them. its a way of storytelling that transcands the language barrier.
Dark Souls 2 is the only game from the franchise i enjoyed playing so much i beat it several times. Usually never play games multiple times
i swear there's a whole ass Channel committed to debunking every misleading claim about Scholar of the First Sin being more Difficult, having more Enemies and whatever else people claim, he's showing side by side comparisons as proof, for example during gank fights, Scholar will actually make enemies stand back and wait depending on how many enemies are fighting you, OG won't, just throwing that out there, shouldn't come as a shock people who hate Dark Souls 2 naturally talk outta their ass because they do not play the game, why the fuck would they if they hate it?
anyway that was unrelated mostly, thanks for speaking good of Dark Souls 2 its always refreshing >W
Domo the goat destroying every Dark Souls 2 hater's credibility 🙏🙏
Domo's channel is goates but he isn't always correct about the differences between vanilla and sotfs, and is very biased for sotfs.
Vanilla does have a way harder endgame then sotfs, but it's early game is way easier.
I agree Scholar is a straight up improvement. But handling the rerelease like Bandai/From did just causes confusion. I don't like that they sell both versions of the game separately. They caused this mess
It's harder cause of the changes to the enemies. Just cause they don't mob you as much doesn't matter when they're all individually harder.
@primary2630 Alot of enemy damage values were nerfed in scholar believe it or not.
I couldn't have said it better myself, although I always interpreted the anti-hollowing crowns at the end of DKS2 to be the true ending and a more-or-less "permanent" solution, at least for yourself, since the game is about the personal journey rather than the ages of light and dark.
Lucatiel does have a happy ending in SOTFS. You can summon her for the Ivory King.
Being able to summon chars doesn’t necessarily mean they’re alive. Many of the summon signs across the series are from characters who died a long time ago (Tarkus, for example)
You put how I feel about DS2 into words. It 100% feels more personal. Best in the series for me
the irithyll black knight clip cutting off right before you get sniped 😵💫😵💫😵💫😵💫
I like the theory of the lack of cohesion being because of our own character's descent into Hollowing - it makes sooooo much sense. And honestly, I'd rather that as a lore explanation than just 'the devs didn't think about cohesion'. That said, I feel like, at least for me, what captures a personal feeling for me with Dark Souls 2 is that, at least with the DLC, you technically succeed in your quest. There's never anything that outright states your goal is to break the curse for everyone, so even if it's just for yourself, and with one of the crowns on, you do still succeed. Every step you are alone, and Majula fuels that with it's music, as does Vendrick's and Aldia's themes, I feel. But, as you said, in the end, like every ending, it's temporary. If you take off the crown, you can Hollow. And there's little point in being sane and immortal in a world trying to live past it's expiration date, as is driven home in DS3. It's a hollow victory.
But you take pride in it all the same. DS1, it's similar. DS3, it's similar. The hubs are usually the only 'levels' with music, to signify a place to return to, to rest. But the music of each always conveys, to me, I feel, a tragic, melancholic journey. A journey you take alone.
Each one, even if you end on an Age of Dark, DS3 tells us it's worthless because some hopeful warrior will light the Flame again. The efforts to cure the curse in those don't succeed.
But Dark Souls 2? You get a win. Hollow, small, and technical, but a win in a world that doesn't care and just wants to burn out already.
That, to me, is what makes it so personal. Honestly, that knight staring at Gwynevere's painting made me feel that all over again, but really drove it home, years after my first playthroughs of DS2.
It's actually because time and space are warped and don't function properly
The ringed city dlc in DS3 literally shows this
And it's stated in ds2
I think people forget that DSII was the game that revealed the truth of the fire linking curse in the first place. Discovering that either ending of the first game was temporary and had been repeated countless times already really blew open the ideas at play in the series.
To elaborate on my own point, I think the series (particularly 2) wants you to accept that you don’t control the fate of the world without making you completely powerless.
Each game reveals that your previous choice was ultimately overruled, but that doesn’t make those choices invalid; they obviously affected tons of lives for many lifetimes each, and that’s the most any real person can hope to do. Still it will go beyond your control in time.
