Support NeoGAF

[nailbombxx]

For me Bloodborne confirmed how much of a difference it makes having Miyazaki at the helm. I found it so much more memorable than DS2. The combat is better and level design and atmosphere are closer to the original DS in quality. I actually wanted to play through BB again when I had finished it. I don't feel inclined to ever go back to DS2.

DS2 still holds up mechanically. I don't really buy into all the complaints about hit boxes, ADP etc. It falls flat because it doesn't come close to the others for atmosphere and much of the game world feels rushed.s

After playing Bloodborne, people's complaints with DS2's gameplay should be obvious. It is slower, floatier, and in general just less responsive than it should be and it is just frustrating, while BB is basically the series' tight and fluid gameplay mastered to perfection.

Attaching what would be normal character movement and response to a stat was a terrible idea and without it the game plays far worse. In Dark Souls 2 you often get hit in the middle of rolling, or you often don't know if dodging at what you know is the right moment will actually save you from getting hit, and it just feels sloppy.

Some people may not notice it as a big deal, that's okay, but it was definitely apparent to me from the get-go because it was not what I was accustomed to from the previous two games. So its that combined with the lackluster areas and enemy design that really bums me out about this game.

 

[Lumination]

It would just make the game less strict.

A lot of what I see in bad hit boxes is toes getting clipped on rolls and people claiming to be miles away. The animations exacerbate the problem, most egregiously on grabs, as the minor tags get played out like the avatar was right in the center. But that's an animation issue more than a gameplay one.

The tracking thing is tough. DS1 does the same thing but with a different animation style; in DS1, the enemies would plant their feet and raise their sword, then, in the transition of the downward slash, would instantaneously flip around and strike at you. It looks better, because the pivot happens during a transition, but it doesn't read like enemy is going to track you until they do. DS2 enemies do the ice skate feet track while circling around them, which looks terrible, but they plant when they actually do the swing (no instantaneous pivot). This conveys that the enemy is going to swing while always oriented in your direction (identical to DS1 in function, but actually showing it on screen).

This is what causes the instances like the previous poster complained about with the dude doing the jump attack and then turning 180 and attack the opposite direction (and then the next poster subsequently showing a gif of a DS hollow doing nearly the identical thing). You can see/notice the difference in the two: The DS1 hollow is tracking the user on the transition animation (the jump)...he literally curves in the air. The DS2 enemy continues to jump forward, but once he hits the gound, he plants and attacks towards the user. Same thing, different animation.

Yeah, I know how it all works.

That's what I mean by each issue exacerbates the other. If the animations matched reality better, there would be no pivot issues and less hitbox complaints. If the hitboxes were closer to reality, than more generous iframes and animations would be less necessary. If iframes were increased, the toe clipping and gravity squeezing would be less common and the tracking wouldn't matter as much. As it stands, because From screwed up on all three fronts, the end result looks and feels janky and unfair.

That's why the issue isn't about lack of skill. There's no way any developer (let alone From) would let this unholy trinity to slide. There's no way they saw the hippo squeeze or toe clipping and decided, yes, that should be a regular occurrence. Either they screwed up or just didn't have the resources to fix it. And that's ok. Just don't blame the player, especially when most of the complaints are coming from people who do get it.

 

[Sanctuary]

Yeah, when you are comparing Dark Souls 2 to Dark Souls and Demon's Souls, it doesn't hold up very well. It is still however "good" compared to most other modern games though. I also happened to like it more than vanilla Bloodborne, but not because of combat reasons.

You need to get Adaptability to like 20 to get to Dark Souls rolling speeds

I was unaware that agility affected rolling speed. Your weight determines rolling distance at least. Agility is mosty for i-frames, and it takes 92+ to reach Dark Souls levels. Agility was the first surprise "FUCK YOU PLAYERS, HAHAHA" from this game.

I actually just finished Scholar. Game is dope.
Adaptability is awesome when you realize it helps you're ability to dodge. It's brilliant.

Yeah, it's totally "awesome" when you realize that you have to invest a bunch of character levels just to have the same ability that you had by default in the previous two games. Super dope.

 

[gogosox82]

It would just make the game less strict.

A lot of what I see in bad hit boxes is toes getting clipped on rolls and people claiming to be miles away. The animations exacerbate the problem, most egregiously on grabs, as the minor tags get played out like the avatar was right in the center. But that's an animation issue more than a gameplay one.

The tracking thing is tough. DS1 does the same thing but with a different animation style; in DS1, the enemies would plant their feet and raise their sword, then, in the transition of the downward slash, would instantaneously flip around and strike at you. It looks better, because the pivot happens during a transition, but it doesn't read like enemy is going to track you until they do. DS2 enemies do the ice skate feet track while circling around them, which looks terrible, but they plant when they actually do the swing (no instantaneous pivot). This conveys that the enemy is going to swing while always oriented in your direction (identical to DS1 in function, but actually showing it on screen).

This is what causes the instances like the previous poster complained about with the dude doing the jump attack and then turning 180 and attack the opposite direction(and then the next poster subsequently showing a gif of a DS hollow doing nearly the identical thing). You can see/notice the difference in the two: The DS1 hollow is tracking the user on the transition animation (the jump)...he literally curves in the air. The DS2 enemy continues to jump forward, but once he hits the gound, he plants and attacks towards the user. Same thing, different animation.

