Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
Mythical implies it doesn't exist... it really does.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
LTTP: Dark Souls II. What the hell is this?
- Thread starter Nev
- Start date
Mythical implies it doesn't exist... it really does.
Raven117
Member
You need to get Adaptability to like 20 to get to Dark Souls rolling speeds
This. The introduction of this stat was really what makes the game play much different than anything else is the "Souls" series. I think it was a step too far in the "RPG" sides of things. (Stats control everything).
Disaster Nebraska
Banned
Two little changes could've fixed BB's replayability and build variety. The game needed a better distribution of main weapons, offhand weapons, and Hunter Tools early-game, whereas many of the weapons and most of the Hunter tools are tucked away into the post-Amelia areas.
Change #1) Beating the Cleric Beast opens up to the Cathedral Ward courtyard. Keep the main gate locked (requiring the Captain Emblem) so that you still have to beat Father G in order to unlock Oedon's Chapel, the safehaven, the DLC access, Eileen's questline, etc. But this would allow you to also visit Hemwick (see below) and the side-area leading to Yarghul.
Change #2) Gain access to Cainhurst once you reach the crossroads in Hemwick. Maybe require the defeat of the Witches first or something like that, but opening up Cainhurst would make early-game Bloodtinge builds a more viable option.
Consider dodging. BB gives all builds the same dodging, which does reduce build variety. But is that a bad thing? Is it inferior to not impose the restriction of sluggishness on the player as a default? Heck, DS2 took a standard from previous games and cloaked it behind a stat, so while players were trying to figure out dodging and git gud, secretly all they had to do was grind a bit and buff a stat. This feature was completely new to the series and certainly led to unnecessary frustration. I'll agree that Adaptability is a workable concept once you get used to it, but there was a failure to properly explain it and introduce the change.
I will say that "build variety" when it comes to weapons is something DS2 does fairly well even though overall BB has -- arguably -- more viable weapons. But BB handles weapons more like a character action game. Therefore the traditional Souls weapon progression doesn't work well here and I do think that's a flaw. BB either needed more choices in which areas you could tackle first like DS2 does (therefore giving you access to more weapons early game) or an adjustment in where weapons are placed. This is a genuine flaw and shifts a lot of the replayability into NG+.
Something that DS2 did rather well in my opinion compared to BB and other Souls games is that you have some pretty good options in how you can progress after you reach Majula. IMO, the intro areas are not good but at least there's freedom. BB should've taken cues from that. I hope that DS3 opens up early so that players can choose where they go.
Change #1) Beating the Cleric Beast opens up to the Cathedral Ward courtyard. Keep the main gate locked (requiring the Captain Emblem) so that you still have to beat Father G in order to unlock Oedon's Chapel, the safehaven, the DLC access, Eileen's questline, etc. But this would allow you to also visit Hemwick (see below) and the side-area leading to Yarghul.
Change #2) Gain access to Cainhurst once you reach the crossroads in Hemwick. Maybe require the defeat of the Witches first or something like that, but opening up Cainhurst would make early-game Bloodtinge builds a more viable option.
Only in Souls games does it seem that the amount of content somehow justifies the mediocrity of said content. Content is DS2's saving grace. For people who want that content, heck yeah, there's tons of it. There's variety in how a lot of things are handled (like dodging) but that doesn't make it nuanced or superior.
Consider dodging. BB gives all builds the same dodging, which does reduce build variety. But is that a bad thing? Is it inferior to not impose the restriction of sluggishness on the player as a default? Heck, DS2 took a standard from previous games and cloaked it behind a stat, so while players were trying to figure out dodging and git gud, secretly all they had to do was grind a bit and buff a stat. This feature was completely new to the series and certainly led to unnecessary frustration. I'll agree that Adaptability is a workable concept once you get used to it, but there was a failure to properly explain it and introduce the change.