The ending to dark souls 3 is the most consequential given that it really might change the world in a permanent-ish way. However, letting the fire fade still fits that exact theme; it’s about letting go of that control that the gods (and probably you) had been fighting to keep up to that point.
death does not only occur on the body but also in the mind
DS2 is my favorite by a LOT, and it makes me wish that we could travel to other corners of this world, like Catarina and Mirrah. I want to see what those places are actually like. I want to see other lands than just the suburbs of Anor Londo.
Id like to see a side game set in an age of light, where people are around and cities are thriving. Like a proper RPG game within the setting.
Schollar of the sin was my fist souls game. And the only one I really loved
Lucatiel either truely dies or goes completely hollow in DS3
since u can get her sword and gear
or shes inside the cursed rotted greatwood
You find her summon sign outside of the burnt ivory kings boss gate if you do her quest so who knows
@@GilbertTheGilbertGuy ye but thats ds2
ds3 is ages after
@@pegasusrr3156 yeah, well most of ds3 retcons ds2(I hate that it did that tbh) so who knows
Dude, your explanation for the inconsistency of DS2's world actually fits so well with its theme! I like to think the kings' crowns is the first step to curing the undead curse given that hollowing in DS3 is completely voluntary, and I love the firekeeper ending in that game so much because of how hopeful it is.
It's literally stated in game that the world doesn't make sense, just look at the intro you get sucked into a whirlpool then end up in dranglake
Even the npcs have no clue how they ended up there
DS3 even shows that after so much time has past the world just starts to mess up time and space don't function naturally
The silver/black knights aren’t “hollow” per se, as they aren’t human, but yes, it is something akin to that.
they actually are, doesn't work the same way as humans, and black knights have a "stronger" hollowing compared to silver knights
@@KateHikes83TJD actually are what? Humans? They belong to the race that inhabited Anor Londo which go unnamed the whole game. Definitely not humans or giants. Also, what made you think the last part? As far as I can tell, black knights are just silver knights who were scorched during the war in Izalith. I assume you think they’re more “hollow” than silver knights because they’re placed in random locations in Lordran rather than fulfilling their guard duty in Anor Londo?
@@KateHikes83TJD as for the hollowing, that specific term refers to those afflicted with the darksign. They’re more like what Gwyn became after linking the fire, a husk of his former self
@@xonrob9575 Black knights were specifically trained to fight the demons they weren't just scorched silver knights.
@xonrob9575 not at all, it is mostly caused by the darksign but not exclusive.
animals, lords and dragons can hollow
I genuinely thought for a second that Decino made a DS2 video
good vid
Great video! You deserve more subscribers!
Fully agree with you here, great video.
Dark Souls 2 is interesting story wise because it shows the Chosen Undead's choice truly didn't matter. Time and time again, the fire is linked or snuffed out. Straid of Olaphis asks what the name of the kingdom is and you inform him it is Drangleic, and he says it is interesting. The name and kingdom change in different eras. It is implied that several of the kingdoms in the DLCs are also in the location of Drangleic. It is implied several kingdoms have existed within the lands of Drangleic have come, gone, and even been forgotten. The story of the First Flame is one of futility.
and then comes ds3, debunking all that
@@arnimalblackmane8033 I disagree but I understand where you are coming from.
@@Fronsky-mj5tk even with those items and bits of lore from ds2, they made the story of ds3 like ds2 didn't exist. i would actually prefer if they just didn't put any ds2 things in ds3 and pretend that ds2 and ds3 are both alternative stories after the events of ds1
@@arnimalblackmane8033 Honestly they should have just done another unique setting because DS3 felt like they were trying to put in way too much fan service.
@@arnimalblackmane8033 check the responses on the comment by @ pockystyx4087 ,great theory to explain that
Best Souls 2 has done it again
5:56 "dark souls 3"
also I love the vid
I heard of a theory the ds2 is a dream or a dream state of mind, this could be the dream of the chosen of undead
Dranleic Castle has been confirm to be a dream.