He didn't say that. He said the red phantom did a 180 in MIDAIR, not on the ground and your awesome response was to tell him to get good basically. Its funny b/c I've had the exact same thing happen to me with that red phantom as well. Red Phantom jumps I roll under or to the side and he tracks to my position and hits me. No enemy in DS1 does that, they jump to where your position was when they decided to do a jump attack, not where you moved to after they committed to a jump attack.

And I don't see how it would make the game less strict. I believe i frames are in the games to elevate the issues with tracking and hitboxes so you will have to explain how having more i frames makes the game less strict when it was built with i frames in mind to begin with.

 

[Teeth]

Yeah, I know how it all works.

That's what I mean by each issue exacerbates the other. If the animations matched reality better, there would be no pivot issues and less hitbox complaints. If the hitboxes were closer to reality, than more generous iframes and animations would be less necessary. If iframes were increased, the toe clipping and gravity squeezing would be less common and the tracking wouldn't matter as much. As it stands, because From screwed up on all three fronts, the end result looks and feels janky and unfair.

That's why the issue isn't about lack of skill. There's no way any developer (let alone From) would let this unholy trinity to slide. There's no way they saw the hippo squeeze or toe clipping and decided, yes, that should be a regular occurrence. Either they screwed up or just didn't have the resources to fix it. And that's ok. Just don't blame the player, especially when most of the complaints are coming from people who do get it.

The animations do match reality (except for in the complete lol-fests like the Mimics) - the toe clips are reality. They are reality in DS1 as well, they just happen less because there are more iframes. Since there are less iframes on the DS2 roll, there are can end up being no iframes when the character is stretched out at length during the end of the dive (but before the tuck and roll). So your toe gets clipped because your hit box overlaps with a hurt box on a single frame. With motion blur and all the rest of it, you feel cheated, but you got hit. You can say that you rolled through it, but "i frames" are an abstraction; you literally pass through an attack. Some parts you can get hurt, some parts you can't. A lot of the "his axe didn't hit me, i dodged!" is not that the animations don't match the hit boxes. They do. You just weren't invincible when you thought you were.

Here's the thing: I'm no master at DS games. Not by a long shot. But I don't blame the game when the rules are there and 99% consistent, even if they are different than DS1 (which feels better). They are just the rules.

He didn't say that. He said the red phantom did a 180 in MIDAIR, not on the ground and your awesome response was to tell him to get good basically. Its funny b/c I've had the exact same thing happen to me with that red phantom as well. Red Phantom jumps I roll under or to the side and he tracks to my position and hits me. No enemy in DS1 does that, they jump to where your position was when they decided to do a jump attack, not where you moved to after they committed to a jump attack.

Check the gif of the Hollow curving in midair a couple of pages back. It happens.

And I don't see how it would make the game less strict. I believe i frames are in the games to elevate the issues with tracking and hitboxes so you will have to explain how having more i frames makes the game less strict when it was built with i frames in mind to begin with.

i frames aren't in the game to alleviate anything. They are there to literally dive through attacks. I frames are in tons of games, they aren't a crutch, they are a mechanic.

The more i frames there are in a dodge, the larger the window of time the user has to dodge an attack. They can dodge earlier and still pass through an attack. Less i frames, smaller window, more strict timing.

If it takes 3 frames for an attack to pass through a user's hit box, and the user has 10 i frames on a dodge roll, the user can dodge up to 7 frames before the attack connects and they won't be hit. If they only have 3 i frames on a dodge roll, they literally have to dodge on the exact frame the attack would hit them.

Less i frames means that the timing is more strict. You can't dodge too early or too late. By opening up the window (giving more iframes) the game allows the user to be sloppier with their play.

Of course, all of this is compounded by screen lag that the user is using. If you're playing on a big pretty LCD TV, there's a good chance that you are getting 2-3 frames of input lag as it is. As such, your timing has to be even stricter or possibly predictive. But that's not the game's fault.

Lots of games do this, especially 3D games because the perception of distances are difficult when they are coming at you. Lots of 3D platformers will allow the user to jump3 or 4 frames after they have fallen off of a platform because it "feels" better. Namely because it is easier.

Street Fighter, with successive iterations, allowed a wider and wider execution window for special attacks, because it "felt" better to most users. That was until SF4 when they opened up the window to an absurd degree and then you do could do extremely sloppy "motions" (like down-forward, down-forward + punch for a Dragon Punch, which technically covers f, d, df+p) and things got a little too out of control.

Regardless, both of these cases are just examples of how opening up strict timings will make wider user bases feel that a game feels better.

I mean, I'm in that camp too: I think DS1 feels better than DS2. But I also get that DS2 is just a rule change and accept that and play the game based on its rule set.

 

[Lumination]

The animations do match reality (except for in the complete lol-fests like the Mimics) - the toe clips are reality. They are reality in DS1 as well, they just happen less because there are more iframes. Since there are less iframes on the DS2 roll, there are can end up being no iframes when the character is stretched out at length during the end of the dive (but before the tuck and roll). So your toe gets clipped because your hit box overlaps with a hurt box on a single frame. With motion blur and all the rest of it, you feel cheated, but you got hit. You can say that you rolled through it, but "i frames" are an abstraction; you literally pass through an attack. Some parts you can get hurt, some parts you can't. A lot of the "his axe didn't hit me, i dodged!" is not that the animations don't match the hit boxes. They do. You just weren't invincible when you thought you were.