I will say that "build variety" when it comes to weapons is something DS2 does fairly well even though overall BB has -- arguably -- more viable weapons. But BB handles weapons more like a character action game. Therefore the traditional Souls weapon progression doesn't work well here and I do think that's a flaw. BB either needed more choices in which areas you could tackle first like DS2 does (therefore giving you access to more weapons early game) or an adjustment in where weapons are placed. This is a genuine flaw and shifts a lot of the replayability into NG+.
Something that DS2 did rather well in my opinion compared to BB and other Souls games is that you have some pretty good options in how you can progress after you reach Majula. IMO, the intro areas are not good but at least there's freedom. BB should've taken cues from that. I hope that DS3 opens up early so that players can choose where they go.
Who argues this? DS2 content is not mediocre, it's great content. Build variety adds to the replayability of said content.
ChetWilson
Banned
Eh, I'm kinda done talking about NMW in general, but I will just comment that for a level that is "heavy torch"... it can also be viewed as "heavy shield" due to how many enemies you could face at once (even if you are cautious) and obviously you can't wield both at the same time. I'm not saying you can't micromanage that, I'm just saying that's a skill that a new player might not have yet... combined with the annoyance of having to go back and relight your torch should you swap your shield out.
That is definitely true. I am also playing DS2 for the first time right now and I am enjoying it quite a lot. Mainly because there is so much stuff to explore.
Also I did not have any major problems with the difficulty until now. But, I assume, I learned from DS1 and progress through the levels very carefully. Great game so far (ok, the bosses are bit underwhelming maybe).
Dark Souls 2 is quantity over quality, and it shows.
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
I don't understand, how does that make any of the content "mythical"...?
I think "content", while broadly accurate, sells 'build variety' somewhat short. It is more about the different play styles it facilitates rather than the cold hard numbers of weapons available. A lot of the weapons, infusions, spells and armours synergise in really interesting ways, giving the player a broad palette to work with and come up with their own combinations. In an RPG, that is absolutely a positive! Having said that, I'll be the first to admit that a decent number of the available weapons are superfluous reskins with the occasional gimmick thrown in. Even so, there is still plenty of unique, quality combinations to be discovered.
Whilst a lot of the fundamentals of the game's central mechanics don't quite match up to it's much-lauded predecessors, there is more than enough quality there for it to be considered a 'good' game on it's own terms. It may be a somewhat lacking iteration of Souls, but it certainly isn't "mediocre" in the context of the rest of the gaming landscape. If you can ever get past that initial disappointment (DS2 not being the sequel we had in our heads or the one FROM erroneously sold us), you might find that there is a solid and enjoyable game underneath that brings a few new and interesting ideas to the table, whether you deem it worthy of the venerable Souls title or not.
As a side note: Earlier in the thread I mentioned that I much preferred the way Bloodborne did builds and felt it gets short-changed in a lot of discussions. There are numerically fewer builds but they are individually much deeper. On the whole, I don't disagree with much of what you said.
Orochinagis
Member
Morrigan be like, fighting a entire army of Hollows the past pages
Until you found the pharros key switch and light all.....like whats the point anyway
Until you found the pharros key switch and light all.....like whats the point anyway
Crimsonclaw111
Member
Dark Souls > II > Bloodborne
That's my opinion anyway.
That's my opinion anyway.
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
Really? Interesting. Bloodborne shits all over the other two IMO. Different strokes, and all that
I don't understand these threads... maybe I'm too old and oblivious these days...
I've played through every Souls game, including importing DeS before a Western release was announced, played through DS, DS2, BB, and am currently playing SOTFS on PS4 going for a plat before DS3 releases. DS2 is a fine game. Maybe it doesn't have quite as many memorable moments as DS1, but it still belongs on FROM's pedestal of greatness. I'd say it's an easy contender for best game of last gen, aside from DS1. Stop acting like the bar is dangling when it's still too high to grab.