SOTFS is harder and inferior?? It fixes tons of stuff. It’s made to be the definitive version. It’s actually easier in so many areas. It’s like playing a game on the 1.0 version without the day one patches (eg Elden Ring v1.00 vs current).
With DOMOs side by side videos, it really does look like Iron Keep is the only place that made it "harder".
The increase of enemies, the random placement of “hard” enemies in early zones, scholar is so much more annoyingly frustrating than vanilla ds2 imo
@@adamtapparo2168 Tiss mainly Iron Keep that has a couple more knights. As for the hides knights in the ruins, they are passive until you kill the boss. Once you do, they are active and it turns a beginning area into a mid game area.
I agree that SOTFS is the intended version of the game. I have put more time into ds2 than any of the other games in the trilogy.
The Dark Souls fandom has made up so mucb shit about II. The oringal will gank you more and honestly has some encounters to hard. SCHOLAR reworkes AI to be less aggressive in multi fights,removes a lot or males more interesting ones. Scholar is objectively easier and more interesting
Well done. Good video. Be proud of yourself
Ds2 has always been my favorite 3 being my least favorite, i still reguarly play all 3 happily tho, frickin love this trilogy
i just cant get over the footage of whoever was struggling to parry a silver knight😂
Fighting Cowboy. He does tons of playthroughs of games so I wouldn't call him a great Souls player (though, for DS3, more persistence than me as I never got past Pontiff). Still fun to watch if you want to see an average skilled gamer taking on different genres.
@@Ironica82 i cant stand that guy tbh, he's not very good and his "walkthroughs" are basically just him playing games while reading through wiki's. when it comes to watching youtubers im tryna see someone better than me play the game but when it comes to souls games thats hard to find. not even tryna sound cocky but the pvp guys and speedrunners are normally the only ones that are considerably better than i am
@@squish-d2k I think I watched one of his playthroughs but that's it. My main playthrough channels are Christopher Odd and Luckless Lovelocks.
@@Ironica82 might have to check them out. lots of story games like god of war i like to watch instead of actually play because the story is cool but the actual gameplay is pretty boring at least from what i experienced myself from the first game
@@squish-d2k For games like God Of War, there are channels that does a movie version. I usually watch cinematic games that way.
Second. Good vid. Keep making them.
Something that's been troubling me for a while - What is the exact relationship between humanity, abyss, and the soul? Bosses have souls, but we can see that these can be corrupted by abyss (artorias's soul from DS1), Gwyn had a soul, but he split it up and shared it and then linked the first flame and now he's hollow but when we beat him we still get a soul. Do you think the player character has a soul?
I think it's ours, cos we're the agency behind the character.
I love 2 just for the environments, majula is stunning! and the majula theme.. omg I love that track.
We got a DS2 genious interview before GTA6
I`m pretty sure silver knights don`t get hollow, because they`re not human to begin with. They were made by Gwyn as his personal army, and humans originated from dark soul. We know Gwyn hated and feared humans and "everything that stems from humanity", so he wouldn`t allow any in his private army. They`re mindless drones who are fit only to follow orders. They never had consciousness. Gwyn gave his followers exactly enough of a soul for them to function and not a bit more, we see this with giants in DS1: there are grunts who open the gates and throw bombs, they can`t even talk and they do their function despite no one being there for god knows how long, there are giant blacksmith, who can weave a few words together and knows how to smith, and then there is Gough, an eloquent knight who ponders nostalgia and speaks Shakesperian. We also never heard any silver knight speak or do anything remotely intelligent. There were plans for a silver knight npc in DS3, but he was cut, i suspect for that very reason.
That silver knight probably awaited orders from the painting since he couldn`t realize it`s not his princess.
brother who keeps passing this misinformation. what do you mean sotfs "tunes the difficulty to favor people who had experience with the game"
if anything sotfs makes the game easier. enemies in vanilla aggro from much further away leading to the player fighting way more ganks than in sotfs. sotfs enemy placement also makes way more sense.
please get your shit together
Yea, Scholar does make the game easier and more accessible. Heck, even the key to light up The Lost Sinner's boss room is not behind a boss anymore.
The scholar slander will still be around for a while. People are only now coming around to ds2, so give it some time.