Here's the thing: I'm no master at DS games. Not by a long shot. But I don't blame the game when the rules are there and 99% consistent, even if they are different than DS1 (which feels better). They are just the rules.

Ah you got me! Reality isn't quite the best word to use here. More like expectations. In most action games (even in the Souls series themselves), you don't expect the iframes to end before the animation that starts the iframes ends. Dark Souls 2 subverts this rule in a bad way.

Regardless of how strict or unforgiving From wanted iframes to be, not changing anything else to play nicely with the iframe reduction ends with an experience that will often leaves a bad taste in the player's mouth. If they wanted more skillful timing, that's fine. But they're going to have to put in the effort to fix the animations so their failure is better communicated to the player and looks like less of a fluke. Besides the toe clipping, there's really no excuse for the hippo suction squeeze. If they wanted it to be harder to dodge, they should have made the backstep/roll animation take longer than it was.

And that's really all I have to say to about it. DS2 is not a bad game, but a lot of the design decisions here just don't sit well with me.

 

[Teeth]

Regardless of how strict or unforgiving From wanted iframes to be, not changing anything else to play nicely with the iframe reduction ends with an experience that will often leaves a bad taste in the player's mouth. If they wanted more skillful timing, that's fine. But they're going to have to put in the effort to fix the animations so their failure is better communicated to the player and looks like less of a fluke. Besides the toe clipping, there's really no excuse for the hippo suction squeeze. If they wanted it to be harder to dodge, they should have made the backstep/roll animation take longer than it was.

And that's really all I have to say to about it. DS2 is not a bad game, but a lot of the design decisions here just don't sit well with me.

I can agree with almost all of this. The hippo stuff was weak, the Mimics are a laugh, and the Pursuer grab looks bad, even if I've never actually seen the thing that happens in the gifs.

I don't like that one Club Drake Knight that has infinite stamina and I think the pivot skating looks kinda weak.

But I think all of those are a weak 20 minutes of a 50 hour great game. Not as good as DS1, but nowhere in the stratosphere of bad.

 

[Lumination]

I can agree with almost all of this. The hippo stuff was weak, the Mimics are a laugh, and the Pursuer grab looks bad, even if I've never actually seen the thing that happens in the gifs.

I don't like that one Club Drake Knight that has infinite stamina and I think the pivot skating looks kinda weak.

But I think all of those are a weak 20 minutes of a 50 hour great game. Not as good as DS1, but nowhere in the stratosphere of bad.

For me, happening two or three times is enough to shatter the trust between player and game. I can't trust what the screen is showing me, and that's important considering what I'm risking while playing the game.

Maybe it was an unlucky streak over the course of 3 attempts, but afterwards, I just didn't feel like I could respect the challenge if the game didn't respect me back. And that's not getting into any other complaints I had, haha.

FWIW I know some people that love DS2 more than DS1 because of its breadth of options. I'm a bit sad I won't be exploring them and I can only hope DS3 offers something similar.

 

[Red Liquorice]

It tries fun stuff but is a neutered version of the original? Lower production values but still enjoyable in its on way?

That about explains it, thank you

 

[Star Falcon]

Haha the OP is so comically salty i don't know how serious you're being. Dark Souls 2 is a good game - i'd rate the others a notch higher but saying the likes of the Looking Glass Knight and Executioner Chariot are weak experiences is something i can't agree with. Also the DLC is fantastic.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

Morrigan Stark I don't know how you find the motivation to defend DS2 so much. I love the game, it's probably tied as my favourite in the Soulsborne games and I always agree with your posts, but man, I admire your persistence to defend the game.

Every time I tell myself I should NOPE out of these threads, and yet somehow I get pulled back.

Every time someone complains about shitty tracking, I should make a gif of a clip I took of that Bloodborne DLC fatty and his grab move, where it just pivoted and vacuumed me into its tentacled mouth when I was nowhere near it. But that's okay because A-Team/Miyazaki.

 

[Hodders]

Can't say I agree on No Mans Wharf. Thought it was the best area in the game.

The Gulch though. Brrrrr.

Still need to play the DLC for this game

 

[GamingOblivion]

Every time I tell myself I should NOPE out of these threads, and yet somehow I get pulled back.

Every time someone complains about shitty tracking, I should make a gif of a clip I took of that Bloodborne DLC fatty and his grab move, where it just pivoted and vacuumed me into its tentacled mouth when I was nowhere near it. But that's okay because A-Team/Miyazaki.

A single monster versus most of the game's bosses and enemies lol

 

[Maddrical]

A single monster versus most of the game's bosses and enemies lol

In 4 playthroughs of DS2, the only 2 enemies I've ever had issues with in DS2 are the hippos & their grab move, and the Pursuer's stab. Of course, my experience doesn't define everyone else's but "most of the games bosses and enemies"? Really?

 

[Screaming Meat]

Yeah, the issue was at what cost though? If those were just added/improved and everything else was the same as DS1, then it would be a +. But we ended up with quite a few more changes to fundamental gameplay mechanics that few people were happy with.

This is true.

Have people forgotten that PvP sucks in Dark Souls 2?

What do you mean "forgetten"? I was playing it last week!