I've played through every Souls game, including importing DeS before a Western release was announced, played through DS, DS2, BB, and am currently playing SOTFS on PS4 going for a plat before DS3 releases. DS2 is a fine game. Maybe it doesn't have quite as many memorable moments as DS1, but it still belongs on FROM's pedestal of greatness. I'd say it's an easy contender for best game of last gen, aside from DS1. Stop acting like the bar is dangling when it's still too high to grab.
hydrophilic attack
Member
You can choose to either use a torch which prevents you from using shields/two-handing/power-stancing or you can choose to use one of your lockstones, which is a limited and valuable resource. Don't see how this is pointless?
OmegaTreeFish
Banned
To be fair I didn't use torches or the lockstone first time round. It's not like you can't see in the dark areas of this game.
Play it like its not called dark souls 2. It's called purgatory or something and your stuck in a world built by the most powerful souls wills which is why it makes no logical sense and everything is a bit sureal and floaty.
Edit: maybe call it lost souls and you are where all the souls go once the bodies finally go hollow. And world created by dreams etc etc.
My first day with DS2 was rough too. My first night with the game was certainly dissapointing, mainly because I couldn't adjust to the new controls after my almost 500h (360 and PC) on Dark 1.
But I could get past it's problems once I started to think I was playing a sequel that wasn't a carbon copy of Dark 1, adjusted to the new controls and how the game was segmented and started to enjoy the good parts of the game.
At the end I loved the ride, and kept me playing the game for a long time, even though I think Dark 1 is still the superior game. I can switch back and forth between the two games without problems. I just focus on the good things of each game.
And I love this franchise, all of it. 2015 was almost Bloodborne and Dark Souls 2 only for me. And 2014 was a lot of both Souls too.
Orochinagis
Member
Your personal aura which is brighter this time is enough to travel that area without torch,the only significant danger there are the monkeys and you could already own like two lockstones in that part of the game to waste on that place
hydrophilic attack
Member
Sure, that is another viable way to tackle the area.
Sure, but unless you play a lot as a rat bro, there are far more Pharros devices than lockstones available in the game, so each one still brings with it a decision about whether you should activate them or not.
There are no areas dark enough to require a torch.
Its a completely pointless mechanic, made even worse by those fire butterfly whatevers. Now the player can really just circumvent the game.
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
Dark Souls II is my favorite of the games in a lot of ways, but I also don't engage with the PvP much at all. The game has been in my top five or so for three years running now! (PS3 version, PC version, Scholar of the First Sin PC version).
I think it's great, and am not a fan of this narrative that tries to make it out to be some kind of abomination.
I think it's great, and am not a fan of this narrative that tries to make it out to be some kind of abomination.
hydrophilic attack
Member
With the way it affects enemy behaviour, it sure is very useful in several areas. And I found it essential for visibility in The Gutter.
If you did, you would like it even more. It has the best Souls PVP by far.
The gutter is dark, kind of, but no where near dark enough. And its really small.
The game got all fucked up when they stripped out the lighting system.
hydrophilic attack
Member
I feel like a lot of people don't set the lightning up correctly in the settings. If you follow the instructions properly, the game is dark indeed.
Disagree. As I said light, medium, heavy and even ultra heavy builds are viable and enjoyable in this game because thanks to adp you can ALWAYS get needed i-frames.
While in DS1 I was stuck with light to medium-ish sets only, basically skipping huge chunk of the loot, because heavier weapons and armor would prevent me from fast rolling which is the only way to play this series, unfortunately. So I can see where this love for light sets comes from. It's not like you had much of a choice in DS1.
So yes, if you want to dodge, you need to invest points into adp which isn't nearly as bad as people say because you get a lot of those early on. And the game makes up for it by giving you various ways to play differently. And you should play differently (i.e, use other builds as well), it's an rpg in the end. Also
fashion
So this makes it a nice compromise. That's how I see it.
The vanilla version lighting wasn't like that. You could have it set to recommended and everything was visible in all sections except The Gutter. Everything was essentially grey and using a torch actually made it harder to see at distance funny enough.
Only in SOTFS did they change it to where it's generally darker although still not impossible to see which is probably how it should be. Just dark enough to be a hindrance while making the torch seem like a good option to help you.