Damn, good video.
6:31 Doesn't the fight against Soul of Cinder happen in the same era(?) as the Ringed City DLC?
thank you very much ive been saying this for so long, yes 1 & 3 but 2 is just different for better or worst, i forgot the name of that channel but he play ds1,2,3 bloodborne and elden ring as a philosophy and concluded that ds2 is the best game in the series because the story and the journey you took in ds2 is personal compared to other games where in 1 about some prophecy, 3 because who ever resurrect the lord messed up thinking they will do it again and also you the ashen one are not a single person but the ashes of the failed people to link the flame just the the lord of cinder are the combination of all that succeed to link the flame and in elden ring marika called back all the tarnished after she sent as away, as for the bloodborne havent played it yet so i dont know about that.
Bloodbornes protagonist (for lack of a better turn) is basically an outsider who came to yarhnam seeking a cure and got mixed up in the hunt and all that (I think I'm not super sure about the reason your character travels to yarhnam I just know they're not native they came from somewhere else though there's arguments to be made if yarhnam is even real but thats a whole other topic that I'm nowhere near qualified to talk about)
@@jeankirchstein2552 thank you.
@@jeankirchstein2552
That is indeed the reason "The Hunter" travels to Yharnam, they have/had an unnamed disease and wanted one of Yharnam's "magic" blood infusions to cure it
From there, you end up dragged into the hunt. Accepting Gehrman's mercy would likely be the ending the player would take as they can leave Yharnam after and return to their old life like nothing happened.
Peak souls 2
I've only played the scholar version of ds2 and absolutely hated buuuut eventually I wanted to play it again and I liked it a lot more and have done all but one of the dlc this time. And I think the reason for that is I learned how to fight locked off which makes the swarm a lot easier to handle. Honestly I really like the game now
Me and two of my friends liked DS2 before we liked DS1
Fineeeee I finish dark souls 2
At this point, watching people descend into madness to defend a game that was slightly overhated at launch is more interesting than the game itself.
Why the thumbnail look like ia genius video? Lol
After checking out your twitter, i'm no longer surprised that you think that yellow was a good idea.
The PS3 version of SOTFS is the one your talking about in the beginning, as its the vanilla version and it gives you the dlc keys off the bat and the gates are open if you beat the bosses guarding them. Unfortunately it no longer has multiplayer support as they killed the servers march this year. But its still a great way to get the dlc without the pains of the newer versions of Scholar.
Awesome Vid!
Thank You very much for Your Work! Greetings from Germany (Copy/Paste Comment to slightly boost Your Algorythm)
I don't like the way movement feels in DS2, just a personal thing I guess. I really liked the 3 sentinel fight, Hex build used to be fun, Great Sword Guts build was fun.
Oh and I also killed Gavlan during my first tour in No-Man's Wharf.
No wheel, no deal for me.
edit: I forgot binoboosting.I liked that. rip :)
i like ds2 and i don't care about the gamer circlejerk babbling the opinions of others just because that is what everybody says
Sorry but that yellow border is literally making me go hollow why is it there 😭
The idea of an inconsistent journey due to mind loss is fine. But the implementation sucks. When you try to repeat after an old Doom WAD, you better make it good.
And I like ds2.
It's literally stated in game in ds2 and shown in DS3 that time and space don't function properly in the dark souls universe
6:48 seek.. Seek... lost...
It's Bearer, seek, seek, lest
a little bit too yellow
1:55 Calling Anor Londo in Dark Souls 3 "fan-service" is really stupid. DS3 is a freaking sequel. It's not "fan-service" to bring back locations/characters from the previous game.
Batman: Arkham City is a sequel to Arkham Asylum yet they didn't have a whole section in the asylum. DS2 is a sequel to DS1 yet you didn't spend anytime in areas that were in the first game. DS3 really seems like they went too far in trying to please their fans. People complained that DS2 was too clunky, well, DS3 makes you feel as light as a feather. People complained about DS2's enemies tanking attacks, well, DS3 mostly changed poise into either they had it or they didn't. People complained about the "non-linear" of DS2 so they made DS3 as linear as possible. People complained about slowly loosing health when dying, so they went back to Demon Souls logic but this time, hid how much health you have lose in order to trick your mind. People praised Fume Knight as one of the best fights (as well as Mirror Knight) as well as O&S in DS1, and they took that as meaning that people loved two phases boss and made EVERY boss a two phase boss (and one a three phase but that was done perfectly and made sense).