I’ve had a whale of a time trying out all sorts of whacky builds. Plus, DS2’s a heck of a lot more stable in PvP than Dark Souls. I don’t recall getting lag-stabbed anywhere near as much, if at all.

Builds becomes irrelevant after a certain threshold thanks to Soul Memory and start seeing people wearing heavy armor and buffs that takes little damage.

That threshold is very high though and easily circumnavigated by starting a new character (and nowadays you can use the Agape ring).

But that doesn't matter because Poise is broken in Dark Souls 2 so a dagger can stop a full Havel.

Um… I'm not sure but I think you'd have to hit the Havel quite a few times with a dagger before the poise broke (I could be wrong), by which time you're flattened by whatever monstrous two hand cudgel the bastards carrying. Even if you did break the poise, the damage from daggers these days, even when Mundane, aren't all that.

Plus, if you're wearing Havels, you're probably a scum bag.

Invaders are at a huge disadvantage because they have no healing items with Miracles taking too long to cast making them useless.

Do you think invaders should be at an advantage? They already have the enemies in the level on their side, so if they ran away into a crowd of them for breathing space, they could cast whatever they want and rejoin the fight.

Let' not forget that they had to re-balance the game every month because of Monastery Scimitar, the Spells, the consumables(for the worse), The weapon balance and buff stacking.

Oh no, you mean they kept supporting and balancing the game after launch just to make it better?! THOSE RAT BASTARDS! THEY SHOULD'VE GOT IT RIGHT STRAIGHT AWAY!

 

[More Fun To Compute]

The most disappointing boss in DS2 for me was Sir Alonne. Was expecting a cool fight but instead they just ramped the broken grab hitbox up even more for cheap difficulty. At that point surely they should have known that their game had serious flaws like this that were obvious to players.

 

[EUA]

ADP serves a very simple purpose. In order to wear whatever armor you want AND be able to roll through attacks you must invest points in it. At least it allows you to be a shiny knight and still have i-frames. How is that worse than only being able to roll if you are light-weighted? Or having to put like 50 points in endurance?

If some of you expected any of the mechanics to be exactly the same as they were in DS 1, well, that's your own fucking problem.

When i first started Dark Souls 1 I didn't expect it to have i-frames. And I would've never figured it out if I hadn't read the guides. Well, i guess it was the first surprise "FUCK YOU NEW PLAYERS!" from the game. Certainly wasn't the last. Still what a great game it was.

 

[Hypron]

In 4 playthroughs of DS2, the only 2 enemies I've ever had issues with in DS2 are the hippos & their grab move, and the Pursuer's stab. Of course, my experience doesn't define everyone else's but "most of the games bosses and enemies"? Really?

Yeah these threads are always hyperbole-city. I suffered from grab hitbox issues in Dark Souls 2 about as often as in other games in the series - i.e. almost never. I got vacuum grabbed by a hippo and a mimic once each in >200 hours of gameplay (8 or so playthroughs). I got hit by some complete bullshit grabs (ceiling slimes in DaS1, and some stuff I can't even remember in Bloodborne - like I said it's a few times max in a 100 hours) in other games as well and it was really rare there too. People make it seem like it happens all the time which is just not the case.

 

[Benzychenz]

Yeah these threads are always hyperbole-city. I suffered from grab hitbox issues in Dark Souls 2 about as often as in other games in the series - i.e. almost never. I got vacuum grabbed by a hippo and a mimic once each in >200 hours of gameplay (8 or so playthroughs). I got hit by some complete bullshit grabs (ceiling slimes in DaS1, and some stuff I can't even remember in Bloodborne - like I said it's a few times max in a 100 hours) in other games as well and it was really rare there too. People make it seem like it happens all the time which is just not the case.

But it's combined with other issues.

Some enemies have those wack ass hit boxes, some enemies have what seems like infinite stamina, some enemies seem to get staggered by one hit, then don't flinch at all by the next and counterattack you out of nowhere, some have insane tracking on attacks which can be combined with low agility in the early game for maximum frustration etc.

All that combined makes the game feel a lot worse. In past games it felt like the enemies were playing by your rules, whereas in DS2 you have to check for bullshit every time you find a new enemy.

 

[Ferr986]

The most disappointing boss in DS2 for me was Sir Alonne. Was expecting a cool fight but instead they just ramped the broken grab hitbox up even more for cheap difficulty. At that point surely they should have known that their game had serious flaws like this that were obvious to players.

Opinions and all of that but IMO Sir Alonne is the best boss in DS2. I love how he fucks with you with his random delays on his thrust attacks. Never got any unfair grab.

 

[Marty-esque]

Is Sir Alonne a DLC boss? I don't remember him but I never did the DLC areas.

 

[Ferr986]

Is Sir Alonne a DLC boss? I don't remember him but I never did the DLC areas.

Yep, he's on the second DLC.

 

[KeyChainDude]

I resonate your feelings OP, every single one of them. The adaptability bullshit drove me insane since I always use builds with light and fast weapons that rely on reflexes, that ain't worth shit anymore.

The way you are usually forced to brute force 5 strong enemies at once to go past an area, without a more strategic/clever way to do it like on other Souls games is a joke. At least the bad level design helps tolerating this by having some areas being 10 meters long until the next boss/bonfire lol

 

[Daante]

The game is good, but not Souls good.