Orochinagis
Member
Huh, rat bro covenant gives you lockstones.
And yes, the only level that can possibly force you to use torchs is the gutter.
In SotFS there are a bonuses if you light torchs. In the gutter you can get the black witch set pretty early if you light all the candles in that area
nailbombxx
Member
In vanilla Dark Souls 2 torches were pointless. The Scholar of the First Sin editions on PS4/Xbox One made them actually necessary in some areas.
Disaster Nebraska
Banned
Never thought that the content was "mythical" or otherwise non-existent, only that the much-praised build variety in DS2 is not all that it's cracked up to be, depending on what you look for in a Souls game. Just like BB's much-lamented lack of build variety is not all that it's cracked up to be, again depending on what you look for.
The game definitely has a lot to offer, and this goes hand-in-hand with the PvP emphasis. It offers a breadth of options that is not matched by any other Souls game. For the RPG fans and min/maxers, I can see the appeal.
This is a strange argument to me, though you certainly aren't the only one to make it. If Mass Effect 4 handled combat resolution through Sudoku puzzles or top-down grid-based combat, would we be making that argument that "it's a good game, just not a good ME game?".
Based on your comment, it seems you agree that there's a certain amount of responsibility a developer has to the core tenants of a franchise if they decide to make a sequel in said franchise.
I'd argue that the Souls series became popular because -- despite some very big flaws and some very difficult aspects -- the games are supremely consistent and well-crafted titles.
Dark Souls 2 is neither consistent nor well-crafted. People have a variety of reasons for feeling that way, though of course not everyone will feel strongly about all the reasons given. Overall, there are more than enough complaints against the game to demonstrate that it had/has some real problems and the complainers aren't just "Miyazaki fanboys hating on a gem of a game".
The disconnect occurs when DS2 fans argue vehemently that these things aren't a big deal or are imagined or are not unique to DS2. Hey, I fell in love with Resonance of Fate, but you don't hear me trying to convince others there weren't problems. I just accept that the major problems in the game didn't bother me for some reason and I move on with my life.
I'd put the issue Bloodborne's build variety roughly in the same category as DS2's Adaptability: it is poorly explained and not easy to figure out, therefore a lot of people assume it's bad. When I had a hard time with dodging in DS2, I didn't understand how Adaptability worked. That's still a problem with the game, but not in the way people presume. On paper, BB has the most variety of viable builds of all the Souls games in my opinion, but it's tucked behind several not-obvious obstacles.As a side note: Earlier in the thread I mentioned that I much preferred the way Bloodborne did builds and felt it gets short-changed in a lot of discussions. There are numerically fewer builds but they are individually much deeper. On the whole, I don't disagree with much of what you said.
OmegaTreeFish
Banned
I don't think you quite understand the system if you think that. Get adaptability to 20 or so and it then works exactly the same way as in dark souls 1. You need to raise your equip load to wear heavy armour and not fat roll. What makes it easier in darksouls 2 is that you can fast roll up until 70% equip load where as in darksouls 1 it was 25% for fast roll and 50 for medium. Adaptability has nothing to do with it.
AwakenedCloud
Member
It's not not nearly as bad as the OP makes it out to be, but it does fail to recapture the magic of the original. Others have already echoed this sentiment, but Dark Souls 2 says "more, more, more" for every design decision along the way. More enemies, more bosses, more traps, more stats... The list goes on. As a result, most of it ends up being largely forgettable. I've played through the game twice in entirety, but I'd be hard pressed to actually name a hand's worth of bosses or NPCs.
My playthrough of SOTFS this January left a better taste in my mouth than my original run, but it was still rife with sour moments often enough to remind me why it's not the same caliber as the original. It's still one of the best games of 2014, but man it was this close being something amazing. I have tens of little critiques, but my biggest ones are the skating enemies and the aesthetics of gameplay. The enemies move as if they're on a rotating disk, rather than having genuine reactions of their own. Essentially they were reduced to walking tanks - "Enemy rolled. Detecting presence. 87.5° of relative north. Calibrating. Calibrating. Calibrating. Enemy rolled." Rinse and repeat. My second critique is a bit harder to explain. I like the visual design of DS2, but from a gameplay perspective everything seems off. In all the other Souls games, it feels like enemies are genuinely enormous beasts. In Dark Souls 2, for whatever reason that's simply not the case, despite there being a lot of big monsters.Nothing feels threatening. I think it's because they pulled the camera way back, but I could be wrong.