Now, does that all make DS3 a bad game, no. However, it does seem like they went too far in the other direction after DS2 instead of just fixing the things that people hated the most. Though DS2 is the all time favorite of their games and DS3 is my least favorite, even I have to admit that DS3 boss fights (well, the later ones at least) look amazing and much better than fighting a frog with a human face.
@@Ironica82 "DS2 is a sequel to DS1" but it broke so many established lore from DS1 because it was written and developed by a different team, and it shows. The redesigning of giants and rewriting their history and personality, making the "dark soul" inherently evil with how they portrayed Nashandra who was an offspring of Manus (who wasn't even really evil, just the manifestation of the dark soul), the introduction of Vendrick who was a completely new character who was basically an OC not-Gwyn, and even the introduction of the Throne of Want as opposed to the bonfire/first flame as a power system. Hell, even the way they portrayed hollowing was different. DS1 Hollowing was a metaphor for a sense of purpose and will to move forward, but DS2 Hollowing was treated like a disease and an infection that progressively got worse (which was already covered in DS1 with.... undead....).
DS2 was essentially a different team's misinterpretation and rewrite of Dark Souls and IS NOT the norm of what a sequel should be. You call DS2 a sequel yet it breaks all of the rules of the previous game while establishing new rules and continuing none of the lore which is NOT the norm when creating a sequel. DS3 absolutely did not "lean too far in the other direction". It's what a sequel naturally should flow into. You can argue that DS3 was too linear in it's level design (which is true, but that doesn't make it bad. i personally prefer it) but DS3 takes all of the established rules and lore from DS1 and continues it. It introduced the concept of embering and the Ashen Ones which just adds on to the worldbuilding without breaking the rules of DS1 nor does it introduce an entirely new power system.
@@brandonkite4414 "he redesigning of giants and rewriting their history and personality," Who said they were the same giants from the first game? Considering that DS2 takes place thousands of years later, it really doesn't change anything.
"making the "dark soul" inherently evil with how they portrayed Nashandra who was an offspring of Manus (who wasn't even really evil, just the manifestation of the dark soul)" Each of the four daughters were different aspects of Manus. That's why the one who went to the Burnt Ivory King was actually good.
"the introduction of Vendrick who was a completely new character who was basically an OC not-Gwyn," Not sure what you mean by "OC". The point of Vendrick is that, after cycle upon cycle, the next one who was supposed to take over wanted to know if there was another option besides the age of fire or dark. That's the overarching story of DS2. DS2 asked what happens if someone tries to cure the curse. DS3 ask what happens if they choose to ignore their fate and does not bring in either ages (though even that is futile as if the princes stayed alive, the age of dark would happen as no one would link the fire).
"even the introduction of the Throne of Want as opposed to the bonfire/first flame as a power system" The throne of Want is basically the typical ending of your character either linking the fire or letting itt go out. The alt ending shows your character ignoring fate and continuing in Aldia's and Vendrick's research into curing the curse.
"DS1 Hollowing was a metaphor for a sense of purpose and will to move forward, but DS2 Hollowing was treated like a disease and an infection that progressively got worse (which was already covered in DS1 with.... undead....)" DS1 showed what happens after someone goes hollow. DS2 showed the process.
"DS2 was essentially a different team's misinterpretation and rewrite of Dark Souls and IS NOT the norm of what a sequel should be" The head guy was still a supervisor over the game so that comment is muted as he would have had them change the story if it was a "misinterpretation"
"DS3 absolutely did not "lean too far in the other direction". It's what a sequel naturally should flow into." So, first game, you go to restart the fire and should solve the issue. Now, you find yourself 1000+++ years later, find that all of DS1 was basically pointless, yet somehow, someone who died in the first one was still alive for some slug to start eating them, and somehow, there are some of the same characters around, even though the lore states that, during the age of fire, people actually die and the immortality only takes effect when the fire starts to fade and the dark sign appears.