I stand firm that it is a solid 7/10 (maby a 8/10 with DLC included).

Someone said in a previous lltp thread that it is the most Arcadish Souls game so far, and i agree.

 

[More Fun To Compute]

Opinions and all of that but IMO Sir Alonne is the best boss in DS2. I love how he fucks with you with his random delays on his thrust attacks. Never got any unfair grab.

Fume knight is much better at least they got them the right way round. To not get hit by any unfair grabs you must just not dodge much in your play style I guess. It's super obvious.

 

[Lux R7]

Is Sir Alonne a DLC boss? I don't remember him but I never did the DLC areas.

To me, the best boss of ds2 in terms of atmosphere. But the fight is a little easy imho, i mean, you can learn to read his moves pretty fast.

 

[mickcenary]

https://youtu.be/SD1WWoN1cew

5:53 - The epitome of useless roll/bullshit hitboxes. First off, he hits me while I'm attacking but my character doesn't show any feedback, then I clearly dodge the next attack but he hits me for full damage and the character couldn't be less bothered about losing half his lifebar. Listen, if you want to make roll less useful I'm fine with that, but how about you show some feedback like I don't know, the character actually BEING HIT like it is in every other goddamn game of the franchise? I just can't believe this is a thing in this game. Like holy shit the fact that it's a "feature" is beyond unfathomable.

Dude.

DUDE.

This is a great post.

The above example is a perfect illustration of one of DS2's "at the core of it" problems. Bloodborne/Dark Souls evasion is perfection; DS2 evasion is not.

 

[Ferr986]

Fume knight is much better at least they got them the right way round. To not get hit by any unfair grabs you must just not dodge much in your play style I guess. It's super obvious.

Nah, I beat him with a no shield character . I played the DLC for the first time after Bloodborne (didn't bought it for my vanilla 360 copy back then), so I couldn't get back to using a shield. In fact I never fought him with a shield character yet.

I didn't get any problems with him, I dunno call it luck I guess. I do have ghost grab problems with hyppos and mimics though that's for sure.

I like him more than Fume, Alonne is faster and feels less telegraphed IMO.

 

[Hypron]

But it's combined with other issues.

Some enemies have those wack ass hit boxes, some enemies have what seems like infinite stamina, some enemies seem to get staggered by one hit, then don't flinch at all by the next and counterattack you out of nowhere, some have insane tracking on attacks which can be combined with low agility in the early game for maximum frustration etc.

All that combined makes the game feel a lot worse. In past games it felt like the enemies were playing by your rules, whereas in DS2 you have to check for bullshit every time you find a new enemy.

I just don't feel like it's anywhere as much of an issue as pointed out here. Yes there are some issues but it's not something I consistently experience. Every once in a while I'll go "huh that's pretty bullshit" but it isn't even close to the point where it makes the game feel "a lot" worse. Especially since all the games have some bullshit, DaS just has a little more of it.

Fume knight is much better at least they got them the right way round. To not get hit by any unfair grabs you must just not dodge much in your play style I guess. It's super obvious.

I always fight him without a shield and never once got hit by his grab... It's like the pursuer's grab it's extremely telegraphed so it's easy to avoid. I dodged through both of those guys' grabs before without issues either, but all my characters apart from my SL1 one have high agility.

 

[More Fun To Compute]

Nah, I beat him with a no shield character . I played the DLC for the first time after Bloodborne (didn't bought it for my vanilla 360 copy back then), so I couldn't get back to using a shield. In fact I never fought him with a shield character yet.

I didn't get any problems with him, I dunno call it luck I guess. I do have ghost grab problems with hyppos and mimics though that's for sure.

I like him more than Fume, Alonne is faster and feels less telegraphed IMO.

To not notice you must already be so used to the bullshit hitboxes in dark souls 2 that you automatically give the grab attacks 10 times the distance than they look like they require.

 

[SlipperyFishes]

The game is good, but not Souls good.

I stand firm that it is a solid 7/10 (maby a 8/10 with DLC included).

Someone said in a previous lltp thread that it is the most Arcadish Souls game so far, and i agree.

If anything Bloodborne is a Souls Arcade game that gives little depth in builds compared to Dark Souls 2.

 

[Screaming Meat]

If anything Bloodborne is a Souls Arcade game that gives little depth in builds compared to Dark Souls 2.

I'm not sure I'd say that and I think its a bit of a misnomer: whilst there is undoubtedly a larger variety of builds in DS2, each weapon in Bloodborne offers far more 'depth' for players (builds generally being based on maximising a weapons output in Soulsborne). Combined with your secondary weapon, the off-hand weapon, AND your gem set-up, I'd argue Bloodborne offers some of the 'deepest' builds in the series so far, just not quite as many.

 

[Noray]

The real hyperbole starts here!

Dark Souls 2 is literally Hitler!

Yeah whatever. It plays a little differently, not as well maybe, but people be crazy.

 

[DarkFlame]

As far as weapons go,bloodborne has by far the most fleshed out moveset of any souls game. That being said,it can't be compared to the build variety from DS2,where you you can play strength,dexterity,sorcery,miracle,pyromancies,hexes,you can play with shield turtling,parrying,riposting,backstabbing....Those are all distinct playstyles,while in Bloodborne you are essentially meele with a gun for parrying no matter which weapon you are using.