The DLC does a better job of recapturing the feel of the original, but at times resort to the most infuriating areas of all time. I think the
was the most infuriating experience one of these games provided. Maybe 2nd to the Anor Londo archer, but that's it.
My playthrough of SOTFS this January left a better taste in my mouth than my original run, but it was still rife with sour moments often enough to remind me why it's not the same caliber as the original. It's still one of the best games of 2014, but man it was this close being something amazing. I have tens of little critiques, but my biggest ones are the skating enemies and the aesthetics of gameplay. The enemies move as if they're on a rotating disk, rather than having genuine reactions of their own. Essentially they were reduced to walking tanks - "Enemy rolled. Detecting presence. 87.5° of relative north. Calibrating. Calibrating. Calibrating. Enemy rolled." Rinse and repeat. My second critique is a bit harder to explain. I like the visual design of DS2, but from a gameplay perspective everything seems off. In all the other Souls games, it feels like enemies are genuinely enormous beasts. In Dark Souls 2, for whatever reason that's simply not the case, despite there being a lot of big monsters.Nothing feels threatening. I think it's because they pulled the camera way back, but I could be wrong.
The DLC does a better job of recapturing the feel of the original, but at times resort to the most infuriating areas of all time. I think the
area leading to the magic Firelurker (boss included)
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
? It sucks far less than in Dark Souls which is BS-fishing: the game.
People say that, and for a while we did see Havelyn katana hexers (pre-nerfs) but after a while I stopped seeing those, and see all sorts of varied characters. Same with giantdad in Dark Souls really.
This is funny because in Dark Souls, invaders cannot heal either. And worse, re: poise, in Dark Souls, you can attack an opponent to try to interrupt his running-backstab, but poise will mean they'll tank right through it and BS you anyway. Fun times!
Poise was poorly implemented in Dark Souls. It's not really that much better in Dark Souls II, true. The ideal lies somewhere in the middle.
True Walk of Peace, Ring of Fog, Darkwood Grain Ring, Magic Shield sorcery, Crystal Ring Shield... I could go on. But yeah how dare they support the game by making balance adjustments, hmm...
Either you are actually a Dark Souls critic too, or people's memory is really pathetically short.
There is exactly one "infinite stamina" enemy and he is not in early game, he's in very-late game. The staggering thing, and the tracking thing, I noticed happening in Bloodborne as well. Hitboxes are more or less the same as well, maybe a tad more wonky in DS2 because of Agility and the fact that DS2 has too many grab attacks, which I feel is a legit criticism - grab attacks have always been rather vacuumy bullshit in all of the games, and DS2 has more of them than in the other games so it probably stands out more.
How about all of us who are addressing the points? I would say it's "fucking disgraceful" that you selectively ignore them but, well, I'm not a fan of hyperbole so I wouldn't go that far.
If you don't think the content is a pile of garbage, that build variety makes the game all the more amazing. Imagine that!
Pointless? No. It's rarely 100% essential I suppose, but it's still very helpful in some areas, such as the Gutter, No Man's Wharf, Shrine of Amana (to detect the falls), Tseldora (to repel the spiders), and of course, the Old Chasms of the Abyss.
Changing the brightness setting doesn't magically change the lighting model.
Don't play this game; its incredibly dismissive and condescending. I know how to set up brightness on my TV, and I know how to tell the difference between lighting, shadows, and an option slider.
hydrophilic attack
Member
I may have a slightly skewed perspective because I live pretty far north, where during summer you get a lot of sunhours, even during the night. This leads to screen glare which makes playing dark games incredibly frustrating to me. I found the darkness level of DaS II to be adequate to force me to use the torch from time to time. Had it been darker it would have only gotten frustrating to me. Maybe someone living in an area without this issue would not agree.