"DS3 takes all of the established rules and lore from DS1 and continues it. It introduced the concept of embering and the Ashen Ones which just adds on to the worldbuilding without breaking the rules of DS1", yea, DS2 does that as well. It builds on the lore of DS1, introduces how hollowing fully works, introduced the concept of the "chosen one" not following their fate, and did not make any of DS1 characters immortal.
@@brandonkite4414no it didn't break any established lore, ds3 did that with it's retcons
5:30 I disagree with this take. In actuality, it shows the futility of your choice. After dark, comes fire, when the fire goes out, comes dark. It's a never ending repeating cycle, caused by Gwyn and perpetuated until the end of ringed city dlc when you face Gael. Dreg Heap shows how an impossible ammount of kingdomshave risen and fallen, to the insane extent that they're crumbling in on one another, like a microcosm version of a universe collapsing. The world was artificially extended. And although many things are up for interpretation, my perception of ds3's dlc ending, and giving the blood full of the dark soul to the little painting girl, makes her paint a blood red world different from all the others which is then consumed in flames. Which to me, is Bloodborne. Blood moons, the starting area being burnt to the ground, and so on.
I really love how personal DS2 story is.
Also, if you want to learn more about symbolism and meaning of many areas and bosses of the game you most likely didn't know before, I recommend watching TB Skyen's playthrough.
Not only it's funny af, entertaining, and well-edited, but also he analyses everything very deeply and with a lot of unbiased care.
Dark Souls 2. "But is this our only choice?" is what SOTFS is about.
Also you DO see Lucatiel again. Mirroring Solaire's story if you do her entire quest, you find her summon sign outside of the burnt ivory kings boss gate.
Omce again, 10 years on, you still repeat the same boring old trite (amd wrong) criticism of Dark Souls 2: "The area connections don't make logical sense!!1!"
Did you ever consider the possibility, given DS2's level design leads you to very distinct areas, that those connections just signify longer travel distance, abbreviated in favor of gameplay? Think of the tunnel to Drangleic Castle or the elevator from Earthen Peak more like fades, like a cut-to-black in a movie (or a wipe, if Star Wars).
This is how I see it as well. On my gaming channel, I even point out that you can see mountains behind Earthen Peak and can surmise that The Iron Keep is over there. However, I also did come up with a better transition to that point that would have only taken about how long the tunnel is to Dranleic (or shorter) and still make sense (basically, instead of going up, the elevator goes down, opens in a room with a huge pool of poison (to show where the poison that the windmill was pulling up came from), a bridge across the pool, and then, after the bridge, you turn the corner and enter Iron Keep).
The actual best version of this game is Playstation 3 DS2 SotFS. It did NOT include the unnecessary garbage updates to the base game, but it DID include all the DLC, all on physical disc, I might add. Highly recommended.
Some day, I hope Dark Souls 2 can get some kind of remake and reach its full potential...
And remove ADP
You should play Scholar of the First Sin, despite the backlash to the game. The DLC ending, the secret ending, lets you walk away from the fire while aldia speaks at you. Dark Souls 2 the point at the end is to find treatment to the hollowing curse so that the bearer of the curse is no longer a slave to the fire linking curse
Importante note: that ending also exists in base DS2, as long as you have the DLCs.
Dark Souls || Understands the the pain of playing the game.
I've found the issue with DS2 is that people played it after DS3. Because of DS3's slavish dedication to DS1 and complete ignoring of DS2, anyone who played it after DS3 could only be disappointed.
I'm sorry but I cannot watch the video with the constant white-screen transitions. I really like what you have to say though!
i don't understand caring about storyline in games in 2024
What don't you understand?
Doooo you don't like story? Ok bud
I really don't understand how people like dark souls 2. Its objectively a terrible game and terrible souls game
FromSoft are literally worse than Ubisoft when it comes to asset recycling. There is nothing deep about them doing it.