Bloodborne replayability was lost on the build variety for me,but the first single player playthrough was an amazing experience

 

[RoadHazard]

Ambushes exist all over souls game. NMW ambushes are not cheap at all, you can see them coming if you take it slowly and are careful. If you rush yeah no shit you will get ambushed.

Nah, there's some cheap BS crap there for sure. Not with getting ambushed per se, but with how separate groups of enemies telepathically aggro each other. You can run past the wooden houses at the bottom without being seen by any of the enemies hiding inside, and they won't aggro since they, naturally, don't know you're there. But then you go up the stairs, run into some unavoidable enemies, and THEN all the ones you safely bypassed down below will come charging. Suddenly you're overrun by close to 10 enemies, most of which shouldn't even be aware of you. The game forces you to deal with all the enemies in an, I feel, unfair way.

 

[OmegaTreeFish]

As far as weapons go,bloodborne has by far the most fleshed out moveset of any souls game. That being said,it can't be compared to the build variety from DS2,where you you can play strength,dexterity,sorcery,miracle,pyromancies,hexes,you can play with shield turtling,parrying,riposting,backstabbing....Those are all distinct playstyles,while in Bloodborne you are essentially meele with a gun for parrying no matter which weapon you are using.


Bloodborne replayability was lost on the build variety for me,but the first single player playthrough was an amazing experience

Bloodborne has a lot more build veriety that people dont give it credit for. The weapons mostly feel very different from each other and can change how you play quite a bit.

Want to do a 2 handed run? Transformed kirkhammer or ludwigs.

Duel weild? Blades of mercy

You can alter weapons to become elemental

The different movesets of each each weapon offer different feels to how you play, some super fast, other slow but powerful.

You can add some magic into your build to support you.

However it's hyper aggressive melee focused. If you want to play as a mage, bowman or turtle behind a shield you can't do that which is why DS offers more veriety. But bloodborne still has good options within its focus.

To me though a game is replayable if I find it just that fun to play. If I'm honest I don't find many games that I actually do replay. It takes something pretty special to get me to keep going once it's finished. Bloodborne I have completed 4 times plus done chalice dungeons through once total.

Dark souls I went all the way through once. Then on NG+ went to beating O&S and then the DLC once. Plus I have a character I took up to beating O&S. (I don't really find the parts after that point that fun).

Dark souls 2 I beat once, did all the DLC and now and then play a second playthrough with an alt doing a two handed spear, bow and faith build with no shield.

That says something about the level of enjoyment I get from all of these games really. I can see where the OP comes from with everything they said and while I agree with a lot of it, I eventually started to just accept the game on its own terms as its own thing (it took me a real long time, till pretty much after completing my first run plus DLC and starting a new char to stop that nagging sensation).

I don't like it as much as the first half of ds1 and to me bloodborne is just on another level of awesome entirely but its still a good game. Try and think of it not as a direct sequel but as its own thing with its own take on the formula. You may not prefere many of the things it does differently but if you can get past that feeling of "well this isnt as good as it was in ds1" there is still a lot of fun to be had. Learn the games own rules on combat and try to just accept this is how things are now. I use a bow a hell of a lot more in ds2 for example than I did in ds1.

I get it OP I really do. But there is fun to be had still if you face the game on its own terms....and lvl adaptability to about 20 lol.

 

[Already Torn]

Dark Souls 2 is literally Hitler!

Yeah whatever. It plays a little differently, not as well maybe, but people be crazy.

If the Souls games were terrible people, it would actually be Dark Souls 1 that was literally Hitler. Dark Souls 2 would be the guy who mugs you in an alley with swastikas tatooed all over his body and misquotes Mein Kampf.

 

[Murkas]

So if we have genuine issues with DS2, we're just some sort of real life Miyazaki covenant members invading DS2 threads to shit them up for imaginary medals?

 

[Auctopus]

If the Souls games were terrible people, it would actually be Dark Souls 1 that was literally Hitler. Dark Souls 2 would be the guy who mugs you in an alley with swastikas tatooed all over his body and misquotes Mein Kampf.

I can't believe this analogy works.

 

[lukeskymac]

It's fucking disgraceful that OP took his/her time writing why he/she feels the game sucks and dozens of responses on the first page are essentially equivalent to "Hurr, you're just a hater, game is good" with absolutely no content whatsoever.

 

[DoubleTake]

If the Souls games were terrible people, it would actually be Dark Souls 1 that was literally Hitler. Dark Souls 2 would be the guy who mugs you in an alley with swastikas tatooed all over his body and misquotes Mein Kampf.

This is actually accurate goddamn lol...

 

[ChetWilson]

And if you don't need rolls, you invest those points elsewhere. If you're a spellcaster -- something DS2 is far better at providing options for -- you can ignore ADP.

I made it through my last DS2 playthrough with 10 adp as a sorc/hexer. I didn't have any issues with Fume knight.

 

[Disaster Nebraska]

As far as weapons go,bloodborne has by far the most fleshed out moveset of any souls game. That being said,it can't be compared to the build variety from DS2,where you you can play strength,dexterity,sorcery,miracle,pyromancies,hexes,you can play with shield turtling,parrying,riposting,backstabbing....Those are all distinct playstyles,while in Bloodborne you are essentially meele with a gun for parrying no matter which weapon you are using.