Lumination
'enry 'ollins
The biggest issue is quantity and frequency. Yes, DS1 and BB have the occasional bs tracking or vacuum, but it doesn't happen as often as in DS2. Again, it's because DS2 runs the gamut on these kinds of issues and that they compound upon each other that make the game painful to play at times.
I'm saying there's a massive distinction between the brightness of the image and the shadow system of the game.
They stripped out the latter and completely gutted the experience.
Torches had a point, sometime in development, but are largely useless in the final release. No area in DS 2 is dark enough to actually hide the enemies or pathways, which was a pretty cool advertised feature.
Imperfected
Member
DS2 is a decent Dark Souls clone that only really comes into its own when it stops trying to be a clone and do its own thing (the DLC, mostly). Most of the things with no direct analogue or obvious call-back to Dark Souls are done relatively well, whereas the things that are reaching back to Dark Souls for a pick-me-up tend to be somewhere between "poor" to "galling" in terms of their lack of polish.
If you choose the wrong weapon, the wrong build, and play through the game in the wrong sequence, you can spend so much time with that unpolished content that the impression that's left is the entire game is slap-shod thrown together on the quick without any real care and attention paid to things like hitboxes, enemy pathing, level design, etc.
If you choose the right weapons and build, and play through the game in the right sequence, you're still going to be confronted with the unpolished bits along the way, but at a rate more similar to what you'd probably expect coming from Dark Souls (which, itself, had some horribly jagged bits and bobs sticking out that needed polishing down).
Probably the greatest sin of Dark Souls 2's design is that it does not do a good job at funneling players into the content that is good, and instead quite the opposite tends to be true. More than most other games I can readily think of, it really does put its worst face forward, particularly with the abysmal first three or four hours of the experience.
If you choose the wrong weapon, the wrong build, and play through the game in the wrong sequence, you can spend so much time with that unpolished content that the impression that's left is the entire game is slap-shod thrown together on the quick without any real care and attention paid to things like hitboxes, enemy pathing, level design, etc.
If you choose the right weapons and build, and play through the game in the right sequence, you're still going to be confronted with the unpolished bits along the way, but at a rate more similar to what you'd probably expect coming from Dark Souls (which, itself, had some horribly jagged bits and bobs sticking out that needed polishing down).
Probably the greatest sin of Dark Souls 2's design is that it does not do a good job at funneling players into the content that is good, and instead quite the opposite tends to be true. More than most other games I can readily think of, it really does put its worst face forward, particularly with the abysmal first three or four hours of the experience.
You are equating i-frames to fast roll and that's not how it works in DS2. In DS1, i frames were tied to roll speed but they are not in DS2. They are tied to adp and vitality. Adp increases your i frames and vitality increases how far away you can roll away by increasing your equip load. The higher the equip load, the lower of the percentage of your total load is which determines how far you roll.
Ninja Sharingan
Banned
I am sure there are people like you and then there's people like me where I am the exact opposite. Ive played dark souls and dark souls 2 multiple times with different builds and I have played bloodborne once.
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
My bad. I thought you were the poster that quote was in reply to. I don't have avatars on and rarely read names
Speaking of strange arguments, I dont think thats all that great an analogy. The difference between them isnt nearly as pronounced. Turning Mass Effect 4 into a Sudoku puzzler would be violating the basic moment-to-moment gameplay. DS1 & 2 are at their core and in spirit the same game (by spirit I mean they are attempting to impart similar experiences via similar mechanics and share a philosophy of both design and narrative) that, as I said, doesn't quite reach the heights of other entries.
Some of it is, some of it isnt. Some of the areas, mechanics and boss fights are arguably series bests. I think there is more to the appeal than the series being well crafted (I know plenty who think Demons/Dark Souls is anything but well crafted) but yeah, it absolutely does come up short in a lot of areas.