Bloodborne replayability was lost on the build variety for me,but the first single player playthrough was an amazing experience

In a thread full of people defending DS2 by saying "just play for another 30 hours. The DLC is so great, tho" it shocks me that people can't apply that same level of imagination and patience to Bloodborne. BB has DLC too, ya know, which addresses many of the critiques the vanilla version has (not enough areas, not enough weapons, not enough bosses, etc).

I will agree that BB makes it very easy to play the same playstyle at a basic level. I think that's one of the things that catches Souls fans off guard. It certainly caught me off guard. I expected to struggle for the first half of the game, finally find a decent weapon, struggle for the latter half of the game, get a good late-game weapon, and then start NG+ with that awesome weapon. In BB, you can easily play the entire game with your starter weapons on a normal (non-challenge) run.

And I agree that on the surface, the replayability is not as obvious. In order to switch from, say, a LHB to Kirkhammer to Whirligig to Boomhammer, the requisite stats are essentially unchanged. In that sense, yeah, BB has "less replayability" because you don't have to completely start from scratch like you do in many of the other Souls games. But I fail to see how that's a disadvantage. What's superior about having to replay the starting areas over and over again just to spin up a new build?

You can use the same character in BB for a number of different builds instead of being railroaded into a specific build. BB leans more on the side of "character action game" whereas other Souls games embrace their RPG roots. It's not that BB has less build variety. It's that BB doesn't outright restrict you from, say, using most of the weapons if you decide to focus on Arcane.

However, I assure you that BB has as many -- of not more -- "distinct playstyles" compared to DS2. Each weapon is perfectly viable, whereas in DS2 there are a large number of garbage weapons. Each weapon plays very differently than the others, especially in Trick mode. Off-hand weapons may seem like nothing more than a gun to parry, at least until you start experimenting with Bloodtinge and/or Arcane, both of which add some serious oomph to the off-hand items.

Then there are Hunter Tools, which do not have as much variety as the magic schools in DS2 but shouldn't be dismissed, either. You can definitely make a mixed-magic build in Bloodborne and kick some butt. With the DLC, you can now use a bow as well. Unlike Souls, though, you still have that core ability to dodge and to fight in melee/ranged with weapons. Is it really such a huge loss to not be able to backpedal-pincushion every enemy in the game? Really?

You have Caryll Runes and Oaths, two of which have some very interesting effects on certain weapons. Armor is not so obviously useful but it is extremely useful if you know when to change it.

And let's not even get into the absurd flexibility you gain when you start dabbling in Blood Gems and the Uncanny/Lost versions of weapons. It makes upgrades in the Souls games look limited in comparison.

People complain about BB being less replayable because there is less build variety, which is simply untrue. If anything needs to be adjusted, BB needs Boss Souls (or the Lovecraftian equivalent) in order to add variety to each playthrough. THAT was my big complaint in the 160+ hours I've played in BB so far. Variety is not lacking, though.

 

[Fhtagn]

There's a correct way to explore a zone in DS? Which one is that, following a gamefaq walkthrough, or mimicing what you saw on someone's twitch channel? News to me bro, news to me...

Ironically, there is a "correct" way to explore a zone in DS and its expressly the one you didn't use or you would have both found the ladder and also had no trouble in No Man's Wharf.

On a first playthrough, you should methodically and slowly explore every area, using the camera to look around every space, walking around each room to explore for items or hidden walls, etc. The first time through can take 10 times as long as the second.

No Man's Wharf is easily one of the best stages in Dark Souls 2 and I've had fun with it everytime I've played the game... You just have to approach it methodically with shield up, trading out to a torch as appropriate.

 

[DedValve]

I made it through my last DS2 playthrough with 10 adp as a sorc/hexer. I didn't have any issues with Fume knight.

Thats because Attunement also increases those i-frames on your dodge I believe.

It does it slower but if your caster focused then you would most likely have high attunement anyways.

 

[nailbombxx]

ADP serves a very simple purpose. In order to wear whatever armor you want AND be able to roll through attacks you must invest points in it. At least it allows you to be a shiny knight and still have i-frames. How is that worse than only being able to roll if you are light-weighted? Or having to put like 50 points in endurance?

If some of you expected any of the mechanics to be exactly the same as they were in DS 1, well, that's your own fucking problem.

When i first started Dark Souls 1 I didn't expect it to have i-frames. And I would've never figured it out if I hadn't read the guides. Well, i guess it was the first surprise "FUCK YOU NEW PLAYERS!" from the game. Certainly wasn't the last. Still what a great game it was.

Why people don't like Adaptability is obvious. If I don't give a shit about wearing heavy armor, at least in the previous games I don't have to put points into a skill to make the game play properly. Adaptability does not increase max equip load so I still need to invest in more Endurance levels if I want to wear heavy armor.

Adaptability was a neat idea on paper but when implemented it just makes the game play slow and shitty until you dump like 20 points into it. After that, ta-da, you are now at the default level that all the other games are at.

Totally unnecessary.

In a thread full of people defending DS2 by saying "just play for another 30 hours. The DLC is so great, tho" it shocks me that people can't apply that same level of imagination and patience to Bloodborne. BB has DLC too, ya know, which addresses many of the critiques the vanilla version has (not enough areas, not enough weapons, not enough bosses, etc).

I will agree that BB makes it very easy to play the same playstyle at a basic level. I think that's one of the things that catches Souls fans off guard. It certainly caught me off guard. I expected to struggle for the first half of the game, finally find a decent weapon, struggle for the latter half of the game, get a good late-game weapon, and then start NG+ with that awesome weapon. In BB, you can easily play the entire game with your starter weapons on a normal (non-challenge) run.

And I agree that on the surface, the replayability is not as obvious. In order to switch from, say, a LHB to Kirkhammer to Whirligig to Boomhammer, the requisite stats are essentially unchanged. In that sense, yeah, BB has "less replayability" because you don't have to completely start from scratch like you do in many of the other Souls games. But I fail to see how that's a disadvantage. What's superior about having to replay the starting areas over and over again just to spin up a new build?

You can use the same character in BB for a number of different builds instead of being railroaded into a specific build. BB leans more on the side of "character action game" whereas other Souls games embrace their RPG roots. It's not that BB has less build variety. It's that BB doesn't outright restrict you from, say, using most of the weapons if you decide to focus on Arcane.

However, I assure you that BB has as many -- of not more -- "distinct playstyles" compared to DS2. Each weapon is perfectly viable, whereas in DS2 there are a large number of garbage weapons. Each weapon plays very differently than the others, especially in Trick mode. Off-hand weapons may seem like nothing more than a gun to parry, at least until you start experimenting with Bloodtinge and/or Arcane, both of which add some serious oomph to the off-hand items.

Then there are Hunter Tools, which do not have as much variety as the magic schools in DS2 but shouldn't be dismissed, either. You can definitely make a mixed-magic build in Bloodborne and kick some butt. With the DLC, you can now use a bow as well. Unlike Souls, though, you still have that core ability to dodge and to fight in melee/ranged with weapons. Is it really such a huge loss to not be able to backpedal-pincushion every enemy in the game? Really?

You have Caryll Runes and Oaths, two of which have some very interesting effects on certain weapons. Armor is not so obviously useful but it is extremely useful if you know when to change it.

And let's not even get into the absurd flexibility you gain when you start dabbling in Blood Gems and the Uncanny/Lost versions of weapons. It makes upgrades in the Souls games look limited in comparison.

People complain about BB being less replayable because there is less build variety, which is simply untrue. If anything needs to be adjusted, BB needs Boss Souls (or the Lovecraftian equivalent) in order to add variety to each playthrough. THAT was my big complaint in the 160+ hours I've played in BB so far. Variety is not lacking, though.

Good post. The most important thing to note about Bloodborne's mechanics is that it is a very streamlined and specialized game. Its built around high-speed, aggressive melee combat with many variations. That in itself leads you to have more limited choice than Dark Souls, for example its harder to be a pure magic build or a turtle with a greatshield. But each weapon that exists in the game plays very differently and is entirely its own weapon. I was a bit disappointed that magic was very underutilized and thats perhaps its biggest flaw in its combat system, but it innovates in so many ways on the existing formula its hard to complain.

 

[old manatee]

If you light all of the torches in No Man's Wharf you can see. What is big deal.

 

[aggienader]

Can we please stop hating on Dark Souls 2? It's getting really old. And besides even if it's "nawt as ghud as the awtha Dawk Souls games..." it's still a gem.

 

[zma1013]

This is how I took it when I first figured out ADP. It turned iframes into an optional, specific stat that actually allows more freedom than DS1 did if you use it.

And if you don't need rolls, you invest those points elsewhere. If you're a spellcaster -- something DS2 is far better at providing options for -- you can ignore ADP. And in some situations you might wish you didn't, because risk vs. reward is a good thing in RPG builds.

Nobody knew what an iframe was when DS1 came out. The complaints over DS2 largely amount to, "it isn't like DS1" rather than an actual inherent flaw to ADP/rolling.

The other issues DS2 has are apparent, and yeah, it's probably more awkward overall than a sequel should be. But I maintain that there's a LOT of B-team bandwagoneering surrounding this game. I've seen it so many times on GAF and other gaming communities over the years, so I don't think it's impossible for essentially mass delusion over a game to be a thing.

My issue and i think everyone elses with adaptabilty was that DS2 took what was considered a standard constant and essentially assigned it variability that made it difficult to gauge when your roll actually protected you. In this game a roll can look exactly the same animation wise, yet vary in its protective timing, something that just wasn't true in the past 2 games. I'd say this breaks a fundamental core concept of the dodging system and makes it worse and ultimately makes dodging untrustworthy until you pump up the stat enough.

 

[Azzanadra]

As far as weapons go,bloodborne has by far the most fleshed out moveset of any souls game. That being said,it can't be compared to the build variety from DS2,where you you can play strength,dexterity,sorcery,miracle,pyromancies,hexes,you can play with shield turtling,parrying,riposting,backstabbing....Those are all distinct playstyles,while in Bloodborne you are essentially meele with a gun for parrying no matter which weapon you are using.


Bloodborne replayability was lost on the build variety for me,but the first single player playthrough was an amazing experience

Whats the point of build variety of what your playing through is the same pile of garbage each an every time? Despite this mythical "build variety" I could only ever force myself to replay the game once, whereas with Bloodborne the excellent setting, level design and bosses have motivated me to play the game multiple times despite a lack of build variety.