Personally, I find that DS2 manages to retain the spirit of the series (as described earlier), albeit watered down in fundamental areas. However, I do find that the majority of complaints - including the ones I made in the weeks that followed its release were disproportionately harsh and based more on expectations than what was actually presented (games don't exist in a vacuum so this is bound to happen).
EDIT:
Great example of this (for me) is Fallout 4. I played it for about 10 hours and was (still am) bitterly disappointed with how far from the tree it fell. In the mainline Fallout pantheon, it is easily the worst experience I've had. Even so, I'm very much aware that I'm being unfair and not judging the game on its own merits and have every intention of trying it again on its own terms. Perhaps with my expectations adjusted I might be able to get over the "mythical" game in my head and see what's in front of me based on whether it accomplishes what it set out to do rather than what I wanted it to.
The relationship between distance and iframes should not be overlooked. Dodging further, over the same number of frames, means that the iframes that you do get are more useful: a further dodge minimizes (or decreases) the number of intersecting frames on hit and hurt boxes.
A character with with 7 iframes on a far roll will dodge most attacks easier than one with 7 iframes on a short roll.
The latter may intersect with a swing for more frames than the former.
Yep, also it's probably good to point out that it works this way granted you dodge in the right direction.. If you dodge in the wrong direction (i.e. in the same direction as a swiping attack), a longer roll might mean you stay for longer in the weapon's hitbox.
Jathaine
Member
Maybe amongst people who don't know what they are doing, sure?
There are too many reasons not to try that.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
I didn't say I didn't like it because I struggled against it. I don't BS-fishing games because they're boring.
Yeah knowing what you are doing won't prevent you from getting lagstabbed from the front because the game's matchmaking was complete shit.
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
Benzychenz
Member
I got lagstabbed from about 50m away the first time I got invaded in DS2.
I know that, I just didn't go out of my way to explain it fully, because I assumed everyone here was familiar with the mechanics and would understand what I implied.
So let me elaborate. It's not just "easier" to stay under 70% which means getting fast roll (yes, just speed, not i-frames), it's incredibly simple. So simple that basically no one ever goes higher than that. Even heavy and ultra heavy builds fast roll without putting too much efforts (of course, some compromises must be made too). So ultimately it boils down to just upping your adp to get the needed i-frames, which allows for more builds to be feasible. And as Teeth said, if you prefer lighter builds, you also get farther rolls as a reward.
So how is it bad? Dark Souls 2 stands on its own, and the fact that some mechanics differ from those in DS1 doesn't mean that these mechanics are poor.
OmegaTreeFish
Banned
What's bad is that's its a pointless hurdle. 2 main things overall make it bad.
1 - its not clearly explained anywhere what it does. So people who have played other souls games but not read up online what it does will be getting hit while rolling and not having a clue why.
2 - you level up a lot faster and more often in a dark souls play through than the other games. The 10 - 15 levels needed to get normal roll iframes and item usage speeds make little difference to your overall build in terms of stat usage and once you pile them on at the beginning of the game you don't care about the stat ever again. It's pretty much entirely pointless.
On a side story, a funny thing happened. I was going through my second playthroughs. Bit last night. Killed the rotten lit the fire and this huge thing came out of the fire I had never seen before (I think it's aldia?). Then I got a trophy for lighting that fire.....
I can only guess the first time I played it I never lit that fire for some reason lol. Oops.
Moon_frogger
Member
I was so glad to have more dark souls at the time that I hungrily plowed through the game without even thinking critically about it's flaws. I loved it. I did notice the art design in particular was far less cohesive and original. My second playthrough lasted halfway through before I got bored. Eventually I picked up scholar of the first sin and while I love almost all the changes including enemy encounters and adored the DLC, I've come to realize it is indeed inferior to the original Dark Souls in many ways. Probably in most ways. Still my most played souls game due to the super accessible Coop and PVP. I've also come to appreciate the lore and world building for what it is and enjoy the more open ended design of scholar.
Similar threads
- Poll